What do you think?
Rate this book
The Right To Be Lazy and Other Writings
Exuberant, provocative, and as controversial today as when it first appeared, Paul Lafargue's The Right to Be Lazy is a call for the workers of the world to unite--and stop working so much! Lafargue, Karl Marx's son-in-law (about whom Marx once said, "If he is a Marxist, then I am clearly not"), wrote his pamphlet on the virtues of laziness while in prison for giving a socialist speech. At once a timely argument for a three-hour workday and a classical defense of leisure, The Right to Be Lazy shifted the course of European thought, going through seventeen editions in Russia during the Revolution of 1905 and helping shape John Maynard Keynes's ideas about overproduction. Published here with a selection of Lafargue's other writings--including an essay on Victor Hugo and a memoir of Marx--The Right to Be Lazy reminds us that the urge to work is not always beneficial, let alone necessary. It can also be a "strange madness" consuming human lives.
121 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1880
307 people are currently reading
8,051 people want to read
About the author
Paul Lafargue
127books84followersFrench revolutionary Marxist socialist and Karl Marx's son-in-law.Lafargue was born in Cuba to French and Creole parents. Karl Marx even once reffered to him by the n-word.
Lafargue his main work was called the right to be lazy. In which he calls upon not only the right to work, but also the right to be lazy. At the beginning of that book he claimed that the African slaves lived under better circumstances than the European worker.
At 69 he died together with his wife Laura in a suicide pact.
Lafargue his main work was called the right to be lazy. In which he calls upon not only the right to work, but also the right to be lazy. At the beginning of that book he claimed that the African slaves lived under better circumstances than the European worker.
At 69 he died together with his wife Laura in a suicide pact.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 573 reviews
October 16, 2018
Tembelliğin özgürlüğün bir parçası olduğunu ve insanların tembellik yapma haklarının olduğunu belirten Lafargue (Marx'ın damadı olduğunu da belirtmek lazım) etkileyici bir sistem ve toplum eleştirisi yapıyor.
Yazar sistemin insanları baskı altına sokan ve kölelik düzenine uymaya zorlayan çalışma şekillerini dikte ettiğini belirterek, tembellik üzerine farklı noktalara dikkat çekiyor.
Tembelliğe aşağılayıcı gözle bakılmasının yanlışlıklarını dile getiren eserde tembelliğin bir varoluş gerekliliği olduğunun altı çiziliyor.
Kapitalist sistemin yaşamaya zorunlu kıldığı hayata sistem dışından bakmayı başaran bir eser.
Yazar sistemin insanları baskı altına sokan ve kölelik düzenine uymaya zorlayan çalışma şekillerini dikte ettiğini belirterek, tembellik üzerine farklı noktalara dikkat çekiyor.
Tembelliğe aşağılayıcı gözle bakılmasının yanlışlıklarını dile getiren eserde tembelliğin bir varoluş gerekliliği olduğunun altı çiziliyor.
Kapitalist sistemin yaşamaya zorunlu kıldığı hayata sistem dışından bakmayı başaran bir eser.
Shelved as 'to-be-considered'
February 19, 2020The three symptons of lazyness:
#1
#1
June 2, 2021
Yıllarca önce okuduğum bir kitabı tekrar okumak istedim. Aslında kitabın adı içeriğini yansıtmıyor. Marx’ın damadı Lafargue çalışmamayı, tembelliği savunmaz elbette. Buradaki tembellik “insanın kendisine çalışmadan geçireceği bir zaman ayırması� hakkında kullanılıyor. Kendimize ayıracağımız boş zaman denilebilir buna.
Paul Lafargue sivri ve alaycı dili ile anti-kapitalist bir manifesto olarak yazmış “Tembellik Hakkı”nı. Dini kitaplardan, söylencelerden, antik çağ bilgelerinden alıntılarla, tarihi olaylardan ve gelişmelerden çıkardığı zorunlu çalışma karşıtı örneklerle tezini renkli kılmış, böylece bu kısa sosyalist bildiriyi ortaya çıkarmış.
Bir ara tembellik yapın ve 50 sayfalık cep boydaki bu karamizah kitapçığını okuyun bence.
Paul Lafargue sivri ve alaycı dili ile anti-kapitalist bir manifesto olarak yazmış “Tembellik Hakkı”nı. Dini kitaplardan, söylencelerden, antik çağ bilgelerinden alıntılarla, tarihi olaylardan ve gelişmelerden çıkardığı zorunlu çalışma karşıtı örneklerle tezini renkli kılmış, böylece bu kısa sosyalist bildiriyi ortaya çıkarmış.
Bir ara tembellik yapın ve 50 sayfalık cep boydaki bu karamizah kitapçığını okuyun bence.
March 9, 2017
Dünyanın bütün işçilerine sesleniyorum.
Durun!
Hepiniz durun. Kimse çalışmasın. Bırakın çalışmayı. Bırakın bu vahşi brujuvaların midesini şişirmeyi. Etinizi kemiğinizi yedirmeyin, izin vermeyin.
Sizi çalıştırıyorlar, kendi zenginliklerine zenginlik katıyorlar. Sizden 3 kuruş para karşılığında hayatınızı, sağlığınızı ve mutluluğunuzu satın alıyorlar. Hatta sizden ailenizi çalıyorlar. Çok kötü bir anlaşma bu çok kötü. En değerli hatta va hatta paha biçilmez değerlerinizi bedavaya satın alıyorlar. Korku filmlerinde kendi ömrünü uzatmak için başkalarının kanını emen vampirlere benziyorlar.
Çalışmayın. Çalışmak insan vücuduna, yaradılışa aykırı. Siz hiç sabahtan akşama kadar kendisini küçücük bir mekana sokan ve 3 tane muz uğruna burada deliler gibi çalışan bir maymun gördünüzmü.
Canlıların tek amacı mutlu ve sağlıklı yaşamaktır. Karnınızı doyurun ve yatın aşağıya. Size gösterilen, vaadedilen lüks fotoğraflara kanmayın. O lüksleri satın almak için ömrünüzden verir miydiniz?
Sende işçisin. Hemen kendini ayırma. Bu brujuvazinin oyunu işte. Kim bu işçiler diye düşünme. Sensin. Sen işçisin. Patron değilsen işçisin demektir.
Düşün bir kere. Para kazanmak için işçi çalıştırıyorlar. Bu zaten kölelik ve sömürü demek. Kendi işini yapmıyorsan kölesin demektir. Brujuvazi seni yakalar ve çalıştırmaya başlar. Sen onlar için 100 liralık iş yaparsın ama onlar sana 100 lira vermezler. Çünkü o zaman para kazanamazlar. Yani mantık şudur; çalıştırabildiğin kadar fazla işçi çalıştır, hepsine 100 'er liralık iş yaptır, ama hiç birine yaptıkları işin karşılığı olan 100 liraları verme, hatta mümkünse 1 lira bile verme, onları 1 liraya bile muhtaç et ve böylece aralarından 1 liraya bile "he" diyecek gönüllüler bul ve çalıştır, böylece piyasayı düşür.
Dünyanın bütün insanlarına sesleniyorum: Çalışmayın!
Çalışmak ihanettir. Hatta cinayettir. Var olan her şeye aykırıdır. Hayvanlar gibi düşünün. Sadece karnınızı doyurun ve sevişin. Bunun haricinde yapılan herşey köleliktir.
Ah bir biraraya gelebilsek...
Durun!
Hepiniz durun. Kimse çalışmasın. Bırakın çalışmayı. Bırakın bu vahşi brujuvaların midesini şişirmeyi. Etinizi kemiğinizi yedirmeyin, izin vermeyin.
Sizi çalıştırıyorlar, kendi zenginliklerine zenginlik katıyorlar. Sizden 3 kuruş para karşılığında hayatınızı, sağlığınızı ve mutluluğunuzu satın alıyorlar. Hatta sizden ailenizi çalıyorlar. Çok kötü bir anlaşma bu çok kötü. En değerli hatta va hatta paha biçilmez değerlerinizi bedavaya satın alıyorlar. Korku filmlerinde kendi ömrünü uzatmak için başkalarının kanını emen vampirlere benziyorlar.
Çalışmayın. Çalışmak insan vücuduna, yaradılışa aykırı. Siz hiç sabahtan akşama kadar kendisini küçücük bir mekana sokan ve 3 tane muz uğruna burada deliler gibi çalışan bir maymun gördünüzmü.
Canlıların tek amacı mutlu ve sağlıklı yaşamaktır. Karnınızı doyurun ve yatın aşağıya. Size gösterilen, vaadedilen lüks fotoğraflara kanmayın. O lüksleri satın almak için ömrünüzden verir miydiniz?
Sende işçisin. Hemen kendini ayırma. Bu brujuvazinin oyunu işte. Kim bu işçiler diye düşünme. Sensin. Sen işçisin. Patron değilsen işçisin demektir.
Düşün bir kere. Para kazanmak için işçi çalıştırıyorlar. Bu zaten kölelik ve sömürü demek. Kendi işini yapmıyorsan kölesin demektir. Brujuvazi seni yakalar ve çalıştırmaya başlar. Sen onlar için 100 liralık iş yaparsın ama onlar sana 100 lira vermezler. Çünkü o zaman para kazanamazlar. Yani mantık şudur; çalıştırabildiğin kadar fazla işçi çalıştır, hepsine 100 'er liralık iş yaptır, ama hiç birine yaptıkları işin karşılığı olan 100 liraları verme, hatta mümkünse 1 lira bile verme, onları 1 liraya bile muhtaç et ve böylece aralarından 1 liraya bile "he" diyecek gönüllüler bul ve çalıştır, böylece piyasayı düşür.
Dünyanın bütün insanlarına sesleniyorum: Çalışmayın!
Çalışmak ihanettir. Hatta cinayettir. Var olan her şeye aykırıdır. Hayvanlar gibi düşünün. Sadece karnınızı doyurun ve sevişin. Bunun haricinde yapılan herşey köleliktir.
Ah bir biraraya gelebilsek...
October 6, 2023
Brings interesting perspectives about the past, specially about how our amount of work should be minor with technological progress, but we are actually working more.
But the author fails to see the following inevitable things about the future:
Petroil is going to end;
Primary sources of minerals will end;
So we'll need more intelligent materials... or at least a way to recycle them without losing quality;
We'll have to make assembly lines more scalable in order to free manual laborers to do some analytical work;
We have to make a transition to renewable energy;
We will need even more doctors and engineers that we already need;
We have to end poverty;
We have to automate housework in order to liberate women;
We have to figure out a better way of public transportation so we won't waste so many time (a.k.a. the most valuable resource ever) on stupid traffic.
We have to educate the masses so they'll be able to adapt to the ongoing automation;
We have to figure out a practical way to distribute wealth better than the flawed capitalism (that same capitalism that makes us waste time in meaningless jobs so we can fulfill the short-term needs for shelter and food).
And the social issues? School reform? That's a lot of research, data analysis, and work. Prison reform? More work. What about the always understaffed Social Services that protects kids, battered women, the homeless and the addicted. Well, these problems aren't going away with technology improvement. Places like CPS need a lot more people than they have nowadays.
These problems are not going to be solved by themselves. They'll need a lot of work.
So, Lafargue, as much as I know you have good intentions, you are wrong. We don't have the right to be lazy. The future of mankind depends on our work. The life quality of our peers depend on our willingness to provide value to them. (And I mean real value, not elitist-consumerist-values, and definitely not the I'm-better-than-you-because-I-have-an-Iphone value that Sillicon Valley claims is "changing the world".)
What we need is not to stop working, but to attach our work to a purpose, even if it is a completely small and non-pretentious one. Working just so you can pay bills is a waste of human potential, and I think Lafargue would agree with that.
Maybe Lafargue would also agree that we need to study more. Reflect more. We need to stop being such champions of whatever obligation is thrown at us. It is hollow to define our values in how well we accomplish predetermined tasks. (Remember epitaphs? "Beloved mother, wife", meaning she was good at fulfilling societal obligations.) This book criticizes it to some extent.
But, since we messed up with the exploration of natural resources in the last few centuries, our existence is not just about us anymore. It is also about how we need to solve the crap the we and our ancestors did to the world.
So the world doesn't need less work from us. The world needs more. A re-purposed work, an intelligent work. A work that builds progress in the long term. But how are going to do that? How are going to prepare socially, politically and economically to solve the problems that really need to be solved? Well, that's subject for another book.
But the author fails to see the following inevitable things about the future:
Petroil is going to end;
Primary sources of minerals will end;
So we'll need more intelligent materials... or at least a way to recycle them without losing quality;
We'll have to make assembly lines more scalable in order to free manual laborers to do some analytical work;
We have to make a transition to renewable energy;
We will need even more doctors and engineers that we already need;
We have to end poverty;
We have to automate housework in order to liberate women;
We have to figure out a better way of public transportation so we won't waste so many time (a.k.a. the most valuable resource ever) on stupid traffic.
We have to educate the masses so they'll be able to adapt to the ongoing automation;
We have to figure out a practical way to distribute wealth better than the flawed capitalism (that same capitalism that makes us waste time in meaningless jobs so we can fulfill the short-term needs for shelter and food).
And the social issues? School reform? That's a lot of research, data analysis, and work. Prison reform? More work. What about the always understaffed Social Services that protects kids, battered women, the homeless and the addicted. Well, these problems aren't going away with technology improvement. Places like CPS need a lot more people than they have nowadays.
These problems are not going to be solved by themselves. They'll need a lot of work.
So, Lafargue, as much as I know you have good intentions, you are wrong. We don't have the right to be lazy. The future of mankind depends on our work. The life quality of our peers depend on our willingness to provide value to them. (And I mean real value, not elitist-consumerist-values, and definitely not the I'm-better-than-you-because-I-have-an-Iphone value that Sillicon Valley claims is "changing the world".)
What we need is not to stop working, but to attach our work to a purpose, even if it is a completely small and non-pretentious one. Working just so you can pay bills is a waste of human potential, and I think Lafargue would agree with that.
Maybe Lafargue would also agree that we need to study more. Reflect more. We need to stop being such champions of whatever obligation is thrown at us. It is hollow to define our values in how well we accomplish predetermined tasks. (Remember epitaphs? "Beloved mother, wife", meaning she was good at fulfilling societal obligations.) This book criticizes it to some extent.
But, since we messed up with the exploration of natural resources in the last few centuries, our existence is not just about us anymore. It is also about how we need to solve the crap the we and our ancestors did to the world.
So the world doesn't need less work from us. The world needs more. A re-purposed work, an intelligent work. A work that builds progress in the long term. But how are going to do that? How are going to prepare socially, politically and economically to solve the problems that really need to be solved? Well, that's subject for another book.
September 10, 2016
Neredeyese yarım saatte okunabilen bu kitap, makale demek daha doğru, 19. yüzyıl vahşi kapitalizminin çalışan kesimi sömüren uygulamalarına ve bunun esasen kapitalist kesim için de verimsizliğine, kendine has üslubuyla dikkat çekiyor. Tabii makale 1880'de kaleme alınmış, köprünün altından epey su geçti bugüne değin. Yine de, özellikle günümüzde adeta yükselen değer haline gelen işkolikliğe karşı dur demek için esin verici unsurlar içeriyor. Belki de hem kamu, hem de özel sektörde yöneticilere zorunlu olarak okutulması faydalı olur. Okurken Auschwitz'in giriş kapısına Nazilerin koyduğu "Çalışmak özgür kılar" tabelası aklıma geldi.
Ben Zeplin yayınları baskısından, Mehmet Köle'nin çevirisinden okudum (çevirmenin soyadı da böyle bir eser için ayrı bir ironi). Yalnız böyle kitaplara bağlamına oturtmak bakımından kısa da olsa bir önsöz konulsa iyi olur. Zeplin kolaya kaçmış. Bu arada Lafargue da Marx'ın damadıymış...
Ben Zeplin yayınları baskısından, Mehmet Köle'nin çevirisinden okudum (çevirmenin soyadı da böyle bir eser için ayrı bir ironi). Yalnız böyle kitaplara bağlamına oturtmak bakımından kısa da olsa bir önsöz konulsa iyi olur. Zeplin kolaya kaçmış. Bu arada Lafargue da Marx'ın damadıymış...
March 18, 2016
Aslında Lafargue'nin düşünceleri oldukça grotesk. Ancak amacına kafa yorulup, biraz da abartılı bir ifade tarzı içinde olduğu varsayılırsa; çalışmanın gerek kilise, gerek ahlakçılar, gerek burjuvazi, gerekse devlet tarafından kutsallaştırılması ile, çalışan kesimin insan hakları gözetmeksizin sömürülmesi; bunun da yalnız kapitalist düzenin çarkını döndürmeye yaraması arasındaki ilişkiler gayet temiz bir şekilde anlaşılabilir. Elbette içinde olduğumuz dünyaya aktaramayacağımız denli ütopik noktaları var, fakat bir yandan da ciddi haklılığı var.
Birde tembellik kelimesinin içeriğini 'boş zaman', 'çalışmaya adanmayan zaman' olarak düşünürsek daha iyi anlaşılabilir. Zira 'tembel' kelimesi genel geçer algı yüzünden fazlasıyla olumsuzluk çağrıştırıyor. Garip bir hayatı olan, komünist düşüncenin duraklarından biri olan Lafargue'nin (nam-ı diğer Marx'ın Damadı'nın) bu kısa ama çarpıcı kitapçığını okumanızı tavsiye ederim.
10/6
Birde tembellik kelimesinin içeriğini 'boş zaman', 'çalışmaya adanmayan zaman' olarak düşünürsek daha iyi anlaşılabilir. Zira 'tembel' kelimesi genel geçer algı yüzünden fazlasıyla olumsuzluk çağrıştırıyor. Garip bir hayatı olan, komünist düşüncenin duraklarından biri olan Lafargue'nin (nam-ı diğer Marx'ın Damadı'nın) bu kısa ama çarpıcı kitapçığını okumanızı tavsiye ederim.
10/6
February 17, 2023
YouTube kitap kanalımda Tembellik Hakkı kitabını detaylı olarak yorumladım:
Son zamanlarda okuduğum en iyi kitaplardan biriyle tanıştırmak istiyorum sizi bugün... Onun adı Tembellik Hakkı.
Bazı kitaplar çok ince olmalarına rağmen bize söylemeye çalıştıklarıyla hacimlerinin dışına taşabiliyorlar. Kalın kitaplarda bir düşünceyi yayıp detaylandırmak nispeten kolaydır ama 60 küsür sayfada bir düşünceyi okuruna geçirebilmek bir başarıdır.
Bazen tembellik yapmayı çok seviyorum. Neyse ki, bu kitabı okumak için tembellik etmeyip okumamı tamamladım. 2 yıl önce kendi mesleğinden istifa eden ve tembellik hakkını hak eden biri olarak size anlatacağım şeyler var.
Kendi mesleğinde işe her gün mutsuz giden biriydim ben. Düşünsenize, Süper Mario olmadığınız için elinizde sadece tek bir yaşam hakkı var ve siz de bunu hakkıyla yaşayamıyorsunuz. Çünkü meslekler harika olmasına rağmen bu mesleklerin içini dolduran insanların karaktersizliğini ve paragözlüğünü görüyorsunuz. Mutsuzlaşıyorsunuz, yıpranıyorsunuz, tükeniyorsunuz...
Katip Bartleby ve Oblomov gibi kitaplar bu yüzden yazıldı işte. Kendi meslek hayatlarınızı ve iş düzenini sorgulayın diye. Uğruna emeğinizi ve zamanınızı harcadığınız işverenlerin değeri ne kadar hak etmeyen insanlar olduklarını anlayabilin diye. Hatta sırf bundan dolayı Oblomov kitabında Oblomov'a sordukları bir soruyu hiç unutamıyorum:
"- Niçin uyuyorsun?
- Vaktin nasıl geçtiğini bilmemek için." [s. 434]
Bazen siz de kendi içsel zamanınızla hayatın akan zamanı arasında bir uyumsuzluk hissediyor musunuz? Çalışmak sizin kendi benliğinizle hayatın benliği arasında bir uçurum oluşturuyor mu? O halde belki sizin de Tembellik Hakkı'nızı kullanmanız gerekiyordur artık.
Bu kadar ağır çalışma saatleri olan ve insanların emeğinin karşılığını çoğu zaman alamadığı bir ülkede olduğumuz için bu konuyu hep sorguluyorum. Çalıştığımız insanlar bizim mesaimizi, emeğimizi ve zamanımızı hak eden insanlar mı? Emeğinizin karşılığını tam olarak alabiliyor musunuz? Hatta en basite indirgemek istiyorum bu soruları... Şu an yaşadığınız hayattan mutlu musunuz? Cevaplarınızı gerçekten merak ediyorum.
"Günde üç saatten fazla çalışmamalı, günün geri kalanında ve geceleri tembellik etmeli, yiyip içip eğlenmelidir." [s. 16]
Şu an bu incelemeyi okuyanlardan kim hayatlarında üç saatten az çalışıp günün geri kalanında tembellik edebiliyor, özgürce yiyip içip eğlenebiliyor? Hangimiz sorumluluk çuvallarının altında ezilip büzülmüyoruz? Hangimizin patronu bir emir verdiğinde ona "Bunu yapmamayı tercih ederim." diyebiliyoruz?
Soruların cevaplardan daha önemli olduğunu anladığımız zaman bakış açımızda bir kırılma noktası oluşuyor. O yüzden cevaplardan çok soruları önemseyen bir insan oldum son zamanlarda. Hem sorduğum bütün bu sorular Şener Şen'in Zengin Mutfağı oyununda dediği bir sözü getiriyor aklıma:
"İnsan kime hizmet ettiğini bilmeli."
Evet dostlarım, gerçekten de kime hizmet ettiğimizi bilmeliyiz. Bu kitabı hepimiz okumalıyız. Eğer bu inceleme sizde en ufak bir sorgulamaya sebep olduysa bu incelemeyi paylaşmalıyız. En doğal hakkımız olan Tembellik Hakkı'mızı kullanmalıyız.
Elimizdeki tek hayatı gerçekten de tek hayatmış gibi yaşamak için neyi bekliyoruz?
Son zamanlarda okuduğum en iyi kitaplardan biriyle tanıştırmak istiyorum sizi bugün... Onun adı Tembellik Hakkı.
Bazı kitaplar çok ince olmalarına rağmen bize söylemeye çalıştıklarıyla hacimlerinin dışına taşabiliyorlar. Kalın kitaplarda bir düşünceyi yayıp detaylandırmak nispeten kolaydır ama 60 küsür sayfada bir düşünceyi okuruna geçirebilmek bir başarıdır.
Bazen tembellik yapmayı çok seviyorum. Neyse ki, bu kitabı okumak için tembellik etmeyip okumamı tamamladım. 2 yıl önce kendi mesleğinden istifa eden ve tembellik hakkını hak eden biri olarak size anlatacağım şeyler var.
Kendi mesleğinde işe her gün mutsuz giden biriydim ben. Düşünsenize, Süper Mario olmadığınız için elinizde sadece tek bir yaşam hakkı var ve siz de bunu hakkıyla yaşayamıyorsunuz. Çünkü meslekler harika olmasına rağmen bu mesleklerin içini dolduran insanların karaktersizliğini ve paragözlüğünü görüyorsunuz. Mutsuzlaşıyorsunuz, yıpranıyorsunuz, tükeniyorsunuz...
Katip Bartleby ve Oblomov gibi kitaplar bu yüzden yazıldı işte. Kendi meslek hayatlarınızı ve iş düzenini sorgulayın diye. Uğruna emeğinizi ve zamanınızı harcadığınız işverenlerin değeri ne kadar hak etmeyen insanlar olduklarını anlayabilin diye. Hatta sırf bundan dolayı Oblomov kitabında Oblomov'a sordukları bir soruyu hiç unutamıyorum:
"- Niçin uyuyorsun?
- Vaktin nasıl geçtiğini bilmemek için." [s. 434]
Bazen siz de kendi içsel zamanınızla hayatın akan zamanı arasında bir uyumsuzluk hissediyor musunuz? Çalışmak sizin kendi benliğinizle hayatın benliği arasında bir uçurum oluşturuyor mu? O halde belki sizin de Tembellik Hakkı'nızı kullanmanız gerekiyordur artık.
Bu kadar ağır çalışma saatleri olan ve insanların emeğinin karşılığını çoğu zaman alamadığı bir ülkede olduğumuz için bu konuyu hep sorguluyorum. Çalıştığımız insanlar bizim mesaimizi, emeğimizi ve zamanımızı hak eden insanlar mı? Emeğinizin karşılığını tam olarak alabiliyor musunuz? Hatta en basite indirgemek istiyorum bu soruları... Şu an yaşadığınız hayattan mutlu musunuz? Cevaplarınızı gerçekten merak ediyorum.
"Günde üç saatten fazla çalışmamalı, günün geri kalanında ve geceleri tembellik etmeli, yiyip içip eğlenmelidir." [s. 16]
Şu an bu incelemeyi okuyanlardan kim hayatlarında üç saatten az çalışıp günün geri kalanında tembellik edebiliyor, özgürce yiyip içip eğlenebiliyor? Hangimiz sorumluluk çuvallarının altında ezilip büzülmüyoruz? Hangimizin patronu bir emir verdiğinde ona "Bunu yapmamayı tercih ederim." diyebiliyoruz?
Soruların cevaplardan daha önemli olduğunu anladığımız zaman bakış açımızda bir kırılma noktası oluşuyor. O yüzden cevaplardan çok soruları önemseyen bir insan oldum son zamanlarda. Hem sorduğum bütün bu sorular Şener Şen'in Zengin Mutfağı oyununda dediği bir sözü getiriyor aklıma:
"İnsan kime hizmet ettiğini bilmeli."
Evet dostlarım, gerçekten de kime hizmet ettiğimizi bilmeliyiz. Bu kitabı hepimiz okumalıyız. Eğer bu inceleme sizde en ufak bir sorgulamaya sebep olduysa bu incelemeyi paylaşmalıyız. En doğal hakkımız olan Tembellik Hakkı'mızı kullanmalıyız.
Elimizdeki tek hayatı gerçekten de tek hayatmış gibi yaşamak için neyi bekliyoruz?
May 18, 2021
In my eyes, the book touches a very important topic, but unfortunately it only touches it. The historical background that Lafargue provides though is very interesting.
Maybe Lafargue felt a bit more lazy than he should while he was writing the book, and I am also lazy to come up with a better joke.
Maybe Lafargue felt a bit more lazy than he should while he was writing the book, and I am also lazy to come up with a better joke.
February 15, 2015
Dağınık, bazen faşistce - humanizmadan uzak, yer yer doğru çıkış noktası ama yanlış gidiş yoluna sahip birçok "statement" yani düşünce beyan eden cümle ile dolu bir kitapçık. Bundan daha anlamlı ve akademik metinler okudum. Yazıldığı dönemi göz önüne alarak 2 yıldız veriyorum.
October 21, 2024
currently in my anti-work wage slave era.. just gimmie my moneyyy 🤌🏽
December 1, 2019
1982 Anayasası m 49'a göre, “Çalışma, herkesin hakkı ve ödevidir. Devlet, çalışanların hayat seviyesini yükseltmek, çalışma hayatını geliştirmek için çalışanları korumak, çalışmayı desteklemek ve işsizliği önlemeye elverişli ekonomik bir ortam yaratmak için gerekli tedbirleri alır.�
Şimdi bu kitabı işe giderken metrobüste okudum. Biraz ironik oldu. Anayasa çok güzel açıklamış "çalışma hakkı"nın tanımını fakat tam olarak öyle mi işliyor pek emin değilim.
Kitap işte tam da savunulan "çalışma hakkı"nın insanlara en muhteşem şeymiş gibi Աıldığını, aslında ulaşılması gereken çalışma veriminin düzeyini, bir bireyin kendine ayırması gereken zaman ile kazanacağı para için sarf etmesi gereken optimum koşul ve süreler hakkında bilgi veriyor.
Okuyun. Hatta metrobüste sefillik çekerken okuyun benim gibi. Sonra da hep birlikte biz gerçekten ne yapıyoruz diye düşünelim.
Şimdi bu kitabı işe giderken metrobüste okudum. Biraz ironik oldu. Anayasa çok güzel açıklamış "çalışma hakkı"nın tanımını fakat tam olarak öyle mi işliyor pek emin değilim.
Kitap işte tam da savunulan "çalışma hakkı"nın insanlara en muhteşem şeymiş gibi Աıldığını, aslında ulaşılması gereken çalışma veriminin düzeyini, bir bireyin kendine ayırması gereken zaman ile kazanacağı para için sarf etmesi gereken optimum koşul ve süreler hakkında bilgi veriyor.
Okuyun. Hatta metrobüste sefillik çekerken okuyun benim gibi. Sonra da hep birlikte biz gerçekten ne yapıyoruz diye düşünelim.
July 22, 2014
"Bizim toplumumuzda çalışmayı çalışma olduğu için seven sınıflar hangileridir? Toprak sahibi köylüler ve küçük burjuvalardır. Birisi kendi toprağı üzerinde kamburlaşırken, diğeri dükkânına sıkı sıkıya bağlıdır. Yeraltı dehlizlerindeki bir köstebek gibi hareket ederler ve doğanın güzelliklerini seyretmek için kafalarını asla dışarı çıkarmazlar."
Tembellik hakkından da ziyade, işçi sınıfının; "çalışmanın kutsallığı yalanı"na aldanışını Աıyor, iyi de ediyor. Yeterince -ki hiçbir zaman yetmez- çalışınca sistem devam ediyor, üretim arttıkça tüketim artıyor, işin içine dini dogmalar da girince çember tamamlanıyor.
Tembellik hakkından da ziyade, işçi sınıfının; "çalışmanın kutsallığı yalanı"na aldanışını Աıyor, iyi de ediyor. Yeterince -ki hiçbir zaman yetmez- çalışınca sistem devam ediyor, üretim arttıkça tüketim artıyor, işin içine dini dogmalar da girince çember tamamlanıyor.
January 29, 2021
Η δουλειά προέρχεται από τη δουλεία τόσο ως λέξη όσο και ως θεσμός. Αυτό εξηγεί ο Λαφάργκ στο βιβλίο του ως άξιος γραμματέας κι εκπρόσωπος του Μαρξ. Στο δικαίωμα στην εργασία, το σύνθημα του ύστερου 19ου αιώνα, αντιτάσσει το δικαίωμα στην τεμπελιά, καθότι η εργασία στα πρώτα χρόνια της εμφάνισής της δε διέφερε πολύ από τη σκλαβιά. Οι εργάτες δούλευαν 10-14 ώρες -ακόμα και παιδιά 6-8 ετών- και παρέμεναν φτωχοί.
«Όπως ο Χριστός, η λυπητερή προσωποποίηση της αρχαίας σκλαβιάς, έτσι και οι άντρες, οι γυναίκες, τα παιδιά του Προλεταριάτου ανεβαίνουν κατάκοποι εδώ κι έναν αιώνα τον σκληρό Γολγοθά του πόνου: εδώ κι έναν αιώνα η καταναγκαστική δουλειά τσακίζει τα κόκκαλά τους, σκοτώνει τις σάρκες τους, βασανίζει τα νεύρα τους. Εδώ κι έναν αιώνα η πείνα δένει κόμπο τα σωθικά τους και φέρνει παραισθήσεις στο μυαλό τους!... Ω Τεμπελιά, δείξε οίκτο για τη μεγάλη δυστυχία μας! Ω Τεμπελιά, μητέρα των τεχνών και των ευγενών αρετών, γίνε το βάλσαμο για τις ανθρώπινες αγωνίες!».
«Όπως ο Χριστός, η λυπητερή προσωποποίηση της αρχαίας σκλαβιάς, έτσι και οι άντρες, οι γυναίκες, τα παιδιά του Προλεταριάτου ανεβαίνουν κατάκοποι εδώ κι έναν αιώνα τον σκληρό Γολγοθά του πόνου: εδώ κι έναν αιώνα η καταναγκαστική δουλειά τσακίζει τα κόκκαλά τους, σκοτώνει τις σάρκες τους, βασανίζει τα νεύρα τους. Εδώ κι έναν αιώνα η πείνα δένει κόμπο τα σωθικά τους και φέρνει παραισθήσεις στο μυαλό τους!... Ω Τεμπελιά, δείξε οίκτο για τη μεγάλη δυστυχία μας! Ω Τεμπελιά, μητέρα των τεχνών και των ευγενών αρετών, γίνε το βάλσαμο για τις ανθρώπινες αγωνίες!».
March 19, 2014
The best parts of this book are the historical context and the introduction. Lafargue's actual text is mildly interesting and he is definitely addressing an important topic. We do need to stop worshiping at the alter of work/jobs and carve out more time for the important things. But I found reading him a little tedious. And anybody who cites the Greek philosophers with admiration (especially Aristotle) and then talks about how they knew only slaves should work....Well, we have a problem.
February 5, 2015
I first discovered the existence of Paul Lafargue's The Right to Be Lazy when the new edition edited by Bernard Marszalek was on a sale table at The Left Forum back on June 8. Had I any money, I would have bought a copy right then simply from reading the back cover. The New York Public Library refused to order a circulating copy, and on September 19, I was told that they could find no library to supply the item. I tweeted out that NYPL refused to order or ILL the book for me, and a few days later, it was showing as "in transit" in my holds queue. It arrived at the Mid-Manhattan Library on October 7, and I checked it out on October 12. The copy came from North Country Community College in Saranac Lake, New York. I finished reading it this morning, and I conclude that the book is easily one of the most important ever written. When I saw the book, it seemed clear that it was analysis of who and who does not have the right to be lazy in the society of that time. Searches on Amazon described it as a rollicking farce that was nevertheless instrumental in reducing the standard work day to eight hours.
The book, while intended to be funny, is so effective because it is so true. The working class in America, with its anti-intellectual tendencies, has been brainwashed into a love of hard manual labor. I don't think any really do love it, but it sure comes across that way. When I worked for the Indiana University Public Opinion Laboratory, one of our polls asked people what they thought should be taught in high school. One of the items was teaching students job skills. Most people thought that was very important, and only one person whom I interviewed questioned what that meant to the point that he could not consider this important without clarification. All we were allowed to say is "whatever it means to you." One man with a twangy voice said to me "college... is for hippies, and degenerates" when asked about the importance of high schools preparing students for college. An older woman was emphatic about the importance of high schools teaching jobs skills but her "That's not too important" for "preparing students for college" is forever burned onto my brain. The hippies and degenerates line made it into Misused Minds. My landlady in Jacksonville thought it was great that I was taking work home because work, to her, is inherently good, even though I was glum about it because I wasn't being paid any additional money to do it (having fallen into the trap that many salaried employees fall into believing, when in fact, ). One of my roommates at the homeless shelter, a parolee whose work experience is in manual labor, said, "I knew there was something wrong with you" when I showed him the book, although he was clearly not being serious.
For this essay, Lafargue narrowly defines only those in the following occupations as workers: agricultural laborers, including herdsmen, servants, and farmers' daughters living at home, factory workers in cotton, wool, hemp, linen, silk, knitting, mine workers, metal workers (blast furnaces, rolling mills, etc.), and domestics (40). While Lafaruge's correspondence with Engels makes clear that he himself was a white collar worker (he gave up the practice of medicine after the deaths of the two children he and his wife, Laura Marx, had, then worked in engraving, did correspondence for an insurance company, then tried to live off his writing while supported with checks from Engels), and he objected to socialist conferences that barred workers who were white collar laborers. In this essay, only the blue collar fields mentioned above are considered "work," and he calls for a restriction of such jobs to no more than three hours a day. At the time (1880), social movements were pressing to the eight hour workday that is currently standard. Ten to fourteen hours of this brutal labor was quite common. The most conservative of the social views was people getting Saturday afternoons off. The organizer of Occu-Evolve was pushing that Occupy's minim wage goal should be $20 an hour with the hope that it's at least fifteen. He, I and one other were outvoted by others who thought we should be in solidarity requesting for a raise in the minimum wage to $15. Before Occupy existed, I got involved with a group promoting "Job Creation," but the guy in charge was a roofer who seemed to have no conception of being medically limited to a desk job, then whined when he offered to pay me $8 to hold a sign at Federal Hall, backhandedly complaining that he "had to" pay me to do this when he offered the money before he made the request, oblivious to the fact that I put up with the pain for one hour because I thought the cause was worthwhile.
Lafargue looks to the ancient Greeks, for whom all such labor was done by slaves. He argues that the difference between then and his present were that there were wage slaves instead of unpaid slaves. He cites Aristotle (55) as longing for a time when mechanization can eliminate work entirely, and all people can devote their time for intellectual pursuits, and, in fact, pretty much any position for which one attends college is not considered work under these narrow definitions of labor. Instead, the machines make work more efficient, and so the workers are overworked and overproducing, to no positive effect. Lafargue's argument is essentially what we were promised in K-12 would be the result of going to college--the ability to earn a living doing something that you love, a privilege that was awarded to the brightest who could make it through. As detailed in my entry, I have an abhorrence for busy work and sought out intellectual and creative pursuits from the time I was very young, only now to be treated like garbage because I am not only unwilling but unable to do hard physical labor.
Lafargue notes that there was so much overwork that no one can consume the over-priced goods, which often had to be destroyed because there was no room for unsold merchandise. "Hundreds of millions are required to figure the value of the goods that are destroyed. In the last century they were burned or thrown into the water" (33). This is the capitalist thumbing his nose at the worker--not only am I going to pay you so little to subsist to do the work that I want done, but the results of your work are going straight into the garbage because I can't find anyone who wants to buy it. He discusses the capitalist's need for Livingston, Stanley Du Chaillu, who search the world trying to find new customers for the goods they attempt to sell (42), a clear prefiguring of globalization. The capitalist compensates for this by making products that are built to be used up or broken quickly and need replacing, with no eye for quality (43)--an "Age of Adulteration."
The term "work ethic" has strong associations with Protestantism. On page 46, Lafargue notes that the Catholic Church laws provided the laborer with 90 rest days enforced by law, most of which were for feasting. In 1666, Perefixus, Archbishop of Paris suppressed 17 of them in his diocese. Lafargue describes Protestantism as religion adapted to fit the industrial and commercial needs of the bourgeoisie. The elimination of saints made many more workdays available. As such, it has been easier to establish socialist ideas in countries like France and Italy, where Protestantism is not so ingrained in the populace. Protestants seem to love the phrase "God helps those who help themselves," a purportedly Biblical statement that is really derived from the fictitious book of Philistines that also says, "thou shalt not take thy member into thy hands and stroke it" and "only men have the right to decide if a pregnancy is ended." The phrase is directly contradicted by "How does God’s love abide in anyone who has the world’s goods and sees a brother or sister in need and yet refuses help?" (1 John 3:17, New Revised Standard Version). High percentages of Americans believe in regard to the "help themselves" phrase. Wikipedia cites the statement as coming from Ancient Greece, which is interesting considering Lafargue's emphasis on the Greeks' despisement of labor. He cites the poet Antiparos longing for slave women to give up the mill in favor of leisure.
The set of essays includes a work of fiction called "Sale of an Appetite." Lafargue explicitly invokes Mary Shelley's The Last Man as being supposedly assembled form a work by another, first person, author through disordered leaves of paper--Lafargue claims that the central character wrote the book, but he changed it to third person. This would be perfect material for House of Mystery, except that the villain does not get punished, which would be required in code-approved days. It depicts a poor hungry, homeless man named Emile Destouches who is hired by M. Sch___ (the full name is never given) to digest his food via a mystical process. M. Sch___ is a complete glutton, and Destouches is ultimately allowed no work-life balance. When he wants out of the contract, he goes to M. Gabarit, the notary, who tells him the following:
This really sums up what is so abhorrent about capitalism. Capitalists ought to be mocked as "cappie greenos" the way communists are mocked as "commie pinkos." The term "handicapped" is derived from a disabled person having "cap in hand" for the purpose of panhandling. As such, it is considered a pejorative term even though it's a . Capitalism is a system in which the wealthy want a handout, only instead of the handout being money, it is pitifully paid work that barely makes a dent in the workers' needs. There is no such thing as an intelligent person who complains about people on SNAP benefits using mobile phones. These people do not realize that if you're using more than 50% of your income to cover your necessities, you are impoverished. Such people have no problem with 100% of a person's income being used for necessities. This is morally bankrupt.
Marszalek discusses the book's reception in the 1960s. He says that intellectuals were concerned that mechanization would lead to depression-level unemployment. When I was younger, I had little concern about mechanization, because I thought manufacturing jobs were for the intellectually lazy and the demise of such jobs should be celebrated, right in the vein of Antiparos, so that the workers can put their time to better pursuits. Unfortunately, this is not how it works, even for those who go on to advanced education, such as myself. You are still simply a commodity of "What task can you do for me?" because, if you have no money, you are effectively shut out of the marketplace no matter how skilled you are unless you are able to sell those skills to someone else. The wealthy lazy have no such problems, yet few of them are as intelligent as I am, let alone as honest. Jamie Dimon and Ina Drew lied to Congress, and all they had to do was pay (to them) a pittance, whereas anyone else would have had to serve prison time. According to Marszalak, "While [the intellectuals] accurately foresaw the decline of manufacturing jobs, their forecast that unemployment would grow to Depression Era proportions proved incorrect" (13). Is he using a restricted time frame? Two pages later, he says,
This has been my existence from the moment I finished college. My first job was data entry, and more recently I had a very precarious job teaching college. I didn't appreciate that. Now with a college degree, I wasn't being paid to think, but to be a functionary, hence my play's title, Misused Minds. I originally derived it from the United Negro College Fund's "A mind is a terrible thing to waste," but "Wasted Minds" was already taken by Vanessa Satone for a manga (I later met Satone at King Con 1 in 2009) and seemed to me to carry a drug connotation that I wanted to avoid, since none of the economic problems depicted in the play are the result of drug use.
From K-12, we were taught to aspire to do work that we loved and that, to us, was anything but drudgery, especially from the men who chose teaching as a career. The male teachers were always the most popular. I imagine this has changed quite a bit, but the male teachers chose the profession because they wanted it, while the female teachers, at least the older ones, were in it because they saw no better opening. Whatever they achieved has been destroyed by the capitalist class. As Marszalak puts it,
Marsalak concludes his introductory essay with the following:
You read it right there. Creativity is the opposite of work. So when a rabid anti-feminist mocked me for saying that I love Anita Sarkeesian's "work" with the retort that she doesn't "work" is true in that sense. The works of William Shakespeare are not "works," just as Ben Jonson was criticised in 1616 for publishing a book of his "works" that included his plays. The word "opera" in Italian literally means "work" and is the root of "operation." Shall we rename such creative works "opera?" That would be confusing. I am constantly being told how I refuse to work, how I choose not to work, how I can work in spite of my injuries, etc.
If creative work is not work, then I reject work. I demand my right to be lazy, and I demand my right to housing. Based on what I was taught throughout K-12 education and beyond, I have earned the right to have housing while doing creative work. The wealth needs to be taken away form the capitalist class that doesn't work and given to the creative class that longs to have the resources to survive and do their creative work. We must stand up and join together. The capitalists think that they are "entitled" because they had money on which to build a business, but have nothing good to say about those they believe "act entitled" like me, who believe that my education and brain power should exempt me from hard physical labor. They don't even think my physical challenges should exempt me from hard physical labor. They are no different from slaveholders. Their "vacuum up" economy needs to be altered, their wealth redistributed. This is what the capitalist class most fears. They keep saying the wealth will go back where it was within a year. They keep saying this because they know that the creative class will rise to the top if given the resources to execute their ideas. I would say, "Stand up!" at this point, but given my physical challenges, I would have to sit back down again too soon for the metaphor to work.
The book, while intended to be funny, is so effective because it is so true. The working class in America, with its anti-intellectual tendencies, has been brainwashed into a love of hard manual labor. I don't think any really do love it, but it sure comes across that way. When I worked for the Indiana University Public Opinion Laboratory, one of our polls asked people what they thought should be taught in high school. One of the items was teaching students job skills. Most people thought that was very important, and only one person whom I interviewed questioned what that meant to the point that he could not consider this important without clarification. All we were allowed to say is "whatever it means to you." One man with a twangy voice said to me "college... is for hippies, and degenerates" when asked about the importance of high schools preparing students for college. An older woman was emphatic about the importance of high schools teaching jobs skills but her "That's not too important" for "preparing students for college" is forever burned onto my brain. The hippies and degenerates line made it into Misused Minds. My landlady in Jacksonville thought it was great that I was taking work home because work, to her, is inherently good, even though I was glum about it because I wasn't being paid any additional money to do it (having fallen into the trap that many salaried employees fall into believing, when in fact, ). One of my roommates at the homeless shelter, a parolee whose work experience is in manual labor, said, "I knew there was something wrong with you" when I showed him the book, although he was clearly not being serious.
For this essay, Lafargue narrowly defines only those in the following occupations as workers: agricultural laborers, including herdsmen, servants, and farmers' daughters living at home, factory workers in cotton, wool, hemp, linen, silk, knitting, mine workers, metal workers (blast furnaces, rolling mills, etc.), and domestics (40). While Lafaruge's correspondence with Engels makes clear that he himself was a white collar worker (he gave up the practice of medicine after the deaths of the two children he and his wife, Laura Marx, had, then worked in engraving, did correspondence for an insurance company, then tried to live off his writing while supported with checks from Engels), and he objected to socialist conferences that barred workers who were white collar laborers. In this essay, only the blue collar fields mentioned above are considered "work," and he calls for a restriction of such jobs to no more than three hours a day. At the time (1880), social movements were pressing to the eight hour workday that is currently standard. Ten to fourteen hours of this brutal labor was quite common. The most conservative of the social views was people getting Saturday afternoons off. The organizer of Occu-Evolve was pushing that Occupy's minim wage goal should be $20 an hour with the hope that it's at least fifteen. He, I and one other were outvoted by others who thought we should be in solidarity requesting for a raise in the minimum wage to $15. Before Occupy existed, I got involved with a group promoting "Job Creation," but the guy in charge was a roofer who seemed to have no conception of being medically limited to a desk job, then whined when he offered to pay me $8 to hold a sign at Federal Hall, backhandedly complaining that he "had to" pay me to do this when he offered the money before he made the request, oblivious to the fact that I put up with the pain for one hour because I thought the cause was worthwhile.
Lafargue looks to the ancient Greeks, for whom all such labor was done by slaves. He argues that the difference between then and his present were that there were wage slaves instead of unpaid slaves. He cites Aristotle (55) as longing for a time when mechanization can eliminate work entirely, and all people can devote their time for intellectual pursuits, and, in fact, pretty much any position for which one attends college is not considered work under these narrow definitions of labor. Instead, the machines make work more efficient, and so the workers are overworked and overproducing, to no positive effect. Lafargue's argument is essentially what we were promised in K-12 would be the result of going to college--the ability to earn a living doing something that you love, a privilege that was awarded to the brightest who could make it through. As detailed in my entry, I have an abhorrence for busy work and sought out intellectual and creative pursuits from the time I was very young, only now to be treated like garbage because I am not only unwilling but unable to do hard physical labor.
Lafargue notes that there was so much overwork that no one can consume the over-priced goods, which often had to be destroyed because there was no room for unsold merchandise. "Hundreds of millions are required to figure the value of the goods that are destroyed. In the last century they were burned or thrown into the water" (33). This is the capitalist thumbing his nose at the worker--not only am I going to pay you so little to subsist to do the work that I want done, but the results of your work are going straight into the garbage because I can't find anyone who wants to buy it. He discusses the capitalist's need for Livingston, Stanley Du Chaillu, who search the world trying to find new customers for the goods they attempt to sell (42), a clear prefiguring of globalization. The capitalist compensates for this by making products that are built to be used up or broken quickly and need replacing, with no eye for quality (43)--an "Age of Adulteration."
The term "work ethic" has strong associations with Protestantism. On page 46, Lafargue notes that the Catholic Church laws provided the laborer with 90 rest days enforced by law, most of which were for feasting. In 1666, Perefixus, Archbishop of Paris suppressed 17 of them in his diocese. Lafargue describes Protestantism as religion adapted to fit the industrial and commercial needs of the bourgeoisie. The elimination of saints made many more workdays available. As such, it has been easier to establish socialist ideas in countries like France and Italy, where Protestantism is not so ingrained in the populace. Protestants seem to love the phrase "God helps those who help themselves," a purportedly Biblical statement that is really derived from the fictitious book of Philistines that also says, "thou shalt not take thy member into thy hands and stroke it" and "only men have the right to decide if a pregnancy is ended." The phrase is directly contradicted by "How does God’s love abide in anyone who has the world’s goods and sees a brother or sister in need and yet refuses help?" (1 John 3:17, New Revised Standard Version). High percentages of Americans believe in regard to the "help themselves" phrase. Wikipedia cites the statement as coming from Ancient Greece, which is interesting considering Lafargue's emphasis on the Greeks' despisement of labor. He cites the poet Antiparos longing for slave women to give up the mill in favor of leisure.
The set of essays includes a work of fiction called "Sale of an Appetite." Lafargue explicitly invokes Mary Shelley's The Last Man as being supposedly assembled form a work by another, first person, author through disordered leaves of paper--Lafargue claims that the central character wrote the book, but he changed it to third person. This would be perfect material for House of Mystery, except that the villain does not get punished, which would be required in code-approved days. It depicts a poor hungry, homeless man named Emile Destouches who is hired by M. Sch___ (the full name is never given) to digest his food via a mystical process. M. Sch___ is a complete glutton, and Destouches is ultimately allowed no work-life balance. When he wants out of the contract, he goes to M. Gabarit, the notary, who tells him the following:
You complain because you have been reduced to becoming nothing but a digestive apparatus; but all who earn their living by working are lodged at the same sign. They obtain their means of existence only by confining themselves to being nothing but an organ functioning to the profit of another; the mechanic is the arm which forges, taps, hammers, planes, digs, weaves; the singer is the larynx which vocalizes, warbles, spins out notes; the engineer is the brain which calculates, which arranges plans; the prostitute is the sexual organ which gives out venereal pleasure. Do you imagine that the clerks in my office use their intelligence, or that they reflect when they are copying papers? Oh, but they don't; thinking is not their business; they are nothing but fingers which scribble. They perform in my offices for ten or twelve hours this work which is far from exhilarating, which gives them headaches, stomach disorders and hemorrhoids; and at evening they home writing to finish, that they may earn a few cents to pay their landlord. Console yourself, my dear sir, these young people suffer as well as you, and not one of them has the satisfaction of saying that he receives per year the sum that you draw for a single month of digestive labor.
This really sums up what is so abhorrent about capitalism. Capitalists ought to be mocked as "cappie greenos" the way communists are mocked as "commie pinkos." The term "handicapped" is derived from a disabled person having "cap in hand" for the purpose of panhandling. As such, it is considered a pejorative term even though it's a . Capitalism is a system in which the wealthy want a handout, only instead of the handout being money, it is pitifully paid work that barely makes a dent in the workers' needs. There is no such thing as an intelligent person who complains about people on SNAP benefits using mobile phones. These people do not realize that if you're using more than 50% of your income to cover your necessities, you are impoverished. Such people have no problem with 100% of a person's income being used for necessities. This is morally bankrupt.
Marszalek discusses the book's reception in the 1960s. He says that intellectuals were concerned that mechanization would lead to depression-level unemployment. When I was younger, I had little concern about mechanization, because I thought manufacturing jobs were for the intellectually lazy and the demise of such jobs should be celebrated, right in the vein of Antiparos, so that the workers can put their time to better pursuits. Unfortunately, this is not how it works, even for those who go on to advanced education, such as myself. You are still simply a commodity of "What task can you do for me?" because, if you have no money, you are effectively shut out of the marketplace no matter how skilled you are unless you are able to sell those skills to someone else. The wealthy lazy have no such problems, yet few of them are as intelligent as I am, let alone as honest. Jamie Dimon and Ina Drew lied to Congress, and all they had to do was pay (to them) a pittance, whereas anyone else would have had to serve prison time. According to Marszalak, "While [the intellectuals] accurately foresaw the decline of manufacturing jobs, their forecast that unemployment would grow to Depression Era proportions proved incorrect" (13). Is he using a restricted time frame? Two pages later, he says,
"Workers today [2011], when they can find jobs, have no option but uncertain employment, since from data entry to college teaching no job is secure. Include non-profits that absorb an idealistic workforce in no-future jobs at starvation wages with no benefits, and this phenomenon, universal in the 'developed' world, defines a new labor sector: the precariat--those who submit to precarious employment."
This has been my existence from the moment I finished college. My first job was data entry, and more recently I had a very precarious job teaching college. I didn't appreciate that. Now with a college degree, I wasn't being paid to think, but to be a functionary, hence my play's title, Misused Minds. I originally derived it from the United Negro College Fund's "A mind is a terrible thing to waste," but "Wasted Minds" was already taken by Vanessa Satone for a manga (I later met Satone at King Con 1 in 2009) and seemed to me to carry a drug connotation that I wanted to avoid, since none of the economic problems depicted in the play are the result of drug use.
From K-12, we were taught to aspire to do work that we loved and that, to us, was anything but drudgery, especially from the men who chose teaching as a career. The male teachers were always the most popular. I imagine this has changed quite a bit, but the male teachers chose the profession because they wanted it, while the female teachers, at least the older ones, were in it because they saw no better opening. Whatever they achieved has been destroyed by the capitalist class. As Marszalak puts it,
"Work has changed dramatically since the nineteenth century, and yet it remains recognizable as enslavement--brutal and crippling, mentally and physically. There is nothing good that can be said for it. Work has been transformed over the decades, however the universal attitudinal and behavioral responses to order-taking, remain unchanged. The pervasive 'bad attitude' railed against by capitalists, is sufficient evidence that work as meritorious human activity is discredited for all but the most servile. and when career gurus, without remorse, counsel young people that they will have to 'retool' (meaning that they will need to retrain and to commoditize themselves) for six or seven 'careers' before they retire, what response can this evoke but utter despair? The work ethic issued from the workers' contractual obligation conceded by them on expectation that the capitalists would guarantee secure and decent employment. For over a hundred years labor struggled to attain this chimeric goal, only to have the bosses methodically trash it in a few decades.
Marsalak concludes his introductory essay with the following:
Lafargue's essay implies that to build a new society we need a new foundation for its creation. What is the opposite of work? Neither leisure nor idleness. The opposite of work is autonomous and creative collective activity--ludic activity--that develops our humanity and grounds our practice of reversing perspective. The desire to be a jesting whistleblower of daily life's subservience is a revolutionary desire.
You read it right there. Creativity is the opposite of work. So when a rabid anti-feminist mocked me for saying that I love Anita Sarkeesian's "work" with the retort that she doesn't "work" is true in that sense. The works of William Shakespeare are not "works," just as Ben Jonson was criticised in 1616 for publishing a book of his "works" that included his plays. The word "opera" in Italian literally means "work" and is the root of "operation." Shall we rename such creative works "opera?" That would be confusing. I am constantly being told how I refuse to work, how I choose not to work, how I can work in spite of my injuries, etc.
If creative work is not work, then I reject work. I demand my right to be lazy, and I demand my right to housing. Based on what I was taught throughout K-12 education and beyond, I have earned the right to have housing while doing creative work. The wealth needs to be taken away form the capitalist class that doesn't work and given to the creative class that longs to have the resources to survive and do their creative work. We must stand up and join together. The capitalists think that they are "entitled" because they had money on which to build a business, but have nothing good to say about those they believe "act entitled" like me, who believe that my education and brain power should exempt me from hard physical labor. They don't even think my physical challenges should exempt me from hard physical labor. They are no different from slaveholders. Their "vacuum up" economy needs to be altered, their wealth redistributed. This is what the capitalist class most fears. They keep saying the wealth will go back where it was within a year. They keep saying this because they know that the creative class will rise to the top if given the resources to execute their ideas. I would say, "Stand up!" at this point, but given my physical challenges, I would have to sit back down again too soon for the metaphor to work.
July 30, 2019
"... günde yalnızca üç saat çalışmaya, gününün ve gecesinin geri kalan bölümünde de kendini tembellik etmeye ve de bol bol yiyip içmeye zorlaması gerekir."
Lafargue'ın önerisi bu. Kişi günde en fazla üç saat çalışmalı. Bunu bir zorunluluk olarak da yapmamalı elbette, zevk almalı, zevk almıyorsa onu da yapmamalı. Kitap bir "hak"kı ele almaktan ziyade yıllar içinde kutsal bir niteliğe büründürülmüş olan çalışmanın toplum üzerindeki "yıkıcı" etkisini dile getiriyor. Her iş daha fazla işi doğuruyor; daha fazla iş de sömürü düzenini. Kitap bende Marx'ın yabancılaşma teorisinin Lafargue tarafından yorumlanışı izlenimini uyardı. Daha doğrusu, eksik bir yorumlama. Lafargue'a bazı yerlere katıldığımı söylemem pek mümkün değil. Giderek daha da acımasız hale gelen bir düzende yaşıyoruz, bu doğru; ama bunun çözümü Lafargue'ın önerileri mi, bence değil. Bence bazı aşırılıklardan kaçayım derken başka aşırılıklara yaklaşmış. Belki eserin kısalığı bende bu hissiyatı uyandırdı, bilemiyorum; çünkü yeterince ikna edici bir metin değildi benim için.
Ben Ayrıntı Yayınları'ndan okudum. İhya Kahraman'ın konuya ilişkin fikirlerinin yer aldığı bir önsöz yer alıyor kitapta. Bunun yanı sıra sonunda da Bob Black'in "İşin Yok Edilmesi Üzerine" isimli "deneme"sine yer verilmiş. Bunu da belirteyim.
Lafargue'ın önerisi bu. Kişi günde en fazla üç saat çalışmalı. Bunu bir zorunluluk olarak da yapmamalı elbette, zevk almalı, zevk almıyorsa onu da yapmamalı. Kitap bir "hak"kı ele almaktan ziyade yıllar içinde kutsal bir niteliğe büründürülmüş olan çalışmanın toplum üzerindeki "yıkıcı" etkisini dile getiriyor. Her iş daha fazla işi doğuruyor; daha fazla iş de sömürü düzenini. Kitap bende Marx'ın yabancılaşma teorisinin Lafargue tarafından yorumlanışı izlenimini uyardı. Daha doğrusu, eksik bir yorumlama. Lafargue'a bazı yerlere katıldığımı söylemem pek mümkün değil. Giderek daha da acımasız hale gelen bir düzende yaşıyoruz, bu doğru; ama bunun çözümü Lafargue'ın önerileri mi, bence değil. Bence bazı aşırılıklardan kaçayım derken başka aşırılıklara yaklaşmış. Belki eserin kısalığı bende bu hissiyatı uyandırdı, bilemiyorum; çünkü yeterince ikna edici bir metin değildi benim için.
Ben Ayrıntı Yayınları'ndan okudum. İhya Kahraman'ın konuya ilişkin fikirlerinin yer aldığı bir önsöz yer alıyor kitapta. Bunun yanı sıra sonunda da Bob Black'in "İşin Yok Edilmesi Üzerine" isimli "deneme"sine yer verilmiş. Bunu da belirteyim.
March 24, 2010
...karena siapapun yang memberikan tenaga-kerjanya untuk mendapatkan uang bearti menjual diri dan memasukkan dirinya ke dalam jajaran budak
serasa meneorikan cerita di kappa dan fontamara. jika mereka adalah kisah na, maka ini adalah teori na. selama ini orang diperas tenaga na untuk bekerja, memproduksi sesuatu. ketika hasil produksi menumpuk... bingung cari pasar, sementara para pekerja hanya memproduksi, tidak bisa menjadi pasar.
jika demikian, kenapa harus produksi banyak dan numpuk? produksi dikit-dikit aja, dengan jam kerja yang dipersingkat sehingga kaum buruh bisa lebih bersantai dan mungkin malah bisa menjadi pasar dari produk yang mereka hasilkan.
descanzar es salud, bersantai itu sehat. so... take a rest, ambil waktu beberapa saat untuk menghirup wangi secangkir kopi or segelas teh vanilla. hhmm....
serasa meneorikan cerita di kappa dan fontamara. jika mereka adalah kisah na, maka ini adalah teori na. selama ini orang diperas tenaga na untuk bekerja, memproduksi sesuatu. ketika hasil produksi menumpuk... bingung cari pasar, sementara para pekerja hanya memproduksi, tidak bisa menjadi pasar.
jika demikian, kenapa harus produksi banyak dan numpuk? produksi dikit-dikit aja, dengan jam kerja yang dipersingkat sehingga kaum buruh bisa lebih bersantai dan mungkin malah bisa menjadi pasar dari produk yang mereka hasilkan.
descanzar es salud, bersantai itu sehat. so... take a rest, ambil waktu beberapa saat untuk menghirup wangi secangkir kopi or segelas teh vanilla. hhmm....
April 4, 2022
inhaltlich 3/5, gut geschrieben und interessante denkanstöße. ein stern gibts extra weil der typ einfach richtig gut im beleidigen ist
December 6, 2022
I've been meaning to read this for a long time, and this publication of a new translation garnered my attention. However, I was totally unprepared for the anti-semitism found in this short political tract which includes Lafargue's numerous condemnations of the "Rothschilds", and so on. Still, this is a satirical work that doesn't express anything new if you are already familiar with Marxist economics.
Lafargue, in a florid style, argues that technology has advanced to a point that has enabled humanity to cease spending most of our lives working, so there really is no need to continue doing so. Yet, because of capital's unceasing demand for endless production, the working class has been inculcated with a love for working even when it adds nothing to our lives and is entirely meaningless. The working class "maddeningly" worships work for work's sake.
In one paragraph that I particularly enjoyed, Lafargue writes:
"Hordes of poor, emaciated proletarians in rags, escorted by policemen with sabers drawn, pursued by Furies lashing them with the whips of hunger, are bringing piles of merchandise, casks of wine, and sacks of gold and wheat to the feet of capitalist France...When the workers, beaten with gunstocks and pricked with bayonets, have laid down their burdens, they are driven away and the door is opened to manufacturers, merchants, and bankers. They hurl themselves pell-mell upon the pile, gulping down the cotton, sacks of wheat, and the gold ingots, emptying the casks: unable to continue, revoltingly covered in filth, they collapse in their vomit and waste..."
Lafargue connects this perennial tendency to "overproduction" of the capitalist system with imperialism as well. He ends by lamenting on whether "laziness" will heal the working class and cure it of its "madness".
I also read his other writings included in this collection, but could have done without them and the underwhelming introduction. Although he writes with a lot of flair and can be funny, I get tired of didactic styles pretty quickly, especially his "A Capitalist Catechism", which, while entertaining, can feel a little like getting beat over the head with something.
Lafargue, in a florid style, argues that technology has advanced to a point that has enabled humanity to cease spending most of our lives working, so there really is no need to continue doing so. Yet, because of capital's unceasing demand for endless production, the working class has been inculcated with a love for working even when it adds nothing to our lives and is entirely meaningless. The working class "maddeningly" worships work for work's sake.
In one paragraph that I particularly enjoyed, Lafargue writes:
"Hordes of poor, emaciated proletarians in rags, escorted by policemen with sabers drawn, pursued by Furies lashing them with the whips of hunger, are bringing piles of merchandise, casks of wine, and sacks of gold and wheat to the feet of capitalist France...When the workers, beaten with gunstocks and pricked with bayonets, have laid down their burdens, they are driven away and the door is opened to manufacturers, merchants, and bankers. They hurl themselves pell-mell upon the pile, gulping down the cotton, sacks of wheat, and the gold ingots, emptying the casks: unable to continue, revoltingly covered in filth, they collapse in their vomit and waste..."
Lafargue connects this perennial tendency to "overproduction" of the capitalist system with imperialism as well. He ends by lamenting on whether "laziness" will heal the working class and cure it of its "madness".
I also read his other writings included in this collection, but could have done without them and the underwhelming introduction. Although he writes with a lot of flair and can be funny, I get tired of didactic styles pretty quickly, especially his "A Capitalist Catechism", which, while entertaining, can feel a little like getting beat over the head with something.
August 30, 2017
Leitura divertida e subversiva para os dogmáticos do trabalho.
Vivemos para produzir. Os preguiçosos que não trabalham (muitos excluídos pela própria máquina viciada desde o início) são marginalizados e não se lhes concede nada, porque para merecer, é preciso trabalhar. O progresso social justifica a dedicação humana à sobreprodução de bens que precisam de ser escoados dê por onde der. Impingem-se produtos a quem não precisa deles e a máquina continua a rolar. A produtividade impera e a mecanização de várias funções laborais não serve para diminuir a carga horária dos trabalhadores e muito menos para libertar o Homem. O trabalho não é racionalizado nem em termos horários nem em termos demográficos. O que hoje nos parece bárbaro foi prática comum depois da Revolução Industrial. Dezasseis horas de trabalho e trabalho infantil são práticas que se mantêm em países ditos subdesenvolvidos, exportadas pela Europa e pelo mundo dito civilizado. No Ocidente, foram amenizadas para níveis demolidores de qualquer traço de criatividade ou de expressão orgânica nos últimos dois séculos, sempre contra o sábio conselho dos economistas, que, acenando com previsões catastróficas de queda de produtividade, viram a diminuição do horário de trabalho ser proporcional à subida daqueles indicadores.
A obsessão pelo trabalho instalou-se no proletariado, que combateu por melhores condições com prejuízo da derradeira liberdade, a liberdade para fazer o que bem entender com o seu tempo. Como avaliarão as gerações vindouras a relação que mantemos com o trabalho nos anos que correm? O esforço dedicado ao consumo excessivo ultrapassa a procura de um significado real da experiência humana e é contraproducente ao verdadeiro desenvolvimento humano.
O Direito ao Trabalho é a lei da miséria, os Direitos Humanos são os direitos da exploração capitalista. O vigor destas reivindicações deverá ser aplicado ao Direito à Preguiça.
Vivemos para produzir. Os preguiçosos que não trabalham (muitos excluídos pela própria máquina viciada desde o início) são marginalizados e não se lhes concede nada, porque para merecer, é preciso trabalhar. O progresso social justifica a dedicação humana à sobreprodução de bens que precisam de ser escoados dê por onde der. Impingem-se produtos a quem não precisa deles e a máquina continua a rolar. A produtividade impera e a mecanização de várias funções laborais não serve para diminuir a carga horária dos trabalhadores e muito menos para libertar o Homem. O trabalho não é racionalizado nem em termos horários nem em termos demográficos. O que hoje nos parece bárbaro foi prática comum depois da Revolução Industrial. Dezasseis horas de trabalho e trabalho infantil são práticas que se mantêm em países ditos subdesenvolvidos, exportadas pela Europa e pelo mundo dito civilizado. No Ocidente, foram amenizadas para níveis demolidores de qualquer traço de criatividade ou de expressão orgânica nos últimos dois séculos, sempre contra o sábio conselho dos economistas, que, acenando com previsões catastróficas de queda de produtividade, viram a diminuição do horário de trabalho ser proporcional à subida daqueles indicadores.
A obsessão pelo trabalho instalou-se no proletariado, que combateu por melhores condições com prejuízo da derradeira liberdade, a liberdade para fazer o que bem entender com o seu tempo. Como avaliarão as gerações vindouras a relação que mantemos com o trabalho nos anos que correm? O esforço dedicado ao consumo excessivo ultrapassa a procura de um significado real da experiência humana e é contraproducente ao verdadeiro desenvolvimento humano.
O Direito ao Trabalho é a lei da miséria, os Direitos Humanos são os direitos da exploração capitalista. O vigor destas reivindicações deverá ser aplicado ao Direito à Preguiça.
July 1, 2015
The son-in-law of Karl Marx, the heir of Engels. With his money he lived as middle class the end of his life.
I find this book in a old book seller.
It has an historical interest. But not only. It is a testimony of socialist thoughts during the first industrial revolution. Its subversive dimension is related to its attack against work like universal value. This conception is Judeo-Christian but is shared by the Free-Masons and some socialists thinkers for example.
The irony is that this right to be lazy is rather close to anarchist thought that Lafargue fought all his life.
Completely anecdotic but the problem is that Lafargue still has much fan especially in France. To propose to currently work 32 hours per weeks is directly inspired by the theses of Lafargue. In hoping for a reduction in unemployment is illusory whereas we live the 3° industrial revolution, the economy of knowledge.
I find this book in a old book seller.
It has an historical interest. But not only. It is a testimony of socialist thoughts during the first industrial revolution. Its subversive dimension is related to its attack against work like universal value. This conception is Judeo-Christian but is shared by the Free-Masons and some socialists thinkers for example.
The irony is that this right to be lazy is rather close to anarchist thought that Lafargue fought all his life.
Completely anecdotic but the problem is that Lafargue still has much fan especially in France. To propose to currently work 32 hours per weeks is directly inspired by the theses of Lafargue. In hoping for a reduction in unemployment is illusory whereas we live the 3° industrial revolution, the economy of knowledge.
December 28, 2018
Uzun zamandır merak ettiğim bir kitaptı. Hemen hemen literatürlerinden de aşina olduğum şekilde yazılmış. Her ne kadar sunduğu günde 3 saatlik çalışma teklifi bana fazla radikal gelse de, okurken en çok ilgimi çeken konulardan biri de yine çalışma süreleriyle ilgiliydi. Aynı zamanda hızına bazen yetişemediğimiz, bazense zor yetiştiğimiz şu dönemde belki de "yavaşlamayı" veya "yavaşlama hakkını" kişilere hatırlatması da dikkate değer bulduğum noktalardan, hele bazen öyle günler oluyor ki, kişi geriye dönüp baktığında çalışmaktan başka bir şey yapmamış olduğunu anlıyor çünkü kendine göre sorumlulukları ve ayrıca ulaşmak istediği hayalleri var, bir şekilde kurulu düzen tarafından bu şekilde yönlendiriliyor.
Kısa olduğu için rahat okunan bir kitap fakat genel olarak dilinden çok fazla etkilendiğimi söyleyemeyeceğim.
Kısa olduğu için rahat okunan bir kitap fakat genel olarak dilinden çok fazla etkilendiğimi söyleyemeyeceğim.
Read
July 7, 2023Hey, don't laugh ! A French deputy really had an identical idea, in the context of social rights, not long ago. Yes, imagine outlawed alarm clocks, time measured not by clocks, but by how many moments of procrastination one can achieve, people who are woken up by soothing lullabies sung by professional snooze artists. The workweek reduced to just one day, and the rest of the week is dedicated to endless snacking and napping compétitions. Meetings are held in cozy pajamas, productivity is measured by the number of yawns per hour, and whole humanity follow the motto " When in doubts, just doze it out ". Mmm ? Huxley, you'd have released a best-seller, lazy bastard !
August 28, 2016
Paul Lafargue 'nin çarpıcı metni Tembellik Hakkı bu hafta sonu ilk okumamdı. "Yoksul uluslar, halkın rahat ettiği uluslardır;zengin uluslarda ise halk genelde yoksuldur."! Bu kısa ve akıcı metni şiddetle tavsiye ederim.
October 9, 2016
Paul Lafargue 'nin çarpıcı metni Tembellik Hakkı :
."Yoksul uluslar, halkın rahat ettiği uluslardır;zengin uluslarda ise halk genelde yoksuldur."!
Bu kısa ve akıcı metni şiddetle tavsiye ederim. Ezber bozan nitelikte!
."Yoksul uluslar, halkın rahat ettiği uluslardır;zengin uluslarda ise halk genelde yoksuldur."!
Bu kısa ve akıcı metni şiddetle tavsiye ederim. Ezber bozan nitelikte!
Read
February 11, 2021
"Ey Tembellik, uzun süren sefaletimize acı! Sanatların ve asil erdemlerin anası ey Tembellik, insan kaygılarına merhem ol!"
(s.68)
November 24, 2024
Tembelliğin tanımını başından doğru düzgün yapmadığı için haklıyken haksız duruma düştüğünü düşündüğüm, fazlaca romantizm ve düz cehalet kokan, kaldı ki üzerine geçen çağların neticesinde artık geçerli de olmayan bir eserdi.
Kaldı ki çalışmayı fazlaca seven bir insan olarak hiç bana hitap etmedi. İnsanca çalışma, dinlenme ve onurlu yaşama hakkından söz edebilecekken tembellik hakkını kullandıktan sonra sonuçlarına katlanmak istememek arabayla düz yolumda giderken bir oramdan bir buramdan gitmeye çalışan motorun bir yere bindirdikten sonra "ühü ühü trafikte bizi görmüyorlar" serzenişi gibi.
Bir de herşeyi Rothschild'lere bağlamak ne tatlış bir kaçış. Paul Lafargue adeta Seyrantepe'de bir berber gibi büyük oyunu çözmüş ve reisini yedirmemiş. Yürü Paul.
Herkese keyifli okumalar!
Kaldı ki çalışmayı fazlaca seven bir insan olarak hiç bana hitap etmedi. İnsanca çalışma, dinlenme ve onurlu yaşama hakkından söz edebilecekken tembellik hakkını kullandıktan sonra sonuçlarına katlanmak istememek arabayla düz yolumda giderken bir oramdan bir buramdan gitmeye çalışan motorun bir yere bindirdikten sonra "ühü ühü trafikte bizi görmüyorlar" serzenişi gibi.
Bir de herşeyi Rothschild'lere bağlamak ne tatlış bir kaçış. Paul Lafargue adeta Seyrantepe'de bir berber gibi büyük oyunu çözmüş ve reisini yedirmemiş. Yürü Paul.
Herkese keyifli okumalar!
January 24, 2014
"A strange delusion possesses the working classes of the nations where capitalist civilization holds its sway. . . . This delusion is the love of work, the furious passion for work, . . . Instead of opposing this mental aberration, the priests, the economists and the moralists have cast a sacred halo over work. . . . they have presumed to rehabilitate what their God had cursed."
This book, by Karl Marx's son-in-law, is actually a satirical pamphlet, and shouldn't be treated with too much seriousness. Seriousness is, after all, part and parcel of that deadly and deadened mindset that builds and fills the factories -- Lafargue would prefer some levity.
Like Lafargue, we live in a time when the organized poor demand jobs -- when it is considered a radical stance to demand that an employer exploit your labor-power for you. I understand that there are good reasons for this, but all the same it was a relief to find this joyful call for a three-hour work day and more feasting.
This book, by Karl Marx's son-in-law, is actually a satirical pamphlet, and shouldn't be treated with too much seriousness. Seriousness is, after all, part and parcel of that deadly and deadened mindset that builds and fills the factories -- Lafargue would prefer some levity.
Like Lafargue, we live in a time when the organized poor demand jobs -- when it is considered a radical stance to demand that an employer exploit your labor-power for you. I understand that there are good reasons for this, but all the same it was a relief to find this joyful call for a three-hour work day and more feasting.
October 9, 2017
“Eğer işçi sınıfı, üzerinde egemen olan ve doğasını alçaltan kalbindeki kötülüğü sökerek olağanüstü gücü içerisinde, kapitalist sömürünün haklarından başka bir şey olmayan insan haklarını talep etmek için değil, sefalet hakkından başka bir şey olmayan çalışma hakkını da talep etmek için değil, ama bütün insanların günde üç saatten daha fazla çalışmasına karşı çıkan sarsılmaz bir yasayı uydurmak için ayağa kalksaydı, yeryüzü, yaşlı yerküre, sevinçle titreyerek kendi içinde zıplayan yeni bir evren hissedecekti� Ancak kapitalist ahlâkla bozulmuş bir proletaryadan nasıl olur da yiğitçe bir çözüm istenebilir?�(s.52)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 573 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.