>
>Umm, I think you need to read up on anarchism, anarcho-syndicalism, and
>the anti-work movement.
i have. that's why what you say disgusts me. i've read you attempting to make a decent analysis of, say, the IWW and the work issue before. and then you let some shit like "yawn" slide out. yes, it's too bad that this is a victory. but give it a little historical perspective and quit wanking and posturing
> > i likened you to carrol because for all the pretenses the two of you make
> > to detesting each other AND to severely objecting to each other's politics,
> > you're both alike. if they're not on your side, doing what you think is
> > best, then fuck 'em all, sez carrol/chuck0/leatherbuoyz.
>
>I don't understand the comparison, because I'm not very familiar with
>what Carrol has said in the past. I never dismissed the Verizon workers,
>you are reading that into my email. I simply said that winning a
>contract is a small victory.
no, you presented it as an either/or. just like doug accused others of doing. it's not either/or. it shouldn't be. we need to be critiquing the limitations of the labor movement without ever losing sight of the larger issues or belittling everything they do so that what is accomplished is seen as "never good enough." carrol and yoshie do this endlessly. X suX, they both say, because, in effect, it is never marxist enough, never radical enough, never left enough. a constant, endless repetition of "never good enough". yours is the same: verizon wasn't good enough. no, given the context verizon was a victory. get a bigger picture in your lens there and look at that, don't belittle labor and workers who fight their ass off for small gains.
i dig marx's "criticism of all that exists" too. but, as someone else said, if you want to spew, at least be willing to provide an analysis. like why don't you piss and moan about the real fucking enemy chuck, coz it sure as shit ain't the beknighted verizon worker.
>Have you ever worked customer service? You ever worked user tech
>support? I have and I hated it. If that job had been unionized it would
>have been a small improvement, but I ahrdly think the purpose of my life
>on this planet was to spend 40 years providing customer service.
yep. my mother-in-law worked for GTE for 30 years. she loved her work. is she falsely conscious? an ignorant subjectivity? whatever. is that your explanation for the fact that some people seem to like their work? i loved waitressing and cooking. was i a dumb shit? huh? and then you go on to say that most work sucks, ne? in other words, your analysis needs to go a bit further, to look at the real problems.
what the hell is the alternative? if work, in and of itself, sucks, who/what does it? machines? technology? read up on your frankfurt buoyz and some weber and then we'll talk. that kind of world is no more liberating that capitalism.
work sucks because of oppressive and exploitive social relations and not simply because work in and of itself sucks.
you take that anti work position? fine. then why don't you lay out a defensible argument for it instead of trying to justify your position on some bullshit identity politics as you engage in below.
you think your words or thoughts or deeds are justified because of the neighborhood you live in? bull shit.
>I was
>lucky, because I have an M.A. and was able to escape using my privilege.
>I found a better-paying, more tolerable, yet boring job.
yeah, why is it more tolerable chuck? huh? in part because people don't run around talking about how they would just hating doing your piece of shit job for the rest of their lives. you reproduce the very sentiments that IN LARGE PART makes people's lives miserable. their sense of shame about their jobs is because people like you and me run around saying, "i wouldn't want to work in this hole of a job the rest of my life"
the answer isn't to then valorize work, but to analyze the structural relations of capitalist oppression and exploitation. you reinscribe capitalist relations of oppression when you fail to do this and bleat about how the jobs are boring and then fail to provide some sort of alternative. no, i'm not asking for a blueprint. rather, some acknowledgement of what exactly is to be done--how the kind of work YOU think is shit is shit and why and who/what
>I can see why you aren't going to be giving an inspirational pep talks
>at the next Verizon union meeting. I can just hear your talk now:
like i tell carrol: eatme. what on earth does this have to do with any thing. i'm not telling anyone to enjoy their chains. read marx and you'll see that the chain isn't work itself, but the social organization of work. your attitudes are part of what constitutes oppressive social relations of work.
work isn't a priori bad or oppressive. you are the one with an essentialist analysis fraying a hole in your right pocket where your keep your hand far too often.
read genesis. why is it that "work sucks" is also part of the ruling class ideology?
>I have some recommended reading for you, so you won't continue making
>these silly claims about me being anti-worker:
look pal, my speciality is in the sociology of work, unemployment and social inequality, i know the literature and i know where you are coming from. i also know exactly what the problems with your position are. you haven't ever made a defensible argument re antiwork.
so, who is going to do the shit work? eh?
oh and i have a nice chunk of gouda and wedge of gorgonzola cheese. no crackers tho. ought to go nice with the wine.
kelley