I’m fascinated by the forces that manufacture concepts like this.
It’s amazing that it’s actually possible for some to not realize that the very existence of multicellular life, and the unmitigated primacy of cooperation and language itself as a survival trait, entirely refutes the pro-slavery world view implied by reverence for drudgery and the exploitative trade imbalance called “profit.”
It’s almost like blindsight, minus the logical consistency.
I wish Orwell had presented the concept of doublethink differently such that it was more socially obvious in cases like this.
People genuinely don’t realize it’s inherently conflicted. (And there are so many t makes one wonder how democracy itself can be valid when such a small a handful of opinion makers can be so effective.)
That entire notion of labor’s purpose exists to enable the very thing it in the next breath so bitterly attacks as “laziness.” Or should I say Sloth? In another era it’d be the same arguments on behalf of the clergy or the crown.
It’s the same as it has been. A PR firm selling a world view to the masses that keeps them working, expressly so that the owners of the firm and its (royal) clients won’t have to.
But that’s all old news. More recently I am genuinely curious how the narrative is going to evolve when it finds itself in a context where it can no longer (cogently at least) blame unemployment on some imaginary and arbitrarily defined character flaw.
Picture an island with 10 people but only two jobs thanks to innovation. Would they still try to spin the resulting 80% unemployment rate as due to “laziness?”
I mean if demand for leisure/freedom (“laziness/sloth”) is a character flaw (unless you’re rich?) then it follows that work itself is an axiomatic virtue doesn’t it? So without needed tasks, would they invent superfluous time consuming painful ones for the other 80% of the island? (Would simply flogging them be acceptable instead for the sin of having free time?)
Would they be asked to invent such tasks or do the flogging themselves “voluntarily” on pain of avoiding worse social punishment for being “too lazy to find a job?”
Only asking conceptually. Asking my back brain really. After all, few are rational agents in this. Most answers given would just be repetition of some PR firm like always. I’m better off waiting for a press release than asking any one member of the party.
You ever notice how they dare not make any degree of laziness a mental disability? Like how it HAS to stay forever in the realm of shameful character traits. Have you ever wondered why it is that seemingly all other affective traits carried to some socially damning pathological extreme can be parsed as mental illness except the desire to evade labor?