Jobs and Human History

[Iron Sulfide]

(originally posted on the http://virus.lucifer.com bbs on:
2003-07-24 16:56:25)

this isn't exactly alchemist's gold as far as topics go, but it is an interesting
subject to chew on...

firstly, i'd like to note that the source of these quotes is Tom Robbins, from
his book "Half Asleep in Frog Pajamas."

[as a side note, i would recommend that anyone reading this also read some tom robbins...anything...."Still Life with WoodPecker" ,  "Frierce Invalids Home from hot Climates" , "Even Cowgirls get the Blues" "Skinny Legs and All" or anything else he's written...]

second, for easy reference and to save some typing later, a table...

LD =  the character Larry Diamond from the book.
GM = Gwen Mati from the book
N = Narration

[second side note: this book i'm quoting from is most interesting in it's presentation alone. whereas in grammar classes, all the way up to critical composition in college, we are instructed not to write in the second person as it is accusative, this book is writen entirely in the second person...bravo Mr Robbins...it has an interesting way of drawing you into the story, where you end up reading at least a chapter or two more than you expected to in each sitting.]

***********************************************************

okay....so, could jobs be on the way out? it sounds reasonably plausable to me after reading the passage in this book:

*****
LD: Human beings have been here for a million years...

N: (you think him mistaken about that)

LD:...but have only had jobs for the past five hundred years...

N: (that doesn't sound right either)

LD: ...an inconsequential period, relatively speaking. people have always worked, but they have only held jobs- with wages and employers and vacations and pink slips- for a very short time. And now, with the proliferation of cybernetics and robotics and automation of all types and degrees, jobs are on the way out again. in the context of history, jobs have been but a passing fancy...
*****

are jobs, in the context of history, merely a passing fancy? it is rather diffucult for one to imagine (i would imagine) a world where there are no jobs, as we were raised in a world with jobs, and careers all around us. we know no other way, so i could see the notion (being almost completely foreign to most) being no more than scoffed at.

but in between the lines...you start to think about it a little more (after you've smoked half a joint with a 55 year old gas station attendant, stranded roughly 120 miles away from both your starting point and your destination...)

it seems more plausable...yes, i was intoxicated while it made sense to me, but then it also carried over into sobriety as well. random thoughts that i have while intoxicated rarely make sense (at least for me) once i re-enter a state of sobriety. i feel that what merely happened was i was more open to  accept the possibility that the entire way i have viewed the world could be completely different in a (relatively) short amount of time. almost as though it was a fashion trend that faded away after the novelty wore off...

let's go back to the book for a second...

*****
LD: nowadays, the state uses jobs, or rather, the illusion of jobs, as a mechanism for control. when there is an outcry about some particularly vile instance of deforestation, wreckage or pollution, the "pufftoads" hasten to justify the enviornmental assault by trumpeting the jobs it will allegerdly save or create- and then the protestes fade like the rustle of a worn dollar bill.

N: you hasten your wonder of what he means, hoping he'll get to the point and give you the financial information you've been waiting for.

GM: so you're saying...

LD: foreign policy decisions, including illegal and immoral acts of armed intervention, likewise are made acceptable, even popular, on the grounds that such actions are necessary to protect american jobs. virtually every cadidate for public office in the past seventy years has campaigned with the rubber worm of "more jobs" dangling from his or her rusty hook, and the angler with the most lifelike worm snags the votes, even though the voters- except the cerebrally paralysed must recognize that there are going to be fewer and fewer jobs as time- and technology- progress.

N: you shoot him an akward glance.

GM: would you say then, larry, that those of us who're concerned with jobs are reading the wrong libretto [missing the point]?

N: he beams at you magnificently...

LD: there's hope for you yet...
*****

this is where it really starts getting interesting...

now imagine that jobs (the notion of jobs at least) are being used to misdirect people from what someone doesn't want them to see. much like a magician misdirecting your eyes to his left hand while he palms a coin in this other. only this magician isn't going to turn the "magic coin" into a suprise for you by "pulling it out from behind your ear." this stage magician is a little more malicious than others. once he palms the coin and gets away with it, he moves up...using similar misdirection to remove your wrist watch like a street magician might do in his preformance. once again with the difference: this time that he pockets your wrist watch without giving it back...etc...

when "terrorists" suicide bombed the twin towers on 9-11-2002, why didn't we note how many jobs were left open by the deceased people? because the magician needs his audiance to work with, doesn't he? when you take away the audiance, there is no reason for misdirection, because there is no one to misdirect in the first place...

but we regained confidence when we found out that by returning the attacks- and even going a little further and bombing a few other countries- that we could create many many new jobs (bush did state that in one of his addresses, though i honestly can't recall exactly which one, sorry...if you like, go ahead and discount this statement for lack of provided evidence).

anyways...lack of jobs does bring a few other things that could be questioned about living conditions and survival in general.

back to the book...

*****
LD: ...tell me who's more equipped to escape obsolecence: the toads of industrial fundamentalism- lost and hysterical in a world without jobs- or the transformative frogs who..."

GM: if they can't pay their grocery bills, one's just as dead as the other.

LD: 'no jobee, no eatee,' eh? they must've used a harsh detergent when they washed your brain [note to self: remember this phrase for personal use later...it's gold!]. on the roof of the Thunder House [his residence], we could grow enough food to feed everybody in a six block radius, year round. you could do almost as well on top of your appartment building. you wouldn't need to haul a lot of heavy soil up there either. tomatoes'll grow like weeds in shredded newspaper.

GM: tomatoes won't pay for my porshe.

LD: true, but your porche can't drive under water either...[still not exactly sure what he meant by that...probably something like 'you can't take it with you' or even 'it's just a fuckin car, it doesn't need to be that opulent or what-have-you; there are things more important than an expensive car...' but i dunno, that's my interpretation of that particular phrase...]
*****

a lot of people...i mean A LOT of people...damn near all people, really...are stuck on the idea that they HAVE to live within the system that they are in, that no other system will work, because they have never been a part of another system really. they've mostly never even considered that there is another system of "doing things" or "living" at all.

we, humans that is, as a species, and as civilizations, have always had work to do, and will always have work to do. but jobs are a recently ocurring phenomena, in which preception, ethics, "truth", and even "reality" have been distorted. there is the general concept that if one does not have a job, that one is an invalid; one cannot exist properly any other way.

this begs the question (i think at least) of "where did this conception originate, and on what premises is it made?"

i'm going to retire from my ranting for now...i leave you to contemplate or to criticise, what-have-you.

perhaps this could be a future chat discussion? maybe even an addition to some part of the recommended reading portion in time?

c'est la vie, c'est la mort, c'est la guerre....

c'est la pom de terre...

it's all the same to me.

-mo cara,
st. b

[The Good Reverend Roger]

One problem:  JOBS may only be ~500 years old, but WORK has been with us for 10,000 years.

[DJRubberducky]

Similar to what Roger said.  All that's been around recently is the ability to make a living doing something of no immediate survival value.  Were we to be plunged back into feudal times, the world wouldn't need people who do what I do for a living.  But it'd have even *less* need for people who don't do any sort of work at all.

We'd still have to find a way to secure and maintain our basic needs of food and water and shelter - either directly (build own house, grow own food), or by the exchange of labour for commodities (you grow enough food for yourself and someone else; someone else fixes your house).

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Similar to what Roger said.  All that's been around recently is the ability to make a living doing something of no immediate survival value.  Were we to be plunged back into feudal times, the world wouldn't need people who do what I do for a living.  But it'd have even *less* need for people who don't do any sort of work at all.

We'd still have to find a way to secure and maintain our basic needs of food and water and shelter - either directly (build own house, grow own food), or by the exchange of labour for commodities (you grow enough food for yourself and someone else; someone else fixes your house).

And VIOLA!  Right back to JOBS.

[gnimbley]

What's wrong with Jobs? He makes an awesome computer and those little animated flicks are pretty good, too.