SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
I read a couple of good books recently, and wanted to share them and do some writing to collect my thoughts on a subject that is currently of news-worthy relevance and of particular interest to "Soylentils". Enjoy, and I look forward to the discussion!
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Book(s) Review: "Technopoly" and "You Are Not a Gadget"
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 23 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
You will obey or molten silver will be poured into your ears.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 08 2017, @11:34PM
I would argue that the perspective of "workers as machines" was not feasible in many types of production (i.e. products made by craftsmen) prior to the industrial revolution--the individual level of skill and experience used to make a finished product are readily visible in many crafts. In fact, I want to go as far as saying "most types of production", because I imagine that, prior to the present era where the majority of product categories are commodities due to lack of major differences in quality, the skill of the craftsman made a huge difference in the sales value of an item.
Agriculture was pretty widespread prior to the industrial revolution. I'd say that by itself, it would be most people for all but the most highly urbanized societies. Second, there are several other sectors in the same situation: warfare and low skilled labor. So no, I think it was widely prevalent contrary to the basic assumption.
I would agree that the outlook has "been around since the dawn of agriculture"--after all, agriculture has many low-skill tasks that can be done by easily-replaceable workers. But Postman's argument is that this perspective has become pervasive and societally-dominant due to common methods of production and business organization, and negatively affected peoples' own view of themselves and their self-worth based on their contribution to society.
Compared to when? There were a lot of societies who had slaves or indentured servants/peasants. Instead, today is far more respectful of workers than the past was.
I think your reply to AC's criticism of capitalism contains his whole idea: "unless society somehow succeeds in making human labor valueless", with the substitution of "Capitalists" for "society". That, more or less, is the implicit goal of many capitalist enterprises--labor is a cost, and should thus be minimized. But are the human elements of a productive system a cost or an investment?
No, reducing cost is not the goal. Increasing profit would be a typical goal, but you can't get there by merely cutting costs. You have to have revenue generation as well.