Labor day is officially the stupidest holiday ever.

It's a holiday that we set aside to celebrate labor, right, and the way that we celebrate labor is by taking the day off.

But if you work in the service industry, you don't get to take the time off, because all of the bourgeois I mean customers need to spend all three days of Labor Day Weekend swarming your business making unreasonable demands on the staff.

This kind of bullshit is why the 20th century was a disaster. You MUST all know that.

· · Web · 1 · 2 · 3

@swashberry that's the point of Labour Day, to detract completely from International Workers' Day, May 1, aka May Day, and keep a status quo of false "labour peace".

@crashglasshouses @swashberry Why did we even make a day in honor of labor? Labor is terrible! International workers? Why is it so great that they're workers? Why not a day for the common man? Why not a day for humanity? Human Day! No labor allowed!

@cy @crashglasshouses @swashberry Presumably, laborers ARE the common man. Most people work for a living.

@wholemilk @swashberry @crashglasshouses And that's a good thing? We should take heart in being amazing human beings, part of a great people whose traditions and cultures, joys, hatreds, lusts and curiosities are celebrated. Instead, we're just... laborers? That's all we are? Yay, labor day?

@cy @swashberry @crashglasshouses I don't necessarily disagree with you. But you can't really have all the flourishing and excess we have. Today was out common day laborers lol.

I mean once we reach post scarcity, that would be cool.

@wholemilk @swashberry @crashglasshouses Eh, post-scarcity is a bit bullshitty. We reached post-scarcity the day someone thought of putting the food they harvested into storage to eat later. They want us to think this scarcity is inevitable not artificial and imaginary, so we'll work for them, but the bright future we imagine is less about scarcity, more about ecological balance, sustainability, and *working less.*

@cy @wholemilk @swashberry @crashglasshouses Scarcity is inevitable as long as men will bend over backwards to prioritize women's interests over the rest of society. If you need proof just study the Titanic disaster, and how if the boat crews had loaded one man for each woman or child loaded, they could have expected to save all women and children, plus as many men. The passenger fear would've been reduced as families were kept together, and far more lives would have been saved in the long run.

@cy @wholemilk @crashglasshouses
Scarcity is a necessary condition of existence. Until we find a way to beat the second law of thermodynamics, every resource we have is fundamentally and irretrievably limited, including our most precious: time.

This is actually why redistribution is necessarily unethical, it assumes that all resources can be distributed and shared without limit or cost, and that's not possible.

@swashberry @crashglasshouses @wholemilk Except that redistribution doesn't assume that all resources can be distributed and shared without limit or cost. It assumes that some resources must be distributed and shared, at great cost since the wealthy land lords will burn the world to stop us, if we let them. That's what people are trying to do, and that's who you're saying are unethical.

@cy @crashglasshouses @wholemilk
Resources are distributed by the free market. There is no need to seize other peoples' hard-earned property, and nor has any consistent trend of wealthy people "burning the world" been established.

The people who do the best job at wrecking things in the name of greed in fact turn out to be socialists and communists: the very people who, like the IRS, claim to be entitled to other peoples' wages through no effort of their own.

@cy @crashglasshouses @wholemilk
(and ironically the most dedicated and destructive tend to have the support of the elites, or to be the elites themselves. awful funny, that, isn't it?)

@cy @crashglasshouses @wholemilk
In any case, history has shown that the solution to poverty is not to make the rich poorer, but to make the poor wealthier. That's the strategy that's elevated us to the legendary echelons of the Information Age, where even the poorest citizen of a Western country is among the richest people to ever live. We didn't discover El Dorado - we built it.

@swashberry @crashglasshouses @wholemilk I don't know what you think is a life worth living, but being a citizen of a Western country is not. By what measure is the poorest citizen among the richest people to ever live?

@cy @crashglasshouses @wholemilk
Until the Industrial Revolution, the average American lived on a dollar a day, in today's money.

@swashberry @crashglasshouses @wholemilk That's a bit of an unfair comparison, since Colonialism preceded the Industrial Revolution, so the average American included all the unpaid labor, debt prisoners, indentured servants, and slaves. And the Industrial Revolution made it worse. Things only started getting better after the world wars, really.

@cy @crashglasshouses @wholemilk
Yeah, things started getting way better, what with forever wars waged by states vying for economic control of global trade, the adoption of government monopolies on the money supply, the abandonment of the gold standard leading to massive inflation, and various major hegemonies' economies collapsing suspiciously shortly after major increases in socialist policies. Oh, and 9/11.

@swashberry @crashglasshouses @wholemilk I mean, resources aren't distributed by the free market. You don't money, and you get nothing, at best. And wealthy people burned the world in the Great Depression, in the Roman Empire, in the Meiji Restoration, in the fall of the USSR, USA Reconstructionism, UK Enclosure Acts, the French Reign of Terror, World War I, World War II...

@cy @crashglasshouses @wholemilk
Resources are distributed by the free market. How do you think goods end up on store shelves and in the hands of consumers? Humans have understood the process of trade and equitable exchange for probably as long as there have been recognizably human creatures on the planet. No one needs the government to explain to them that an excess of resources can be exchanged for something you lack in a fair display of good faith.

@swashberry @crashglasshouses @wholemilk OK you're right, resources are distributed to stores. Not to people, but it certainly gets them to stores. Barter is a myth, but I think you mean humans have understood gifts for that long. As long as it all adds up in the long run, we don't really need equitable exchange.

@cy @crashglasshouses @wholemilk
Barter is not a myth. People engage in barter all the time. The invention of writing is even correlated with the keeping of tallies in order to document trade between neighbor states. It's impossible to be at all educated in basic economics and not understand how barter and negotiation are at the basis of the exchange, and by extension distribution, of resources.

@swashberry @crashglasshouses @wholemilk And you're damn right you need the government standing there with a gun to kill me if I intervene, when my friend is starving while someone else is destroying an excess of food claiming that they own it. That's neither fair, faithful, nor good.

@cy @crashglasshouses @wholemilk
Your friend would have more food if the state hadn't appointed itself as the authority on what is fair, equitable, and in good faith, and regulated the agricultural sector to rely on handouts in order to survive. Food would also be cheaper if not for taxation and excessive and provably unnecessary regulation. Maybe you ought to think about that the next time you propose that seizure of another person's assets is the only option, Fed.

@wholemilk @swashberry @crashglasshouses Oh, uh, I'm also fine with common labor having a day. I just think it should be called freedom from work day or joy day or something, not "labor day." In fact, wasn't May Day originally about dancing, joy and sex? When did it become "international workers day?"

@swashberry @crashglasshouses @wholemilk That's why I think it's so easy for rich fucks to force us to work on this day. Whether we're pretending it's an honor or not, they want us defined only by our capacity for labor. When people ignorant of the deep historical context encounter "labor day," they don't see why it's not about laboring, and they're right.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

A instance dedicated - but not limited - to people with an interest in the GNU+Linux ecosystem and/or general tech. Sysadmins to enthusiasts, creators to movielovers - Welcome!