What is the rate child mortality in the Ju/'hoansi society? One source sites child infanticide levels as high as 6 in 500 births. In industrialized countries the rate of infanticide is 2.1 in 100,000 births. The happy go-lucky tribal group might look a lot different if you look closely at how they keep their numbers down.
1
I would like to sing a happy song like the Bushmen.
Let me try this again: See Daniel Quinn's Ishmael Trilogy and his book "Beyond Civilization" for a somewhat similar prospective.
1
It is impossible to have a 45-50 hours week let alone 15 hours. One must come from a family of inherited wealth to have that flexibility in America. For families it is becoming harder and harder - juggling between paying escalating property/school taxes, worry about medical, keeping up with changes in the work place and having time for the family. The same challenges are being pushed over in Africa and so if the San Bushman are telling you it is 15 hour work week for them, they are not completely giving you the challenges they are facing from day to day stemming from globalization and external commercial pressures in Botswana.
1
Yes it's true the Bushmen have achieved 15 hour workweeks. They also never started world wars or ended them with nuclear weapons. Neither do they cut off the heads of infidels and post video of it online as proof of piety. Their lifestyle is largely free of the worst humanity has to offer.
They also are not exemplars of the best that humanity is capable of. They do not invent vaccines, write symphonies or launch spaceships that beam us images of the other worlds in our solar system. They do not systematize knowledge of the physical world, knowledge that helps bring life into focus and context.
Civilization has its discontents but humans are collectively committed at this point, we are going forwards to where evolution is taking our species and I for one am curious and cautiously optimistic.
They also are not exemplars of the best that humanity is capable of. They do not invent vaccines, write symphonies or launch spaceships that beam us images of the other worlds in our solar system. They do not systematize knowledge of the physical world, knowledge that helps bring life into focus and context.
Civilization has its discontents but humans are collectively committed at this point, we are going forwards to where evolution is taking our species and I for one am curious and cautiously optimistic.
15
Like many of the commenters here, I admire the people here described. I would like to point out one other aspect of their way of life that bears admiration: although there were leaders in such hunting groups, by and large they were democratic. Everyone participated in decisions especially decisions about where to move or hunt. They all participated in the planning of their work, and then they all carried out that plan. There was no division of management and labor. And if the plans went well or not they all accepted the consequences and were therefore responsible for their decisions. There was no "let’s send the boys off to Vietnam or Iraq" and then “ops sorry about that.” These people have much to teach us about what it means to be free and responsible.
16
"He believed economics to be a rational science and people, on the whole, to be capable of making economically rational choices when presented with them"
Thats where Keynes made a mistake. Economic science is only as rational as people making the policies allow it to be and people are inherently irrational. In a rational society his utopia would have some chance, but with inequality and payment gap at where it is at present, it is only wistful thinking. At least the west European nations seem to have figured that out and they are surely enjoying longer vacation times that Americans....
Thats where Keynes made a mistake. Economic science is only as rational as people making the policies allow it to be and people are inherently irrational. In a rational society his utopia would have some chance, but with inequality and payment gap at where it is at present, it is only wistful thinking. At least the west European nations seem to have figured that out and they are surely enjoying longer vacation times that Americans....
3
i quote from this magnificent article of economic histories:
". . . strategies proposed to manage the impacts of automation tend focus mainly on . . . how to find REPLACEMENT WORK for those made redundant.
". . . if our working culture is an artifact of the economic problem, . . . perhaps we would do better to . . . reimagine our relationship with work [and] so . . . as Keynes put it,
'look forward to an age of leisure and abundance . . .'"
THE ABOVE QUOTATION INSPIRES THIS SUGGESTION:
Of course some 'adjustments' would have to be made, so as to 'standardize' pay scales (a quantification task, setting a unit-work correlation to unit-pay), yet consider the proposition:
That, it would seem a good way to guarantee some werk to anyone wanting,
or needing (if needs are STILL an issue),
to have a job
(a sector including panhandlers, as well as skilled machinists or secretaries, e.g.)--
THAT EACH OF THESE souls take a portion (a 'cut') from whatever other worker--who will have reached his 15 standard hours of work/week.
THUS idler A would step in to worker B's office
[for the sake of exaggeration, by satirical example let's say,
the office is that of some OnePercenter, whose earning power will have been 'adjusted' in order that my scheme work equitably].
So we may have 'full employment' and for few hours a week to hoi polloi,
and so we may revert to gentler, primitive times.
what is NOT to like here??
". . . strategies proposed to manage the impacts of automation tend focus mainly on . . . how to find REPLACEMENT WORK for those made redundant.
". . . if our working culture is an artifact of the economic problem, . . . perhaps we would do better to . . . reimagine our relationship with work [and] so . . . as Keynes put it,
'look forward to an age of leisure and abundance . . .'"
THE ABOVE QUOTATION INSPIRES THIS SUGGESTION:
Of course some 'adjustments' would have to be made, so as to 'standardize' pay scales (a quantification task, setting a unit-work correlation to unit-pay), yet consider the proposition:
That, it would seem a good way to guarantee some werk to anyone wanting,
or needing (if needs are STILL an issue),
to have a job
(a sector including panhandlers, as well as skilled machinists or secretaries, e.g.)--
THAT EACH OF THESE souls take a portion (a 'cut') from whatever other worker--who will have reached his 15 standard hours of work/week.
THUS idler A would step in to worker B's office
[for the sake of exaggeration, by satirical example let's say,
the office is that of some OnePercenter, whose earning power will have been 'adjusted' in order that my scheme work equitably].
So we may have 'full employment' and for few hours a week to hoi polloi,
and so we may revert to gentler, primitive times.
what is NOT to like here??
3
the negative responses to the thesis of this article reminds me of the recent election we had in which people voted against their own economic interests, because of false but tightly held beliefs about the world. People seem apoplectic that their tight little worlds where they are hammering to beat out the next guy might not be necessary or "right" after all. Calm down everyone, you could see a better world than this.
12
Once I heard this: "Rich is not he who has more, but he who needs less."
9
Several other comments have captured the misguided premise of this article, so I'll pose a hypothetical question instead.
What if someone handed you $1 billion and said, "Your financial security is set for life. You can do anything you want without fear of poverty."
Anything you want. What would you do?
Would you keep working a dead-end job that you hate?
Or would you spend more time with your friends, your family, or exercising, or pursuing hobbies, or doing something creative instead?
There's a risk that some people with $1 billion would become self-destructive hedonists. But I think extreme poverty causes a bit of that too.
What if someone handed you $1 billion and said, "Your financial security is set for life. You can do anything you want without fear of poverty."
Anything you want. What would you do?
Would you keep working a dead-end job that you hate?
Or would you spend more time with your friends, your family, or exercising, or pursuing hobbies, or doing something creative instead?
There's a risk that some people with $1 billion would become self-destructive hedonists. But I think extreme poverty causes a bit of that too.
9
The difference between those societies and ours is that their families stick together. While all modern progeny run off to Brooklyn with already high debt to pay high rents instead of building a nucleus as a family first. A strong family that pools thier money and time together can offer each a repreive from the 60 hour weeks each has to endure. Instead of living broom box that no one has the time or energy to visit, stay home on the range until the chips on the board tell you to move, not what the Johnses have
3
Opinion is nice, but I wish it had been bolstered by more facts about the bushmen Ju/hoansi and their lifestyle based on only 15 hours of work a week. Is this the men or all adults? I cannot imagine a woman working only 15 hours a week, washing clothing by hand, keeping the home clean and caring for the children.
Furthermore, if their society is cohesive and doing well, why is the lone photo of these people a man in a resettlement center.
Perhaps there should have been less emphasis on Keynes and more about this culture.
Furthermore, if their society is cohesive and doing well, why is the lone photo of these people a man in a resettlement center.
Perhaps there should have been less emphasis on Keynes and more about this culture.
15
Did they live to age 50? Doubtful.
3
First: "For while agriculture was far more productive, it exposed rapidly growing populations to a new range of potentially catastrophic risks that inspired a range of innovations " Kelptocratic leadership is among the worst of those risks. A few people need to lord it over everyone else. We'll never reach anything like utopia until we solve the leadership problem.
Second: The bushmen have a sparse population spread out over a large area. Something keeps their population sparse; otherwise they would increase in numbers until there was no longer enough for them to eat. In some native societies, this population control consists of constant raiding and warfare. What is it that limits the population of these bushmen? To support 7 billion people that way, we'd need a planet as big as Jupiter.
Second: The bushmen have a sparse population spread out over a large area. Something keeps their population sparse; otherwise they would increase in numbers until there was no longer enough for them to eat. In some native societies, this population control consists of constant raiding and warfare. What is it that limits the population of these bushmen? To support 7 billion people that way, we'd need a planet as big as Jupiter.
5
As Keynes put it, “look forward to an age of leisure and abundance without dread.” Good Luck America with global competition, our standard of living declining, skyrocketing healthcare costs, bankrupt social security, $20 Trillion in national debt, and approx. $100 Trillion in future, unfunded liabilities!
Elected Politician from both parties must be held responsible for knowingly enslaving our and future generations in debt due to their self-interest, that of their party and their special interest donors.
http://www.USDebtForum.com
Elected Politician from both parties must be held responsible for knowingly enslaving our and future generations in debt due to their self-interest, that of their party and their special interest donors.
http://www.USDebtForum.com
2
And with most of the productivity and profit increases from our work going to the upper 1%, how are the other 99% going to get the 'benefit of automation' that will allow them to basically semi-retire?
Articles like this always talk about 'we', as if that upper 1% include the rest of us in their idea of 'we'. Who this 'we', kemo sabe?
Articles like this always talk about 'we', as if that upper 1% include the rest of us in their idea of 'we'. Who this 'we', kemo sabe?
3
reimagine our relationship with work [and] so . . . as Keynes put it,
'look forward to an age of leisure and abundance . . .'"
THE ABOVE QUOTATION INSPIRES THIS SUGGESTION:
Of course some 'adjustments' would have to be made, so as to 'standardize' pay scales (a quantification task, setting a unit-work correlation to unit-pay), yet consider the proposition:
That, it would seem a good way to guarantee some werk to anyone wanting,
or needing (if needs are STILL an issue),
to have a job
(a sector including panhandlers, as well as skilled machinists or secretaries, e.g.)--
THAT EACH OF THESE souls take a portion (a 'cut') from whatever other worker--who will have reached his 15 standard hours of work/week.
THUS idler A would step in to worker B's office
[for the sake of exaggeration, by satirical example let's say,
the office is that of some OnePercenter, whose earning power will have been 'adjusted' in order that my scheme work equitably].
So we may have 'full employment' and for few hours a week to hoi polloi,
and so we may revert to gentler, primitive times.
what is NOT to like here??
'look forward to an age of leisure and abundance . . .'"
THE ABOVE QUOTATION INSPIRES THIS SUGGESTION:
Of course some 'adjustments' would have to be made, so as to 'standardize' pay scales (a quantification task, setting a unit-work correlation to unit-pay), yet consider the proposition:
That, it would seem a good way to guarantee some werk to anyone wanting,
or needing (if needs are STILL an issue),
to have a job
(a sector including panhandlers, as well as skilled machinists or secretaries, e.g.)--
THAT EACH OF THESE souls take a portion (a 'cut') from whatever other worker--who will have reached his 15 standard hours of work/week.
THUS idler A would step in to worker B's office
[for the sake of exaggeration, by satirical example let's say,
the office is that of some OnePercenter, whose earning power will have been 'adjusted' in order that my scheme work equitably].
So we may have 'full employment' and for few hours a week to hoi polloi,
and so we may revert to gentler, primitive times.
what is NOT to like here??
1
The Ju/’hoansi only work 15 hours a week because the fruits of their labor have not been stolen from them by employers and taxation.
5
The main reason increased productivity is not producing more leisure time is the the wealth produced by increased productivity is not shared with the more productive workers. The wealth is taken by the employers. The employees are powerless to negotiate better terms because they choose to remain powerless. The biggest foes of organized labor are poorly paid employees (a.k.a. Trump's base).
9
a lot of people don't want leisure time. they worry they'd just drink beer watch TV, and eat bad food.
In any society that acknowledges private property, the most important property is women. Men want wives and some men want harems (multiple wives). My guess is that non-nomadic, agricultural society (and homebuilding) developed hand in hand with traditions of marriage (sexual exclusivity) and bigamy. I could be wrong. I'm not an anthropologist. I don't know what power structures were like in nomadic societies. But in non-nomadic societies, land (property) is what empowers kings and lords and it's the power and property that gives kings and lords control over mating. Whenever I read articles such as this one, I start to think about sexual politics, the history of marriage, and the role that sexual desire has played in transforming social structures. That's just where my mind goes.
4
The Bushmen may have figured it out, but they have since been overrun, marginalized, and in some cases subjected to genocide, by the Bantu (more conventional Africans of West African stock), whose ability to proliferate their numbers and make war are much greater. At current rates of reproduction, the Bantu will overtake most of the entire earth by the year 2150. Of course, the Bantu also have a substantial IQ advantage over the Bushmen, an advantage they do not have over the people to their north, so the outcome in Europe could well be different, if the Europeans free themselves from "progressive" thought on the equality of peoples and act to preserve themselves in a way the Bushmen could not.
"people’s desires are limitless"
I disagree. I have relatives who have curtailed their desires based on their willingness (or lack thereof) to work. Willingness to work is a personal issue, and we are not all the same. Theories that generalize our attitudes about things are useless.
I disagree. I have relatives who have curtailed their desires based on their willingness (or lack thereof) to work. Willingness to work is a personal issue, and we are not all the same. Theories that generalize our attitudes about things are useless.
1
The big problem today is that there are too few people with the skills needed by technological advances. Thus good computer programmers may have to put 60 hour weeks because there are not enough of them. At the same time the results of their work eliminates many "low-skill" jobs. Yes, the shorter work week is a long term solution but we need to change our educational system by putting more emphasis on teaching the skills for "STEM" much earlier than we do now. This in turn means that we have to improve the skills of elementary school teachers. There are some programs that do that but they are too few and poorly funded. And, yes, we need higher taxes on the wealthy. Much of the new wealth is the result of technological advances (think of hedge fund managers) and the benefits of advances in technology must be spread more widely.
1
The Neolithic revolution also ushered in wealth and power, social hierarchy, war, slavery, and ultimately legal documents and org charts, all of which the Ju/'haonsi seem to be OK without.
Picture Proto-Ur, 10,000 years ago. Once the herds of sheep and goats had become docile and compliant enough to understand "go along to get along," the same domestication techniques could have been applied to captive humans. Select for a few physical and behavioral characteristics, genes modified this way or that, and then voila, like with those Russian foxes recently, you'd have ended up with a good-sized bunch of social, obedient, cooperative domesticated humans. They'd be in demand on farms, in armies, and as servants, particularly the blonde ones. “They’ll work as hard and long as you tell them to.” (Those who didn't fit in would be excused from contributing to the gene pool.)
It might not have taken a seasoned boss with a good staff more than 15-20 hours a week to run the entire enterprise! Or, he could always have just gone with the Bushman option and settled for a joyful life and satisfied mind, instead.
Picture Proto-Ur, 10,000 years ago. Once the herds of sheep and goats had become docile and compliant enough to understand "go along to get along," the same domestication techniques could have been applied to captive humans. Select for a few physical and behavioral characteristics, genes modified this way or that, and then voila, like with those Russian foxes recently, you'd have ended up with a good-sized bunch of social, obedient, cooperative domesticated humans. They'd be in demand on farms, in armies, and as servants, particularly the blonde ones. “They’ll work as hard and long as you tell them to.” (Those who didn't fit in would be excused from contributing to the gene pool.)
It might not have taken a seasoned boss with a good staff more than 15-20 hours a week to run the entire enterprise! Or, he could always have just gone with the Bushman option and settled for a joyful life and satisfied mind, instead.
1
"They found profound satisfaction from the work they did and used of their free time to make music, create art, make jewelry, tell stories, play games, relax and socialize."
Music, art, stories, games, ways to relax and socialize are a heck of a lot better now than then. Oh yeah, and the "elderly" then were left behind.
Music, art, stories, games, ways to relax and socialize are a heck of a lot better now than then. Oh yeah, and the "elderly" then were left behind.
2
Or you could say "music, art, stories, fames ways to relax and socialize" are much worse now. That would be more accurate.
3
We could have had this paradise long ago. In fact, we were on the verge of it in the 60's and 70's. There was even discussion of whole new fields of study on how to help people make use of their free time - although I think most people can figure it out.
But there are those who do not believe in sharing the wealth, for whom greed is all. And so little by little, unions were destroyed, wages lowered, benefits reduced until now it takes two workers to just make ends meet.
But there are those who do not believe in sharing the wealth, for whom greed is all. And so little by little, unions were destroyed, wages lowered, benefits reduced until now it takes two workers to just make ends meet.
6
TS Eliot said it best in Little Gidding:
'And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive back where we started
And know thew place for the first time.'
For more see http://www.davidkhurst.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Cautionary-Tales-f...
'And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive back where we started
And know thew place for the first time.'
For more see http://www.davidkhurst.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Cautionary-Tales-f...
1
This is hilarious— the view that "primitive" people were on the edge of death at all times. The first Spanish padres to visit the San Francisco Bay Area kept detailed journals that documented how the many and varied indigenous tribes around the bay seemed to work only about 12 hours a week for food, shelter, and clothing, and they played the rest of the time. This was generally true all over the world, even in places not as hospitable and fecund as the San Francisco bay. Anybody who wishes can recapture some of this experience by studying and practicing American Indian (versus military) forms of wilderness survival. It was cities and the industrial age that brought endless work and the grind, grind, grind. When you wake up tomorrow morning, ponder that the vast majority of humans who ever lived on this planet would shake their heads, feel sorry for us, and think/know we are crazy. Enjoy your alarm clock!
15
what prevents you and your friends and like minded thinkers from buying hundreds of acres in the remote west and living a hunter and gatherer's existence? I disagree with your conclusion 100%. The vast majority of humans who have ever lived would consider the current world utopian.
1
When computers were becoming ubiquitous some 20-30 years ago, we were told that people would not have to work as many hours because of increased productivity (i.e., the work it took them 40 hours to do could be done in many fewer hours allowing them more leisure). What happened instead? The productivity increases were captured as profits by companies who reduced their employee ranks. That's what happened. It was a con. As long as the 1% hog all profits due to increases in productivity for themselves, three things will continue to happen: 1) increased joblessness; 2) increased gig economy with no security; and, 3) brutal hours for those few "lucky" one's that keep a regular job.
20
The entry of computers into my field, has simply doubled and tripled and quadrupled the work for the remaining workers -- after obsoleting numbers of them, and laying them off. The "lucky stiffs" who got to stay, also got to do EVERYONE'S work. A department that once had 10 people, now has 3-4 people if that many.
One employer I had required that we work overtime, at the drop of a hat, anytime upper management required something -- BUT we were forbidden to BILL for overtime, or put it on our time cards. They had a strict "no overtime" policy. Therefore, we were required to work overtime without pay. Had we complained, we would have been terminated on the spot.
One employer I had required that we work overtime, at the drop of a hat, anytime upper management required something -- BUT we were forbidden to BILL for overtime, or put it on our time cards. They had a strict "no overtime" policy. Therefore, we were required to work overtime without pay. Had we complained, we would have been terminated on the spot.
7
reimagine our relationship with work [and] so . . . as Keynes put it,
'look forward to an age of leisure and abundance . . .'"
THE ABOVE QUOTATION INSPIRES THIS SUGGESTION:
Of course some 'adjustments' would have to be made, so as to 'standardize' pay scales (a quantification task, setting a unit-work correlation to unit-pay), yet consider the proposition:
That, it would seem a good way to guarantee some werk to anyone wanting,
or needing (if needs are STILL an issue),
to have a job
(a sector including panhandlers, as well as skilled machinists or secretaries, e.g.)--
THAT EACH OF THESE souls take a portion (a 'cut') from whatever other worker--who will have reached his 15 standard hours of work/week.
THUS idler A would step in to worker B's office
[for the sake of exaggeration, by satirical example let's say,
the office is that of some OnePercenter, whose earning power will have been 'adjusted' in order that my scheme work equitably].
So we may have 'full employment' and for few hours a week to hoi polloi,
and so we may revert to gentler, primitive times.
what is NOT to like here??
'look forward to an age of leisure and abundance . . .'"
THE ABOVE QUOTATION INSPIRES THIS SUGGESTION:
Of course some 'adjustments' would have to be made, so as to 'standardize' pay scales (a quantification task, setting a unit-work correlation to unit-pay), yet consider the proposition:
That, it would seem a good way to guarantee some werk to anyone wanting,
or needing (if needs are STILL an issue),
to have a job
(a sector including panhandlers, as well as skilled machinists or secretaries, e.g.)--
THAT EACH OF THESE souls take a portion (a 'cut') from whatever other worker--who will have reached his 15 standard hours of work/week.
THUS idler A would step in to worker B's office
[for the sake of exaggeration, by satirical example let's say,
the office is that of some OnePercenter, whose earning power will have been 'adjusted' in order that my scheme work equitably].
So we may have 'full employment' and for few hours a week to hoi polloi,
and so we may revert to gentler, primitive times.
what is NOT to like here??
1
Much thought should be given to the possibility that too much "work time" has prompted more aggression, less tolerance, weakened family and friendship enjoyment, less creativity, etc. We simply burn ourselves--and our lives--out.
13
Exactly backward.
1
At this point, I think it's fair to say you are preaching to the choir. The only holdouts are those who hoard wealth and wish to continue to do so. They imagine even greater accumulation than has already occurred. They also believe in your observations, but for them, greed trumps doing the right thing for the many.
13
Sure. And the women worked 24/7 to support the men!
10
I suspect the 15-hour work week has arrived for many, even if they still punch a 40-hour time clock. They spend at least 15 hours on non-work phone calls, messaging, games, social media, news browsing, shopping etc. and probably another 10 hours at coffee, lunch, errands etc. Not so different from the hunter-gatherers who "used of their free time to make music, create art, make jewelry, tell stories, play games, relax and socialize." I'm not saying it's wrong; we just have to acknowledge it, integrate it into economic models, and maximize the benefits from the 15 productive hours.
16
Would one of the knowledgeable commentators explain how these cultures maintained the low populations that their lifestyles seemed to depend on? Were some measures taken? Was infant/child mortality high?
I guess we can do without a lot of modern stuff, but I for one (and I suspect most of the other older commenters) am very happy about modern medicine. I think its development and the learning necessary to practice it require a lot more than 15 h/wk effort.
I guess we can do without a lot of modern stuff, but I for one (and I suspect most of the other older commenters) am very happy about modern medicine. I think its development and the learning necessary to practice it require a lot more than 15 h/wk effort.
9
In answer to your query: People hardly ever voluntarily limit their population. It is always done for them by famine, disease, natural disasters, and warfare. People are having less children in Industrialized countries because farming, etc, is mechanized, so we don't need the kids to do the chores anymore.
3
It is really about the fact that the Native Americans(Indians), Bushmen, Amish, Hutterites, Mennonites, etc. all spent time doing physical activity to gather their food, thus getting exercise. Now, most people either go through the drive through or a restaurant, where all of the food and beverage are served to them. There is no physical effort in the modern western lifestyle, and that is why 74% of Americans are either overweight or obese. They are not healthy, and are really not enjoying life as they are taking lots of drugs for high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, and heart disease. That is not living, really!
5
Every claim in this article is empirically false and known to be false for decades.
This idea of the desirable life of hunter-gatherers has been around for a long time; not because it's true but because so many people want to believe it.
For an examination and refutation of such ridiculous claims the interested reader can see this: http://kk.org/mt-files/reCCearch-mt/kaplan-darker.pdf
This idea of the desirable life of hunter-gatherers has been around for a long time; not because it's true but because so many people want to believe it.
For an examination and refutation of such ridiculous claims the interested reader can see this: http://kk.org/mt-files/reCCearch-mt/kaplan-darker.pdf
8
In a letter to King George lll Captain Cook described the Aboriginal people of what is now Sydney, Australia:
"In reality they are far happier than we Europeans. They live in tranquility which is undisturbed by the difference of condition. The earth and sea furnish them with all the things necessary for life."
"In reality they are far happier than we Europeans. They live in tranquility which is undisturbed by the difference of condition. The earth and sea furnish them with all the things necessary for life."
11
but did they ski? we now have some complex pleasures, such as skiing and watching John Wick II.
A principal characteristic of the Ju/’hoansi is that their society is relatively flat in terms of economic hierarchy. The possibility for wealth to accumulate, as in US industrial complexes, is simply not there. Thus the possibility for exploitative greed is structurally suppressed.
13
I think this is a really important observation. Most of what we consume today has nothing to do with survival and a lot to do with status. The more you got, the better you are. What you consume and how you consume it indicates your worth as a human being and is a substitute for genuine relatedness and spirituality. We are into power, which is demonstrated by controlling the acquisition and distribution of lots of stuff. These hunter gatherer folks would be horrified by the sight of a homeless person on the sidewalk, ignored by well fed passers by.
4
In NYC, it's about dating models. Men acquire wealth to attract beautiful women. Status = sex. Most poor men over 40 have very little sex. Men over 40 who still have lots of sex tend to be successful and affluent.
Most of these discussions happen as if sex doesn't exist. To people like me, sex is the most driving force in (human) nature.
Older men ant younger wives. That's why they acquire wealth and status.
Most of these discussions happen as if sex doesn't exist. To people like me, sex is the most driving force in (human) nature.
Older men ant younger wives. That's why they acquire wealth and status.
2
This reminds me of the planet we live on and how it has provided way more than we need. One could easily jump to the conclusion that all would be happily satisfied but somewhere along the line some people craved great riches which do nothing more than clutter their and others' lives. How did the the "bushman" survive within centuries of greed and massive collections of useless junk. It's a miracle to me that they have not been run over by greedy
hucksters.
We now face the destruction of all life on the planet earth from over consumption and careless choices. And in spite of this we keep making the condition worse and worse. It is unbelievable and now Canada has and is using enough tar pit oil to smother all on earth. Think about all that labor only to end up like this. We kept telling ourselves. This is progress. I think not but sadly the 'bushman" will disappear with the rest of us.
hucksters.
We now face the destruction of all life on the planet earth from over consumption and careless choices. And in spite of this we keep making the condition worse and worse. It is unbelievable and now Canada has and is using enough tar pit oil to smother all on earth. Think about all that labor only to end up like this. We kept telling ourselves. This is progress. I think not but sadly the 'bushman" will disappear with the rest of us.
4
Different geographies, different cultures. And what it means to adapt to versus alter the environment is often not so straightforward.
If I remember correctly, the National Museum of the American Indian had a special exhibit on Native Hawaiians that stated they only worked for about four hours per day before colonists arrived.
9
Having studied Anthropology extensively in the course of earning my Ph.D. from UCSF/UCB, I read extensively on the transitions from hunter/gathering to agricultural societies. From these readings, I came to the conclusion that this transition was motivated by the natural fecundity of humans. It was to feed the children that parents started the hard labor of farming,
And this need continues in our post-industrial age, parents often needing to work two jobs each to afford their children.
But then, our conspicuous consumption still remains to be explained. So I recall the NW coast Indians with their wealth of unlimited salmon, to be had for the catching. Not needing to farm fish, they took to potlatches (showy public shows of their largess in lavish gifts) to gain power and prestige.
Maybe the bottom line is there's no satisfying us humans.
The Bushman remain content? They're limited to a barren land; who knows how pristine that is?
And this need continues in our post-industrial age, parents often needing to work two jobs each to afford their children.
But then, our conspicuous consumption still remains to be explained. So I recall the NW coast Indians with their wealth of unlimited salmon, to be had for the catching. Not needing to farm fish, they took to potlatches (showy public shows of their largess in lavish gifts) to gain power and prestige.
Maybe the bottom line is there's no satisfying us humans.
The Bushman remain content? They're limited to a barren land; who knows how pristine that is?
6
The problem of scarcity was recognized by Classical Economics as a problem of limits to resources, but NeoClassical Economics introduced the idea of “infinite substitutability”, which was used to get around these limits. Yes technology is wonderful, and we are able to seemingly do more and more with less efforts. But economic science refuses to recognize that our global economy is dependent on Earth’s Ecosystems. These ecosystems are steadily losing their resilience due to our “substitution” of domesticates and human habitat for the rest of Creation. Biodiversity holds the Earth together. Once it is gone, Earth’s Ecosystems will simplify and be less supportive to our existence. Toxic algae slime anyone?
8
A bit slow for the modern world, no?
I would say there are some major flaws in this argument. Yes, for hundreds of thousands of years human ancestors lived by hunting and foraging. But not very long. Lives were short. Richard Lee lived with a group of Ju/’hanse’/!Kung on and off for years and wrote the definitive description of their lives. The people he lived with were living in what ecologists would call a refugium – land not exploited by anyone else at the time. Europeans obliterated populations living in more productive environments and some Ju/’hanse’ survived by living in an environment with a very low carrying capacity. This had the effect of keeping populations low – not much food, not much water, not much else. Groups were small and were compelled by the carrying capacity of the territory in Botswana to remain small. Farming was not possible and thus the population size was defined by the environment. Strategies which might increase the carrying capacity were impossible given their very basic technologies. Relatively recently other Africans (driven by population pressures) began moving in with their cattle. These people dynamited water holes (water being a major limiting factor) while their cattle ate the very resources that had supported the Ju/’hanse’. Life had never been idyllic and now it was virtually impossible. People, in general, are nasty and greedy and will take advantage of others given the chance. Look around.
8
people are nasty and greedy ? - sounds like projection - accusing others of what you feel guilty of yourself
OTOH I've seen something about humans in England being average height like six feet thousands of years ago - before the Industrial Revolution when they were on average at least six inches shorter - so something changed in the diet and lifestyle between those times - and modern times reduced some quality of life.
Not hard to believe when records show that native people traditionally worked less, played more and were generally happier than modern people.
OTOH I've seen something about humans in England being average height like six feet thousands of years ago - before the Industrial Revolution when they were on average at least six inches shorter - so something changed in the diet and lifestyle between those times - and modern times reduced some quality of life.
Not hard to believe when records show that native people traditionally worked less, played more and were generally happier than modern people.
1
Noah Yuval Harari in his course and his book "Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind" similarly that the agricultural revolution did indeed make life much harder for humans (and animals) than it had been when we were all hunter gatherers. No going back, but it is a provocative thesis.
4
Frederick Engels observed that, "First we enslaved the animals, then each other." Prisoners of war, the first slaves, were needed to mind the herds and flocks of domesticated beasts.
2
The problem with the US achieving economic Utopia is the greed of the few that actively promote inequality through the bribery of our politicians so the many never reach a golden age of leisure.
11
I feel we crossed the line from being part of nature into conflicting with nature when we discovered how to expand our species beyond its “intended range of existence”. The Bushmen stayed where they evolved leaving a legacy of how nature designed primates as a successful species, within low pressure evolutionary needs. Cognition evolved by high pressure evolution elsewhere to allow segments of primates to find a way to survive rapidly timed environmental changes. The dinosaurs reign of millions of years appears to adequately demonstrate how a near optimal balance between slow evolution and moderate environmental pressures allowed them to fill and dominate niches for a very long time. Cognition was not designed to push humans to run the global show. To me cognition is a thermodynamic anomaly resulting from a fortuitous (for us) building of complexity where entropy is held in abeyance. With discovery of agriculture and with the extended (millions of years) of competitive development of know how by experimentation with tools etc., we have elevated ourselves. Today we are seriously in conflict with nature, as the lifestyle of bushmen vs suburbanites shows. We are also aware of but not yet very serious about avoiding the casual extinctions nature occasionally subjects Earth to. We also selfishly demand the free use of all resources, regardless of what we do to the environment or to the other species co-existing with us. We are not in tune with anything and drowning in neuroses.
3
what about Nolan's Interstellar? Perhaps our path has been to develop space travel to colonize other planets.
I don't see a lot of science here. The author focuses on a people who seem to have been blessed by an environment which (more often than not) provides for their needs. They therefore "work" less than other societies, where basic necessities are harder to acquire. It's good to be a Ju/hoansi, until things change.
Without inventions, curiosity about the natural world and an understanding of its processes, the Ju/hoansi would be no more equipped to deal with novel environmental adversity than the local pride of lions when the water hole dries up, and game animals disappear. What happens when a new disease appears? Or a mother has a difficult childbirth? Or a simple wound becomes infected?
Query whether this is the type of "affluence" we should all aspire to.
Without inventions, curiosity about the natural world and an understanding of its processes, the Ju/hoansi would be no more equipped to deal with novel environmental adversity than the local pride of lions when the water hole dries up, and game animals disappear. What happens when a new disease appears? Or a mother has a difficult childbirth? Or a simple wound becomes infected?
Query whether this is the type of "affluence" we should all aspire to.
5
You suffer and die, just as people in industrial societies do, and you develop cultural institutions to deal with this ineluctable eventuality. In the mean time, you have a life that, while stressful, does not have the same stresses as ours. Which way is better? That is ultimately a philosophical question. If you look at the discussions we are having around abortion and euthanasia, I am not so sure that lower infant mortality and longer lifespan are the absolute goods that they are generally claimed to be.
3
Of course longer lifespan and lower infant mortality rate are absolute goods. Anything that favors life is good. It's true that greater population puts a huge burden on the environment, but that's mostly due to religion. Atheists breed less than religious people. Longer lifespan and lower mortality rates are due to science and agriculture. They are not due to religion. I believe that in a world without religion, we could have a lot of modernity and science without the negative effect of population expansion, because there'd be less population expansion. About half of the atheists I know don't have children. Almost none of the religious people I know don't have children. The problem isn't science. The problem is religion.
1
If a company like Amazon gives only 2 weeks if vacation to its employees, no way we are ever achieving 25 hour week
May be 15 hours off in a 24/7 work week
May be 15 hours off in a 24/7 work week
5
The problem of work for all who wish to do it and how it is to be compensated is one of the central problems over the next 50 to 100 years. It is that basic and that important.
At present, we operate on a moderated system of push/shove/kill and then get. In almost all of its various forms, the competitive environment is an attenuated version of warfare. He or she who can dominate or defeat others gets/takes the greatest rewards while those who labor accept what they can get or move on to try elsewhere.
Make no mistake, the wealth of a society is made by all those who work and even all those who consume, but the benefits are reserved for the strongest, those with the best lawyers or the most servile legislators who can write laws to suit the needs of the wealthy.
How and whether this system can be rearranged is a problem with which the world is likely to deal for many decades. The goal will be meaningful work for all of those who choose to prepare and seek it and financial security for everyone. No, not by any means a communist future, but it is one in which traditional thinking about work and rewards will be challenged greatly.
We live in an age of abundance but we are still operating by the rules written in the age of scarcity. All can be fed, all can be housed, all can receive excellent health care, but we are in not trained to operate successfully with a "golden age of leisure". We need work to feel whole as human beings; the only question is how we will be paid.
At present, we operate on a moderated system of push/shove/kill and then get. In almost all of its various forms, the competitive environment is an attenuated version of warfare. He or she who can dominate or defeat others gets/takes the greatest rewards while those who labor accept what they can get or move on to try elsewhere.
Make no mistake, the wealth of a society is made by all those who work and even all those who consume, but the benefits are reserved for the strongest, those with the best lawyers or the most servile legislators who can write laws to suit the needs of the wealthy.
How and whether this system can be rearranged is a problem with which the world is likely to deal for many decades. The goal will be meaningful work for all of those who choose to prepare and seek it and financial security for everyone. No, not by any means a communist future, but it is one in which traditional thinking about work and rewards will be challenged greatly.
We live in an age of abundance but we are still operating by the rules written in the age of scarcity. All can be fed, all can be housed, all can receive excellent health care, but we are in not trained to operate successfully with a "golden age of leisure". We need work to feel whole as human beings; the only question is how we will be paid.
11
Excellent article. I am a big fan of Keynes's essay. It echoes much of what the young Marx (pre Das Capital) wrote about the relationship of humans to their labor and it products, and to increasing industrial automation.
Today, most of us measure our self-worth in large part by our jobs. So as good factory jobs disappear, we have not only economic dislocation but also emotional dislocation, a loss of purpose and self-worth. (See Hillbilly Elegy) So one problem is to redefine what it means to be a valuable member of society.
Another problem is distribution. When robots do all the work, the people who own the robots will get all the money. The rest of us will starve. If it is so excruciatingly difficult for Americans to accept and implement the notion that everyone is entitled to health care with costs shared by all, how will we do when it becomes a question of the community (or government) providing almost everything we consume? Work requirements for Medicaid won't work if there is no work to do.
Finally, we as a species need to move to a steady-state economy: steady or decreasing population, reduced use of energy, consumption that merely replaces what has been used up. Our "Spaceship Earth" requires it to survive. How will we react when economic growth turns from a positive to a negative?
Today, most of us measure our self-worth in large part by our jobs. So as good factory jobs disappear, we have not only economic dislocation but also emotional dislocation, a loss of purpose and self-worth. (See Hillbilly Elegy) So one problem is to redefine what it means to be a valuable member of society.
Another problem is distribution. When robots do all the work, the people who own the robots will get all the money. The rest of us will starve. If it is so excruciatingly difficult for Americans to accept and implement the notion that everyone is entitled to health care with costs shared by all, how will we do when it becomes a question of the community (or government) providing almost everything we consume? Work requirements for Medicaid won't work if there is no work to do.
Finally, we as a species need to move to a steady-state economy: steady or decreasing population, reduced use of energy, consumption that merely replaces what has been used up. Our "Spaceship Earth" requires it to survive. How will we react when economic growth turns from a positive to a negative?
7
As stuff becomes more abundant, how we use our time becomes more critical. Keynes and other pre-Schumpeterian economists had trouble seeing this, because they still lived in a world that was relatively poor in things. It was enough for Keynes, or Marx well before him, or Veblen, or Mathus, to obsess over stuff and who was going to get what.
Then along comes Schumpeter, who had the insight to see that while stuff was important, our use of time in creating and consuming was more important. Consider the companies that are changing our lives and economy around us the most today. What do they really do? They save us massive amounts of time. Amazon negates a trip to the grocery store. Netflix negates waiting for the network to run the program you want to see. Spotify negates a trip to the record store, and Uber negates our wait for the cab or the bus. Google and the internet in general offer quicker access to more information, which in the right minds often sparks the drive to find more creative and faster ways to deliver a wider variety of stuff to larger groups of people.
A bushman in Africa doesn't see or need any of this stuff. A day under the sun eating grubs is like any other day under the sun eating grubs. And while their 15 hour work week might sound nice in theory, it's the reason why bushmen in Africa will never walk on Mars, find a cure for cancer, or enjoy a nearly limitless set of culinary and cultural options. I'm glad they're happy, but it sounds sad.
Then along comes Schumpeter, who had the insight to see that while stuff was important, our use of time in creating and consuming was more important. Consider the companies that are changing our lives and economy around us the most today. What do they really do? They save us massive amounts of time. Amazon negates a trip to the grocery store. Netflix negates waiting for the network to run the program you want to see. Spotify negates a trip to the record store, and Uber negates our wait for the cab or the bus. Google and the internet in general offer quicker access to more information, which in the right minds often sparks the drive to find more creative and faster ways to deliver a wider variety of stuff to larger groups of people.
A bushman in Africa doesn't see or need any of this stuff. A day under the sun eating grubs is like any other day under the sun eating grubs. And while their 15 hour work week might sound nice in theory, it's the reason why bushmen in Africa will never walk on Mars, find a cure for cancer, or enjoy a nearly limitless set of culinary and cultural options. I'm glad they're happy, but it sounds sad.
4
The bushmen had something we do not. They had a nuclear group that was internally non-competitive and externally bound to the intricate diverse relationship they shared with their milieu. Abundance and accumulation of property and goods was not a way of life that would ever derive from the hunter-gatherer groups because their very existence amounted to a symbiotic reciprocity they shared with the wide variety of plants, insects, animals, birds, reptiles etc. that formed their omnivorous and highly variable diet.
Still these and other groups did not lay about but busied themselves with a complex and subtly pervasive spiritual/social analysis of their group and the constant reference to the value and council of the aged and wise ones they relied on.
Work for the sake of work and/or work to only amass more are neuroses of "civilization" that are really expressions of the anxiety we have acquired from want, from hunger, and from wanting to have more than others.
When we left behind our past (99.999% of which was the hunter/gatherer society) we left behind the core values of who we are as human beings and a healthy relationship with others and the ecologies we lived in.
Overpopulation problems are the result of man's forfeiture of his God given right to his daily bread in exchange for a "false security" of being kept, employed, and fed by working for the rich and wealthy. Women lost all the equality they had by becoming baby producers - thus property.
No turning back now.
Still these and other groups did not lay about but busied themselves with a complex and subtly pervasive spiritual/social analysis of their group and the constant reference to the value and council of the aged and wise ones they relied on.
Work for the sake of work and/or work to only amass more are neuroses of "civilization" that are really expressions of the anxiety we have acquired from want, from hunger, and from wanting to have more than others.
When we left behind our past (99.999% of which was the hunter/gatherer society) we left behind the core values of who we are as human beings and a healthy relationship with others and the ecologies we lived in.
Overpopulation problems are the result of man's forfeiture of his God given right to his daily bread in exchange for a "false security" of being kept, employed, and fed by working for the rich and wealthy. Women lost all the equality they had by becoming baby producers - thus property.
No turning back now.
5
Women did not become "baby producers - thus property." You obviously want to blame a lot on women, who are only half responsible (and in this time of restricting women's health issues, even less than half) for procreation.
2
There's a big philosophical issue around the question of what makes a good life. Some members of our own culture might include the ability to make discoveries and change some of the terms of existence along with getting some of the benefits of the bushmen lifestyle as well. Then a related question becomes who or what is stopping all of us from actualizing our potential to be discoverers and world changers. And if it is other people stopping us what is their motive in keeping us down and making us less than we could be? Why, for example, the difficulty in obtaining an education and having an income sufficient to sustain life while that education takes place?
2
A very important article. But it misses something:
When the author mentions that the Neolithic revolution placed a new premium on human labor, he omits to say that the economic surplus resulting from agriculture and cattle raising introduced the issue of private property, which led to a patriarcal society (men wanting to know who their children are) and to the division of society into classes.
It is the class society (where a few own the means of production, and the majority have only their labor to sell) that has been preventing the resolution of the "economic problem".
It is also the class society that will cause the exhaustion of our resources, climate chaos and, ultimately, our demise.
When the author mentions that the Neolithic revolution placed a new premium on human labor, he omits to say that the economic surplus resulting from agriculture and cattle raising introduced the issue of private property, which led to a patriarcal society (men wanting to know who their children are) and to the division of society into classes.
It is the class society (where a few own the means of production, and the majority have only their labor to sell) that has been preventing the resolution of the "economic problem".
It is also the class society that will cause the exhaustion of our resources, climate chaos and, ultimately, our demise.
14
"If the economic problem is solved, mankind will be deprived of its traditional purpose."
Having grown up in relative affluence, and having spent three years Forrest Gumping across America with only a backpack, it's apparent that "abundance" is not synonymous with contentment. Before realizing this, abundance seemed to increase a desire for more abundance, while relative poverty drew awareness internal to consider fundamental elements of each moment. Admonitions to "know thyself," or to "seek within" give rise to an inner impulse that grows to reveal a deeper human purpose than material accumulation.
Contentment arises as life is lived consciously step by step, moment to moment. The Buddha points in this direction when answering how best to handle human stress: "In any moment only two things are happening: we are either inhaling or exhaling."
Humanity, earth, the universe, all physical phenomena, entrance the eye, but the animating spirit that gives rise to this entrancement seems the essence of the human experience and our primary purpose.
Having grown up in relative affluence, and having spent three years Forrest Gumping across America with only a backpack, it's apparent that "abundance" is not synonymous with contentment. Before realizing this, abundance seemed to increase a desire for more abundance, while relative poverty drew awareness internal to consider fundamental elements of each moment. Admonitions to "know thyself," or to "seek within" give rise to an inner impulse that grows to reveal a deeper human purpose than material accumulation.
Contentment arises as life is lived consciously step by step, moment to moment. The Buddha points in this direction when answering how best to handle human stress: "In any moment only two things are happening: we are either inhaling or exhaling."
Humanity, earth, the universe, all physical phenomena, entrance the eye, but the animating spirit that gives rise to this entrancement seems the essence of the human experience and our primary purpose.
5
Traditionally, Marxists have seen history, long range, as a three part, dialectical process. First came primitive communism, with a low level of economic development but a high level of equality. This condition is characteristic of so-called primitive, tribal societies.
Then came, with civilization, our present class society. It has a high level of technology and productivity--but permits little equality or free time.
This, in turn, will provoke a Socialist Revolution and a future society that will combine high tech abundance (and leisure) with full equality. Engels quotes the American anthropologist Morgan: "It will be a revival, in a higher form, of the liberty, equality and fraternity of the ancient gentes."
Then came, with civilization, our present class society. It has a high level of technology and productivity--but permits little equality or free time.
This, in turn, will provoke a Socialist Revolution and a future society that will combine high tech abundance (and leisure) with full equality. Engels quotes the American anthropologist Morgan: "It will be a revival, in a higher form, of the liberty, equality and fraternity of the ancient gentes."
3
This is about scaling. Hunting and gathering became wildly successful after stone knives and axes were invented; it was so successful that it made our ancestors nomadic. Once the megafauna were decimated within a certain radius the people would have to move on. A nomadic group has to be a certain size, say thirty to one hundred. Too many and the group strips the available plant and animal resources too quickly for them to be able to reestablish. Too few and the group becomes too vulnerable. Nomadism is associated with good health and egalitarianism. Evidence from ancient human remains shows that hunter-gatherers were taller and lived longer than their farming counterparts; and, being nomadic they could only possess what they could carry on their back, so no one was able to accumulate possessions. In contrast, When people managed to stay put in one place, the few were able to accumulate more and exploit the many.
Population growth affects the health of the environment. Domesticating plants and animals simplified local environments and made it possible for humans populations to scale up in size. It was at a cost of decreased health due to the rise in communicable disease, poor diets, and increasing inequality. There was also a cost to the environment due to overgrazing, topsoil loss, and increasing salt content from irrigation. As we scale up even further with the help of fossil fuels these problems have grow even faster.
Population growth affects the health of the environment. Domesticating plants and animals simplified local environments and made it possible for humans populations to scale up in size. It was at a cost of decreased health due to the rise in communicable disease, poor diets, and increasing inequality. There was also a cost to the environment due to overgrazing, topsoil loss, and increasing salt content from irrigation. As we scale up even further with the help of fossil fuels these problems have grow even faster.
6
Clearly the "economic problem" has it wrong. Most people would certainly prefer working 15 hours to slaving away all week. And they'd have no more trouble than the bushmen finding pleasant things to do, though these things might not seem as quaint and cultured to researchers as what the bushmen do. AND the bushmen's easy life clearly depends on the climate they live in. They couldn't live this way in northern climes. There is good evidence and writings that show that Europe's and China's climate had a great deal to do with how their economy and culture had to develop and developed so differently from Africa. (E.g.,The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, by David Landes.)
3
Read this against yesterday's article by Jennifer Weiner on white men who won't grow up (her words), and I think you will gain a real insight: the virtue of grinding away everyday to support a steady cycle of production and consumption is overvalued. In a way, the goof offs, the homeless and the beggars of the world have something to teach us. I know that Weiner was singling out also abusive men who go unpunished, and I am not including them in my positive category, but as for working enough only to meet your bare necessities, I think there is a reason why so many religious traditions revere monks, nuns, hermits and other recluses who lead exceedingly simple lives.
2
The problem with just "working enough only to meet your bare necessities" is that everyone gets old, or sick, or disabled, and those necessities no longer exist. Monks, nun, and most hermits live on the charity of others base on long-standing religious traditions. Someone has to work to provide that charity. Have you ever seen a healthy/happy goof-off, homeless person or beggar? Also, in pre-modern societies having 10 children was handy so that enough would live to adulthood to take care of the elderly. As has been cited many times (so often that I forget the origin), life in nature was hard, brutish, and short. Hooray for the rat-race.
Agreed, for the most part, but I do believe that it might just be a matter of modulating the ratios. Instead of having a super have class and a super have not class, which exists in many parts of the world, as well with respect to the world itself, and what the US is heading toward, having a more equitable system of production and consumption seems advisable. In other words, everyone working 40 hours per week so that they can afford to live in their own house and drive their own car, the nature of which is heavily influenced by the producers rather than the consumers, let's figure out what it takes for everyone to have basic food and shelter and more or less stop there, as a society and an economy. How do we do that? I don't have a clue. Is anyone doing that now? Maybe the Scandinavian countries.
1
15 hours a week?
For whom?
Men 'hunt'. Women 'gather'.
Since 80% of their diet comes from 'gathering' then why aren't the men when they are out 'hunting' also 'gathering'? Why aren't the women 'hunting'?
The women do all the household chores, do all the cooking, do all the childcare, and must marry a man up to 40 years her elder. She can 'veto' the choices on the list - but she has no say on who is on that list.
This article is why men should never be anthropologists.
They have no idea what the word "egalitarian" means.
15 hours a week?
That's all the men 'work'?
And the rest of the time they are "shade experts".
This is bad science from a man who should know better.
In fact, it is "junk science".
Just ask any Ju/'hoansi woman.
Oh, but he didn't ask.......
For whom?
Men 'hunt'. Women 'gather'.
Since 80% of their diet comes from 'gathering' then why aren't the men when they are out 'hunting' also 'gathering'? Why aren't the women 'hunting'?
The women do all the household chores, do all the cooking, do all the childcare, and must marry a man up to 40 years her elder. She can 'veto' the choices on the list - but she has no say on who is on that list.
This article is why men should never be anthropologists.
They have no idea what the word "egalitarian" means.
15 hours a week?
That's all the men 'work'?
And the rest of the time they are "shade experts".
This is bad science from a man who should know better.
In fact, it is "junk science".
Just ask any Ju/'hoansi woman.
Oh, but he didn't ask.......
10
The Bushmen don't need to produce vast surpluses to be hoarded by a tiny number of Masters of the Universe. The demand to feed the greed of the 1% is the actual source of the "economic problem."
10
Just two questions: what does “Bushmen work” mean and how could the weekly hours of such “work” be reckoned? (and besides, for instance: how long did they live and how healthy they were?) That is to say: about what are we speaking?
the definition of work is "something directly related to the production of goods needed for survival", so time spent hunting or making tools for the hunt is work while drinking palm wine and playing the drums is not.
Most of the difference in age expectancy between hunter gatherer societies and modern societies is due higher rates of infant mortality. The life expectancy for those who reach adulthood isn't so different, though childbirth is fraught with danger.
Most of the difference in age expectancy between hunter gatherer societies and modern societies is due higher rates of infant mortality. The life expectancy for those who reach adulthood isn't so different, though childbirth is fraught with danger.
1
In the early 70's hippies tried to revive and reinvent the bushman lifestyle. Enough work to supply the basic needs, a community/communal ethic of sharing work and reward, and a desire to put more purpose in life not related to accumulating stuff. It was hard work.
I remember the one constant we heard from the "real Americans" shouted from street corners and passing cars, "Get a job, ya bum!"
I remember hearing that as I was walking to work one morning.
Ah, well.
I remember the one constant we heard from the "real Americans" shouted from street corners and passing cars, "Get a job, ya bum!"
I remember hearing that as I was walking to work one morning.
Ah, well.
1
The hole that can never be filled is an artifact of neglect in childhood. It's a vicious circle: mindless strivers raise neglected strivers.
2
Interesting that the accompanying photo of a "bushman" shows him wearing a hat, sportscoat, and shades. Did he "hunt" for them?
3
This comment may be intended as snark, but it does point up an important problem with the pre-1980s anthropology on the Khoisan (Bushmen) peoples of southern Africa, though I say this with all due respect for Professor Marshall Sahlins, who has commented on this article and from whose work the concepts mentioned in the article derive. This work, despite its important insights, "read" the "Bushmen" as isolated, when in fact they have been embedded in and interacting with other peoples, forms of labor, trade, and exploitation for hundreds of years. See the work of Professors Ed Wilmsen and Rob Gordon, among others.
1
I've always thought that the Amish community in our country had this figured out a long time ago. They don't need Heath clubs and treadmills for exercise, the get enough from their daily routines to exist. They don't need insurance premiums beacause their sense of community helps take care of each other in times of tragedy. As far as I can see there is no real envy, jealousy. No keeping up with the Jones's so to say, because they are all in the same life situations. Maybe they have something there we should all revisit.
28
Maybe they have something, but it's not the 15 h week. Amish work very hard, as indicated by the 6000+ kcal/d required by the farming men.
1
In the 1980 film "Reds" a quote relating to, "the American working man, who's one dream is that he could be rich enough not to work," sums the problem up.
We are worked obsessed because we have come to believe that work is the only course open to us to accumulate the capital to have a better life.
We are born with the only sort of capital that matters - time. Long or short, our lifespans are all we really have to work with. We can use it to accumulate and maintain stuff, status or wealth or we can pause to smell the roses; or we can learn and appreciate the world and make the best of things.
Earning one's way can give one a positive sense of accomplishment and material rewards, but I feel that it has, for many, become a trap, particularly in how one's time and effort is valued and by whom. The working poor, without assistance have virtually no way of "working their way up" without a temporal cost that places any dream, or ambition for themselves beyond the range of their productive years. As it is, lifetimes are spent in the service of other peoples dreams and ambitions with no end in sight and no benefit beyond day to day survival.
Unregulated capitalism cannot correct itself. In a winner-take-all culture, losers have nothing and there is no putting away of a Monopoly board at the end of the game; because, this is no game. In real life, there is only the running out of time.
We are worked obsessed because we have come to believe that work is the only course open to us to accumulate the capital to have a better life.
We are born with the only sort of capital that matters - time. Long or short, our lifespans are all we really have to work with. We can use it to accumulate and maintain stuff, status or wealth or we can pause to smell the roses; or we can learn and appreciate the world and make the best of things.
Earning one's way can give one a positive sense of accomplishment and material rewards, but I feel that it has, for many, become a trap, particularly in how one's time and effort is valued and by whom. The working poor, without assistance have virtually no way of "working their way up" without a temporal cost that places any dream, or ambition for themselves beyond the range of their productive years. As it is, lifetimes are spent in the service of other peoples dreams and ambitions with no end in sight and no benefit beyond day to day survival.
Unregulated capitalism cannot correct itself. In a winner-take-all culture, losers have nothing and there is no putting away of a Monopoly board at the end of the game; because, this is no game. In real life, there is only the running out of time.
8
I wish that more people in America really saw this. How we live to work, rather than work to live. I am in a great financial situation (knock on wood), but I look around my house and am disgusted with our consumption of goods. For example a 5 bedroom, 3 bath 3K sq ft house for two people! Rooms just full of stuff that we rarely use. We are slowly offloading our goods in the hope of significantly downsizing in 5-10 years. But its hard to resist the temptation of the quick (not so) cheap thrill from an easy internet purchase. I would give anything to cure myself of this affluenza. I do think there is a little hope for society at large, with the recent popularity of early retirement and frugality blogs, books, etc.
4
There's a cure for affluenza: one of you stay home and have kids while the other bears the working burden for both of you. That is my life. It's not bad, but it will certainly cure you of affluenza so long as the working spouse isn't a millionaire, doctor, stock broker, etc.
If this article interested you, be sure to read Yoval Noah Harari's extraordinary book 'Sapiens', a gripping account of our species. Like this article, he challenges us to reconsider whether our ancient forager ancestors were actually worse than we are, and he offers a thought-provoking account of history, science, agriculture, sociology, anthropology and economics that forces us to take a good look in the mirror to see who we were, are, and may become as a species.
3
That particular group is the exception - they have access to nut-trees as well as water and game, and no one else (for various reasons) has tried to take over their territory. Other bushmen groups have been pushed into less abundant territories where they have to work harder: women at finding and digging up nutritious roots and men in hunting that is not always so successful. Over the past 50 years in particular most have been pushed into less and less productive territories and forced to take up farming.
Once most of humanity took up farming, we had to worry not only about producing food but also storing it and protecting it from raiders, including other humans. Those conflicts played out for 10,000 and now we have the industrial age and the information age.
One can envision a society where robots do most of the work and the rest of us can be happy with sports, arts, music, dance, and socializing but then the owners of the patents on the robots and AI would have to be either forced or coaxed into paying enough taxes that the little league coaches and aspiring poets can be housed and fed.
Once most of humanity took up farming, we had to worry not only about producing food but also storing it and protecting it from raiders, including other humans. Those conflicts played out for 10,000 and now we have the industrial age and the information age.
One can envision a society where robots do most of the work and the rest of us can be happy with sports, arts, music, dance, and socializing but then the owners of the patents on the robots and AI would have to be either forced or coaxed into paying enough taxes that the little league coaches and aspiring poets can be housed and fed.
2
In 1930 when Keynes made his prediction of lives of leisure, the average life expectancy was 60 years. If people had any retirement at all then it was much shorter than it is now. Today, more of our work hours during our working years are used to fund a longer expected retirement than in 1930 and to fund the higher health care costs that have resulted in, and result from, the longer lives. If we had the same life spans and health care costs as in 1930, people probably could have the same quality of life today as then, by working 15 hours a week.
2
The longevity of the wealthy has always been greater than that of the poor. Consequently, the notion of an average life span is misleading.
In particular, the longevity of English immigrants to Massachusetts from 1620 to 1725 was characterized by a great number of centenarians.
In particular, the longevity of English immigrants to Massachusetts from 1620 to 1725 was characterized by a great number of centenarians.
I and my wife are both retired now, but during our 40 yr marriage neither one of us worked more than 3 days/24 hrs/wk, and we have greatly enjoyed our time together. We did our travelling when we were young and more fit and could do more things. Time is more important than money, but most people don't seem to realize that.
14
Until the late 1800's physicians practiced bloodletting to improve the health of their patients. We look back and wonder how medicine could have got it so wrong.
It seems as though society is oblivious to the misconceptions of its age.
Keynesian economics is perhaps a fraud. Perhaps macroeconomics itself is a fraud.
Not microeconomics of course. Micro enables us to predict prices of a single commodity on the basis of laws with experimental basis.
Where macro goes astray is its attempt to explain everything in the economy. The problem is that there are too many variables. Somebody has to choose which to look at.
Americans choose variables like GDP, inflation, unemployment. But statistics on these variables are subject to systematic tampering by governments, or by politicians governed by wishful thinking.
Einstein was able to overthrow Newtonian mechanics by measuring a small anomaly in the orbit of Mercury. In macroeconomics however nothing is exactly measurable. And the rules of the game change by governmental fiat. It is as though the planets got together every four years and adjusted the law of gravitation to make people feel better.
Henry David Thoreau offered an alternative and before him the bushmen. Maybe hard work and ambition is not needed in a life that truly gets back to nature.
And maybe the Keynesian model is beginning to show chinks as we get closer to the carrying capacity of Earth.
Overpopulation is the great problem, and it is ignored.
It seems as though society is oblivious to the misconceptions of its age.
Keynesian economics is perhaps a fraud. Perhaps macroeconomics itself is a fraud.
Not microeconomics of course. Micro enables us to predict prices of a single commodity on the basis of laws with experimental basis.
Where macro goes astray is its attempt to explain everything in the economy. The problem is that there are too many variables. Somebody has to choose which to look at.
Americans choose variables like GDP, inflation, unemployment. But statistics on these variables are subject to systematic tampering by governments, or by politicians governed by wishful thinking.
Einstein was able to overthrow Newtonian mechanics by measuring a small anomaly in the orbit of Mercury. In macroeconomics however nothing is exactly measurable. And the rules of the game change by governmental fiat. It is as though the planets got together every four years and adjusted the law of gravitation to make people feel better.
Henry David Thoreau offered an alternative and before him the bushmen. Maybe hard work and ambition is not needed in a life that truly gets back to nature.
And maybe the Keynesian model is beginning to show chinks as we get closer to the carrying capacity of Earth.
Overpopulation is the great problem, and it is ignored.
5
This may also help to explain the rise in income inequality - that is as a mechanism to siphon off increased productivity to a select few so that most can be kept fully occupied by the continued necessity of a 40 hour work week?
4
I have been thinking of a time when people spend more time on hobbies, with the many personal rewards that they yield--and maybe a sector of the economy devoted to teaching hobbies and appreciating others' creative work. Look at the popularity of Comic-Con or Burning Man. Consider how much happier we would all be if we had ample time for whatever meaningful leisure we chose and the economic benefits that could derive from that.
6
Mr. Suzman is correct to tie the shift in human behavioral patterns to the agricultural revolution. No one truly understands why the transition happened. Knowing how to grow crops is not sufficient cause for human populations to grow crops en masse. As mentioned, agriculture is actually more work than hunting and gathering. You might notice the industrial revolution marked another inexplicable inflection point in human history. Both are actually less secure for long term viability than small scale decentralized subsistence.
I don't know the answer but I can postulate one or two theories. The shift to non-nomadic life was gradual and probably unintentional. One thing leads to another. If you can find a reliable food source, you tend to hover around that area. That's why you typically find human societies gravitate towards aquatic resources. Fishing is a lot easier than hunting. Herding has advantages too. Moreover, you can in fact preserve meat in a way similar to grain. Your nomadic range is therefore reduced because you no longer suffer the same level of seasonal variation.
I might also mention that anthropology has shown that bush women provide around 80 percent of the caloric intake for Kalahari societies. Perhaps women simply got tired of carrying the load even if it meant more work overall. The effort may have actually been an egalitarian social move. You might consider the demands of aging relatives as well. Ancient problems aren't so different from modern problems.
I don't know the answer but I can postulate one or two theories. The shift to non-nomadic life was gradual and probably unintentional. One thing leads to another. If you can find a reliable food source, you tend to hover around that area. That's why you typically find human societies gravitate towards aquatic resources. Fishing is a lot easier than hunting. Herding has advantages too. Moreover, you can in fact preserve meat in a way similar to grain. Your nomadic range is therefore reduced because you no longer suffer the same level of seasonal variation.
I might also mention that anthropology has shown that bush women provide around 80 percent of the caloric intake for Kalahari societies. Perhaps women simply got tired of carrying the load even if it meant more work overall. The effort may have actually been an egalitarian social move. You might consider the demands of aging relatives as well. Ancient problems aren't so different from modern problems.
8
This is really interesting to contemplate. Why indeed would people turn to agriculture if hunting/gathering was so much easier? Another theory: civilizations based on agriculture were able to accumulate more resources, thus eventually were able to support a dedicated caste of warriors, and therefore better able to push hunter/ gatherer societies out of existence.
Agriculture might even help foment territorial aggression in a way that hunting/ gathering does not. You may feel you own a plot of land that you/ your family planted, but ownership of land that provides plenty of resources naturally may be less clear.
I say this not having read the book, which I'm looking forward to doing.
Agriculture might even help foment territorial aggression in a way that hunting/ gathering does not. You may feel you own a plot of land that you/ your family planted, but ownership of land that provides plenty of resources naturally may be less clear.
I say this not having read the book, which I'm looking forward to doing.
1
You may also enjoy Female power and male dominance by Peggy Reeves Sanday, concerning the role of resource competition in the origins of war and sexual inequality.
While I don't buy the argument that the Bushmen have the best lives, I do think that there is likely "diminishing returns" on acquisition happiness. Our society has no limit on human activity or desires, except those that are inherent in our genes and persistence. Not everyone can be a ballet dancer or a rock star or a pro baseball pitcher and of those that have that capability not all have the desire or self discipline to do it. However, we can all get an I-phone or a big screen TV and we can all buy expensive tickets to sports events or go to the very best restaurants or drive the fastest cars if we only had money to acquire those things. This essay brings up the question of whether we are actually "happy" with acquisition or achievement or triumph; or which is it actually. Could we have a "steady state" of happiness rather than continual search for scintillating experience? How much does cultural expectations play in this quest? and how would we shift our thinking?
As to the comment about "Atlas Shrugged", I have this image of the world overpopulated with people eating away at its substance until, ever shrinking, there is no firmament left. Atlas would have nothing left to hold! He would just shrug.
As to the comment about "Atlas Shrugged", I have this image of the world overpopulated with people eating away at its substance until, ever shrinking, there is no firmament left. Atlas would have nothing left to hold! He would just shrug.
2
"We live in warm homes packed with all sorts of enterprising gadgetry and comforts that we feel compelled to replace and upgrade episodically to keep the wheels of commerce rolling. We are now so well fed by the 1 percent of us that still work in agriculture that we deposit as much food in landfill as we put in our bellies."
I firmly believe that while, in some instances, those with 'easy access' to wealth and all its accoutrements can be happy, the sheer attainment of those accoutrements or trappings in and of themselves, does not guarantee happiness. Rather, just the appearance of so, not only to others but to oneself as well (in the form of a temporary 'high' or a distraction). When I think back to a time in my life spent 'accumulating', I was in fact not a happy person at the core, but these items provided me temporary 'highs'. Once I figured out how to be truly happy with MYSELF, I no longer felt the need for 'things'.
I believe many in the U.S. (and much of the rest of the world) have lost their way. They don't know how to simply BE happy. So they fill the void with 'stuff'. I often comment about how many of my Queens neighbors own multiple cars, and then complain there is 'not enough street parking'. Meanwhile, their garages cannot be used to park their own cars, because they are filled to the ceiling with 'stuff'. I see this with MANY of my neighbors. Mere 'accumulation', one-upmanship, 'bargain hunting as a sport', etc. has become a sickness. Oye.
I firmly believe that while, in some instances, those with 'easy access' to wealth and all its accoutrements can be happy, the sheer attainment of those accoutrements or trappings in and of themselves, does not guarantee happiness. Rather, just the appearance of so, not only to others but to oneself as well (in the form of a temporary 'high' or a distraction). When I think back to a time in my life spent 'accumulating', I was in fact not a happy person at the core, but these items provided me temporary 'highs'. Once I figured out how to be truly happy with MYSELF, I no longer felt the need for 'things'.
I believe many in the U.S. (and much of the rest of the world) have lost their way. They don't know how to simply BE happy. So they fill the void with 'stuff'. I often comment about how many of my Queens neighbors own multiple cars, and then complain there is 'not enough street parking'. Meanwhile, their garages cannot be used to park their own cars, because they are filled to the ceiling with 'stuff'. I see this with MANY of my neighbors. Mere 'accumulation', one-upmanship, 'bargain hunting as a sport', etc. has become a sickness. Oye.
3
In extraordinary years of poverty, when the rains fail or are unrelenting, the food procuring becomes a full-time occupation. The potato famine in Northern Europe (started in 1845) was one such time, but in a farming setting. Poverty, by limiting population in bad times, provides leisure time in good times.
Hunter-gatherers have no spare time for leisurely interviews in famine years.
Hunter-gatherers have no spare time for leisurely interviews in famine years.
2
Each year there is that one article which makes me pause and think and ponder..This has been the one for me this year..Many of our problems come from this chase after an abundant affluence
4
"But many environmental economists warn that…"
The environmental economists warn of no such thing, merely monitizing such things as ecosystem services. ECOLOGICAL economists, on the other hand, do warn ― and rightly so. : )
Nice piece.
The environmental economists warn of no such thing, merely monitizing such things as ecosystem services. ECOLOGICAL economists, on the other hand, do warn ― and rightly so. : )
Nice piece.
2
Henry Kissinger said that power is the ultimate aphrodisiac And from an evolutionary standpoint that makes perfect sense. After all, the accumulation of power increases the likelihood of survival. So humans experience an evolutionarily advantageous neuro-chemical when we achieve power.
In the non-Bushman world, we lust after the power of money, physical power, political power and all those wonderful displays of increased status among one's tribesmen (McMansions, corner offices, Rolex watches, etc).
Why do Khoisans settle for less?
I would argue it's because the rest of us FEAR more. We now live in a world where everything and every "other" (i.e., non-tribesman) is seen as a threat and that threat is constantly hyped by pandering politicians seeking their own power and a media seeking the power of ratings. More importantly, though, we also live in a world which has been stripped of belief in any higher purpose or meaning. So there is no existential relief to be found in that which might be labeled the spiritual. There is only the material to give succor.
When Nietzsche said that 'god is dead,' he wasn't happy about the prospect as he, essentially, foresaw that we would end up with a world where "success" is defined by the number of toys you have at death. With a planet constrained by limited resources, there simply are not enough "toys' to go around.
So, ironically, our lust for that which was supposed to keep us safe, ends in our destruction.
In the non-Bushman world, we lust after the power of money, physical power, political power and all those wonderful displays of increased status among one's tribesmen (McMansions, corner offices, Rolex watches, etc).
Why do Khoisans settle for less?
I would argue it's because the rest of us FEAR more. We now live in a world where everything and every "other" (i.e., non-tribesman) is seen as a threat and that threat is constantly hyped by pandering politicians seeking their own power and a media seeking the power of ratings. More importantly, though, we also live in a world which has been stripped of belief in any higher purpose or meaning. So there is no existential relief to be found in that which might be labeled the spiritual. There is only the material to give succor.
When Nietzsche said that 'god is dead,' he wasn't happy about the prospect as he, essentially, foresaw that we would end up with a world where "success" is defined by the number of toys you have at death. With a planet constrained by limited resources, there simply are not enough "toys' to go around.
So, ironically, our lust for that which was supposed to keep us safe, ends in our destruction.
9
I found one sentence in this article fascinating.
"They [Ju/'hoansi] found profound satisfaction from the work they did and used of[?] their free time to make music, create art, make jewelry, tell stories, play games, relax and socialize." No worries about protecting wealth or escaping poverty.
A society free of a demanding, threatening and punishing god. Fast forward to about 4,000 BC and the creation by men of the God of Abraham. My how things changed after that.
"They [Ju/'hoansi] found profound satisfaction from the work they did and used of[?] their free time to make music, create art, make jewelry, tell stories, play games, relax and socialize." No worries about protecting wealth or escaping poverty.
A society free of a demanding, threatening and punishing god. Fast forward to about 4,000 BC and the creation by men of the God of Abraham. My how things changed after that.
15
The key point here is that hunter-gatherers didn't work their lives away because they had few wants, which were easily met. The fact is that many of us in the U.S. could drastically reduce our wants. I get most of my clothing and household needs at the local Mennonite re-sale shop, and grow or gather most of my food. As Thoreau wrote, "the fields and hills are a table constantly spread." Each year, there is a profusion of wild greens, mulberries, raspberries, blackberries, grapes, walnuts and hickory nuts. And if I want meat, I can sit on the front patio and shoot a deer, and then enjoy “leisure and abundance without dread.”
That said, this piece has a few problematic omissions -- one is population density (the earth provides magnificently when the people to nature ratio is low), and the other is that women in most traditional cultures tend to work all the time, but their work (gathering firewood, cooking, childcare) is usually ignored.
That said, this piece has a few problematic omissions -- one is population density (the earth provides magnificently when the people to nature ratio is low), and the other is that women in most traditional cultures tend to work all the time, but their work (gathering firewood, cooking, childcare) is usually ignored.
14
Does that 15 hours of work include the women? Or is this just another economic model that focuses on male input and ignores or devalues women's work. Do the leisure rich males assist in child care, food prep, etc. Hard to say as this is article is just sketch and opinion but I'm suspicious.
27
The "...age of leisure and abundance..." if not upon us already surely will be in 50 years i.e. a generation or two. I say this with certainty as I observe the acceleration of automation and artificial intelligence in the workplace. Gosh, someday soon a smart machine will spill out sneakers cheaper than the lowest cost worker anywhere.
To avoid Keynes' "dread" associated with his "...golden age of leisure..." I offer education, education, education. Peoples must learn to think, imagine, create, socialize, make music, create art, self-amuse, share ideas/values. enjoy nature, to be and to love.
To avoid Keynes' "dread" associated with his "...golden age of leisure..." I offer education, education, education. Peoples must learn to think, imagine, create, socialize, make music, create art, self-amuse, share ideas/values. enjoy nature, to be and to love.
1
This is such an important article! Societies would be wise to re-visit and revise the old "Protestant Work Ethic" that has held that hard work is life's purpose and those that work hardest are entitled to "prosperity." Even the Catholic Church eventually bought into that "ethic" here in the US because the exploitative founding fathers brought it here with them.
Actually, in today's US, those who work the hardest get the least in terms of decent wages, adequate housing, adequate education, health care, etc.
Our business schools are much to blame for all this!
Actually, in today's US, those who work the hardest get the least in terms of decent wages, adequate housing, adequate education, health care, etc.
Our business schools are much to blame for all this!
8
We do not like to hear it but, "survival of the fittest" is in the equation. If not and we decide to live in a "naturist" approach, we will never reach the "dimension" of the solar system and beyond and will be at the mercy of superior civilizations. Earth, not to be destroyed, is presumably only a quantum step in the process.
Our intelligence (whatever that means) and sense of empathy should come into the equation to balance the "survival of the fittest" component.
Anything good or bad may happen to small nuclear families but, on average, the progression is there. We continually need to be on our guard and fight off anything we deem destabilizing such as the 1%, unremitting warfare, autocracy, government by a few, closed door edicts, ideologies, unchecked consumerism, groupthink.
We know what the rules are: Golden Rule, Nothing in Excess, First Do No Harm. It is all in the details.
Instead of having rampant specialization, perhaps we should have citizenry rotation in certain areas such as policemen for 3 years, care-giving for 3 years, dare I say Congress, Supreme Court, along with a sustainable core of professionals to anchor the effort and safeguard memory institution.
Consider increasing Peace-Corps type of programs that makes us more aware of our humanity and fight the notion of clique and clans.
Taxes taken from all and redistributed to all as seen fit (by specialists + citizen (rotation).
Survival at one end, Jesus,Buddha at the other and we shoot for the middle.
Our intelligence (whatever that means) and sense of empathy should come into the equation to balance the "survival of the fittest" component.
Anything good or bad may happen to small nuclear families but, on average, the progression is there. We continually need to be on our guard and fight off anything we deem destabilizing such as the 1%, unremitting warfare, autocracy, government by a few, closed door edicts, ideologies, unchecked consumerism, groupthink.
We know what the rules are: Golden Rule, Nothing in Excess, First Do No Harm. It is all in the details.
Instead of having rampant specialization, perhaps we should have citizenry rotation in certain areas such as policemen for 3 years, care-giving for 3 years, dare I say Congress, Supreme Court, along with a sustainable core of professionals to anchor the effort and safeguard memory institution.
Consider increasing Peace-Corps type of programs that makes us more aware of our humanity and fight the notion of clique and clans.
Taxes taken from all and redistributed to all as seen fit (by specialists + citizen (rotation).
Survival at one end, Jesus,Buddha at the other and we shoot for the middle.
1
The hunter-gatherers meet their "nutritional requirements" through 15 hours of work. People today can also meet their nutritional requirements with 15 hours of work, even at minimum wage. We work because we aspire to consume more than our bare nutritional requirements.
5
A very thought-provoking article. I think the key question here is societal fitness, used in an evolutionary sense of a given culture's capacity for population growth. During the neolithic revolution cultures that could most efficiently exploit agriculture and grow most rapidly were most fit: a key aspect of societal fitness in the new agricultural societies was greater working hours. The relevant question for the future then is what determines societal fitness in an age of increasing automation and productivity, and how will this impact working hours?
1
What would Trump say about people like this, who maintain a happy work-life balance?
Probably he would call them losers!
We are all much the poorer for living in a society that celebrates accumulation rather than redistribution.
As Richard Lee, Marshal Sahlins, and other anthropologists have demonstrated, societies like the K'ung bushpeople exist equitably because wealth (or at least resources) are shared and distributed among kin networks and residential groups. Reciprocity is the key to the social and economic harmony of these kinds of societies.
Cast your bread upon the waters and it shall return . . .
Trump, Kushner? Who are the losers?
Probably he would call them losers!
We are all much the poorer for living in a society that celebrates accumulation rather than redistribution.
As Richard Lee, Marshal Sahlins, and other anthropologists have demonstrated, societies like the K'ung bushpeople exist equitably because wealth (or at least resources) are shared and distributed among kin networks and residential groups. Reciprocity is the key to the social and economic harmony of these kinds of societies.
Cast your bread upon the waters and it shall return . . .
Trump, Kushner? Who are the losers?
48
The Gods Must be Crazy or perhaps I'm missing something here. I suspect that John Muir didn't spend that much time gathering food, nor Jedediah Smith or other explorers. Of course with firearms gathering meat becomes much simpler.
Our problem is that there are simply too darn many of us - nearly eight (8) billion and that brings a required agricultural base into the feed and maintain scenario.
Our problem is that there are simply too darn many of us - nearly eight (8) billion and that brings a required agricultural base into the feed and maintain scenario.
3
The Buddha said something to the effect that "human unhappiness is caused by desire." Most people are never content with what they have.
Jesus said something similar: "Consider the lilies how they toil not and neither do they spin, but Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed as one of these." We are always anxious about having enough.
People don't realize the extent to which the economic system, the economy, the market, technological advances, etc. have a mind of their own. Once we embark on the economic market system, everyone is in competition for new products, low prices, etc.
There are sinister forces at work but everyone - no matter how big or how sinister - has limited ability to influence the economy. For example, Apple is a tremendous business but they must constantly produce new products. The day that they stop coming up with new products, they go into decline. We are in a global economy and it is growing more so by the day. Worldwide communications and shipping have never been cheaper and easier. There are people (Trump, Bannon, and others) who want to fight it but they will never stop it. The moves to more manufacturing in the United States, will be to automation not a move back to the manufacturing of the past.
It is the story of the "Garden of Eden." Several religious traditions have a similar story. People were living in paradise but were not content so they left (or lost ) paradise. Once you leave you can't go back.
Jesus said something similar: "Consider the lilies how they toil not and neither do they spin, but Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed as one of these." We are always anxious about having enough.
People don't realize the extent to which the economic system, the economy, the market, technological advances, etc. have a mind of their own. Once we embark on the economic market system, everyone is in competition for new products, low prices, etc.
There are sinister forces at work but everyone - no matter how big or how sinister - has limited ability to influence the economy. For example, Apple is a tremendous business but they must constantly produce new products. The day that they stop coming up with new products, they go into decline. We are in a global economy and it is growing more so by the day. Worldwide communications and shipping have never been cheaper and easier. There are people (Trump, Bannon, and others) who want to fight it but they will never stop it. The moves to more manufacturing in the United States, will be to automation not a move back to the manufacturing of the past.
It is the story of the "Garden of Eden." Several religious traditions have a similar story. People were living in paradise but were not content so they left (or lost ) paradise. Once you leave you can't go back.
2
An important article with huge implications for how we are going to have to live some day soon. The idea that we can consume without limits has to be scrapped along with the notion that the only healthy business are growing businesses. Maybe w can learn that quality really does trump quantity.
5
How many hours of work on minimum wage would it require to eat 2,000 calories a day and sleep in a bush? Probably less than the 15 hours a week that hunter-gatherers require.
4
Automation requires upkeep. There are 7.5Billion people on the planet now. 200,000 years ago there were a few thousand.
Therefore problem you studied and its solution (as you see it - use automation to allow us to watch more tv) no longer applies to current conditions.
Therefore problem you studied and its solution (as you see it - use automation to allow us to watch more tv) no longer applies to current conditions.
2
With the emergence of fixed agriculture and hierarchical societies controlled from the top, food became a commodity that ensured the power and position of the king. The need to work is an artifact of this concentration of power and wealth in a few at the top who enforced the, "don't work, don't eat," ethos.
11
Keynes lived from 1883 to 1946 and founded modern macroeconomics.
The article kind of slams him--- of course notions of leisure and work have changed over the years!
And he was alive during the Great Depression--and prior to post-World War II prosperity, which brought the baby boomer generation. He died the year that generation started!!
It's a big deal that he was one of the genius economists that facilitated the rebuilding of nations destroyed by that war. And one of the only two founders of the International Monetary Bank that help so many.
You do realize how busy he was saving the world?
But Keynes was absolutely correct on activist fiscal policy as opposed to free markets always providing full employment:
See Obama Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, enacted by the 111th Democratic-led Congress. and signed into law by President Obama.
Which is why we are prospering to this day.
The article kind of slams him--- of course notions of leisure and work have changed over the years!
And he was alive during the Great Depression--and prior to post-World War II prosperity, which brought the baby boomer generation. He died the year that generation started!!
It's a big deal that he was one of the genius economists that facilitated the rebuilding of nations destroyed by that war. And one of the only two founders of the International Monetary Bank that help so many.
You do realize how busy he was saving the world?
But Keynes was absolutely correct on activist fiscal policy as opposed to free markets always providing full employment:
See Obama Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, enacted by the 111th Democratic-led Congress. and signed into law by President Obama.
Which is why we are prospering to this day.
What the article omits to say, is that it repeats without attribution the well known study, "The Original Affluent Society" published by one Marshall Sahlias in 1972, in the book Stone Age Economics. Sahlins' article was originally published in the French Journal Les Temps Moderne in 1969. This argument about Bushmen and other hunters and gatherers has been well known to anthropologists and others ever since.
4
Come on, Marshall, just be direct - you wrote the most original and brilliant analysis of these same concepts, and all of us who took an economic anthropology class in the late 1970s or 1980s read it. My 2 years living as a UN volunteer with tribal communities in PNG was the homework you inspired, and of all the books that have come and gone on my bookshelf over these many years, your "Stone Age Economics" remains, because it is the best profile of the "economics" we all want. :-)
2
I was going to point that out. Kudos for that work!
Tanks Conzot
The Khoisan peoples of Southern Africa live sustainable lives that are not consumed with ever-increasing demands for growth because they keep their population small enough that nature can meet all their needs. But they have one big Achilles Heel: that small, scattered population makes it hard to defend their territory from more numerous invaders, and they have already suffered because of it. Even before the arrival of Europeans in Africa they suffered a huge loss of territory as growing populations of Bantu speaking pastoralists encroached on their land, as Jared Diamond described in a piece for Discover magazine years ago. He also described how the domestication of rice in China led to a population explosion that caused the early Chinese to encroach on the territory of their neighbors. Agriculture doesn't just sustain large populations, it creates them, and as the population grows exponentially so do their needs. It's part of what drove Europeans out of Europe and their comparatively large numbers made it difficult for Native Americans, Australians, Polynesians, and others to protect their territory. It's why six million Tibetans couldn't protect their country from a billion Chinese. But we are on an unsustainable path, our capacity to reproduce is infinite but the resources of our planet are not. Unless we figure out on our own how to live within our means, nature will force limits on us.
15
So shouldn't this line of reasoning lead to the idea that population size is something to be thought about.
1
Excellent piece -- Keynes proposes, anthropology disposes!
Left out of this discussion are the likely causes of the Neolithic "revolution," namely population pressure leading to the extinction of megafauna and not enough wild roots and tubers.
The question then, it seems, boils down to "Is growth the solution -- or is it in fact the problem?" (This question is explored artfully in Dr. Seuss' The Lorax.)
Benjamin Franklin once wrote: “Without continual growth and progress, such words as improvement, achievement, and success have no meaning.”
Was he right? I wonder...
Left out of this discussion are the likely causes of the Neolithic "revolution," namely population pressure leading to the extinction of megafauna and not enough wild roots and tubers.
The question then, it seems, boils down to "Is growth the solution -- or is it in fact the problem?" (This question is explored artfully in Dr. Seuss' The Lorax.)
Benjamin Franklin once wrote: “Without continual growth and progress, such words as improvement, achievement, and success have no meaning.”
Was he right? I wonder...
2
95% of human history was hunting-gathering. This was not recorded so has been passed over, even by the NYT. So please permit me to add a few things to this rare prehistory piece. Most readers have only been exposed to hunter-gatherers by Hollywood. Scholorship is preferred but just common sense tells us that the typical band of 100 people were a clan--closely related. The neighboring tribes whom they intermarried with were also related. That would have made for peaceful relations, not the constant violence portrayed by Hollywood (USA indigenous). Furthermore they held their own numbers in check so as not to outgrow their territories and infringe on their neighboring and related clans.
2
The cause of death for 60% of hunter-gatherer males in the Amazon basin is murder. (See Pinker, The Better Angels of Our Nature) By now scientists have documented organized campaigns of extermination even among chimpanzees.
Other members of our species have probably always been the most important aspect of the environment we needed to adapt to.
Other members of our species have probably always been the most important aspect of the environment we needed to adapt to.
2
So you believe that 60% of the deaths of Native North American males (pre-Colombian) was due to murder? I've read Pinker. No thanx, just as I say no thanx to that 1% of scientists that deny climate change. And you think early Hollywood's portrayal of Native Americans was accurate?
The idea that most or all hunter-gathering humans spent few hours working is false. Hill and Hurtado conducted a series of studies of the Ache people of Paraguay. While it is true that the men spent less than 40 hours per week actually hunting, they devoted much of the rest of their time tending to their weapons, discussing hunting strategies, marching to the next camp, setting up camp, maintaining social order, and guarding against predators. As for the women, work was almost constant. In addition to gathering, they engaged in child care, food preparation, setting up camp, and carrying most of the tribe's resources as they went from camp to camp.
The work/leisure problem of emerging civilization is not enlightened by analysis of hunter-gatherers, particularly when it comes to the roles of women.
The work/leisure problem of emerging civilization is not enlightened by analysis of hunter-gatherers, particularly when it comes to the roles of women.
7
I think you need to look at property rights, or more specifically the lack of them as it applies to the vast majority of people in our work/consume economic system. The system benefits a few, and the rest are chained to a treadmill. otherwise they don't eat. Rent pays for an apartment to keep a person warm and dry, but that is all. Even homeowners are driven out of the house to work, despite the fact that it is bought and paid for, in order to pay the taxes, or lose the house.
In the cultures you describe, I'm guessing their is a completely different notion of ownership. Ownership allows for exploitation of resources and labor, while a notion of stewardship allows for maintenance of life-sustaining resources by and for everyone for the common good. You could call that work if you want, or you can call it being alive.
We are trained and compelled to live the way we live. It has produced technological marvels for sure, but as far as I can see, it is unsustainable short of a worldwide authoritarian organization.
In the cultures you describe, I'm guessing their is a completely different notion of ownership. Ownership allows for exploitation of resources and labor, while a notion of stewardship allows for maintenance of life-sustaining resources by and for everyone for the common good. You could call that work if you want, or you can call it being alive.
We are trained and compelled to live the way we live. It has produced technological marvels for sure, but as far as I can see, it is unsustainable short of a worldwide authoritarian organization.
7
I lived in Micronesia 50 years ago, and life was similar to that of these these Bushmen. Fish and breadfruit were plentiful, the climate made housing requirements simple, ans status was set by birth order. Chitchat was the the main occupation.
6
Stated another way: Get a smaller glass.
4
The viability of Planet Earth to sustain human civilization in its present form is now being questioned. We are heading toward a cliff. The fall will not just be painful; it could spell the end of Homo sapiens. For a start, we urgently need to examine the rational undergirding our Capital Market system. Certain elements of that system, laboriously pieced together over the centuries beginning with the bronze/iron agricultural age and then energized during the Industrial Revolution are now working against us.
www.InquiryAbraham.com
www.InquiryAbraham.com
2
The reference to the Neolithic revolution, agriculture, as the root of the economic problem led me to the thought the farming was the forbidden fruit. The biblical apple has multiple symbolic layers, encompassing sex, sin, knowledge,the forbidden, the fall from grace, and on and on. But it's looking like the path we stepped on in pursuing a solution to the "economic problem" that we created for ourselves was a ""civicidal" one. Or maybe I should use the term "biocidal"! It is not idle fantasy to imagine climate change wiping out civilization. Or even most of the highly evolved organisms in the biosphere,
1
I don't believe that culture alone dictates that we need to work. When the folks who control the shares of the major companies decide to issue equities and dividends to the unemployed so that they can buy stuff, then we can see how much is cultural and how much is necessity. The future is starting to look like a few Jetsons presiding over a lot of Flintstones up until revolution and or collapse. Wilma will have trouble digging for tubers in rich people's gardens; Fred will be unable to charge his phone without paying his electric bill, and Pebbles will flunk the second grade without an Internet connection.
5
It is quite likely that the Ju/'hansi have had some sort of rough population equilibrium in their arid environment. Disease and/or low birth rates have kept the humman population of these deserts sustainable on the available resources. That is not the case with most the rest of mankind at present, with our "standard of living" demanding both more per capita labor and per capita resources.
1
How sad to think that we have a model for a society in which needs are met through 15 hours workweeks, yet we cannot emulate any of it. Modern people are driven to excessive work as a result of the extreme punishments for not partaking in the madness. It isn't that you could work less and just get by on less. That option is rarely available. Instead, if you want to jump out of the rat race, you will find that you and your family will quickly be without health insurance. We are a tribe that forces people to work insane hours producing more plastic. If you do not comply, you and your family will be left to die and become bankrupt if you get sick. No wonder people are panicked if their jobs are threatened.
6
The hunter-gatherer lifestyle was also fraught with risks. Snakes, lions, hyenas, other tribes, famine and infectious diseases took their toll. On the other hand, mental illness, cardiovascular diseases and other lifestyle diseases of the Western diet and lifestyle remain almost unknown.
So you can take your pick - you can be homo economicus - safe in the comfort of modern civilisation and government with its associated downside, OR homo wanderamis - a total sense of belonging and at one with the community and nature but more exposed to its direct hazards.
So you can take your pick - you can be homo economicus - safe in the comfort of modern civilisation and government with its associated downside, OR homo wanderamis - a total sense of belonging and at one with the community and nature but more exposed to its direct hazards.
1
The Bushmen and societies in which a long work-week is common both appear to obey Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Which, if any, is superior, the society of the Bushmen or long work-week? Why did the Bushmen not become long work-weekers, and why did long work-week become so widespread?
1
They discovered the Power of Frugality.
It's amazing how little we really "need". Once you learn to value time over stuff, you become a free man.
It's amazing how little we really "need". Once you learn to value time over stuff, you become a free man.
2
We need to look to the Scandinavians to see what can be done to spread work and retirement around at fair and manageable levels. Socialism will be required. This will not be such a big step for us Canadians. America will have to change their very essence.
6
So imagine a situation where one bushman develops a new type of spear (technology) that is much more efficient at catching water buffalo. The bushmen go hunting but only the one who owns the spear is allowed to eat. That's what we have now, only those (corporations) who own the technology benefit from its use, the rest of us fight over the dregs.
1
"The problem with "philosophy" is that philosophers can't see the forest for the trees. Nor do they want. It would take all the fun out of philosophizing.
1
Here is one of the only spaces dedicated to philosophy in one of america's premiere publications, and this week it's maynard keynes? Two weeks ago it was some long regret about letting your baby die, which, aside from being an abominable piece of trash, also had no philosophical content to it. There is so little public forum for philosophy, and it is such a terrible shame that you so frequently waste it on things that can and should be published elsewhere.
1
"Cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it . . . in the sweat of thy face shall thou eat bread. . . ."
The Neolithic Revolution, aka The Fall.
The Neolithic Revolution, aka The Fall.
5
So the idea is that it is in our human nature to work less and enjoy life more. People in other countries think like this...Germany, Scandinavia, etc.
But Americans have been spoiled and currently have a victim-mentality. Thankfully our democratic system will always protect from truly becoming victims, and that it is up to us. So it makes sense we could learn to better control our future.
But Americans have been spoiled and currently have a victim-mentality. Thankfully our democratic system will always protect from truly becoming victims, and that it is up to us. So it makes sense we could learn to better control our future.
9
My neighbors, even empty nesters, are constantly remodeling/expanding their homes simply because they have too much disposable income to know what to do with. In my neighborhood, if you don't have a huge roll off dumpster in your driveway 24/7, you're just not making it. Trump and Republicans' desire/need for accumulating thousands of times more wealth than they need in several lifetimes threatens our planet. Ignore the fact that Republicans can easily look past the income inequality that leaves millions unable to meet their basic needs. Yet, given that Trump is inexplicably our president, that must be the ideal that his base aspires to.
38
The simple life sounds so idyllic until it dawned on me that if we couldn't afford insurance to cover the millions in medical cost for my wife, she would have died 10 years ago. If I didn't have the bucks for insurance on car/house? Two hail storms would have been a financial killer. My take on the article is that we all have choices and we don't have to choose to carry a huge amount of debt, live beyond our means or run ourselves in the ground to keep up with the Jones, Patels or whomever.
23
And recognize you are speaking expressly to the US here. The French, Italians, Swedes, and Swiss have no problem at all with their month vacation and relaxed lifestyle that caters to people rather than things.
Our greedy corporatist culture is turning us into imbeciles and killing us. It's not sustainable and it's just flat out ridiculous. Like a diet of cotton candy rather than food, it will one day catch up to us.
Our greedy corporatist culture is turning us into imbeciles and killing us. It's not sustainable and it's just flat out ridiculous. Like a diet of cotton candy rather than food, it will one day catch up to us.
133
” perhaps we would do better to embrace automation as an opportunity ..look forward to an age of leisure and abundance without dread.”
Embrace automation? What else is happening in US lightening rapidity where the "number of manufacturing jobs peaked in 1979 and has steadily decreased ever since. At the same time, manufacturing has steadily increased, with the US now producing more goods than any other country but China."
"What kind of world is going to support all this labor-saving, hi-tech gadgetry when its creators are too short-sighted to maintain the habitability of the planet for their own descendants? There are no solutions that scale up to the mountain of problems it has created..The invisible hand of the “free market” has turned into the boot of environmental catastrophe". https://collapseofindustrialcivilization.com/tag/donald-trump/
Perhaps solution for prosperity of humanity could well be found in Hindu dharmic philosophies. Mark Twain said " So far as I am able to judge, nothing has been left undone, either by man or nature, to make India the most extraordinary country that the sun visits on his rounds. Nothing seems to have been forgotten, nothing overlooked. Land of religions , cradle of human race ,birthplace of human speech , grandmother of legend , great grandmother of tradition. The land that all men desire to see and having seen once even by a glimpse , would not give that glimpse for the shows of the rest of the globe combined."
Embrace automation? What else is happening in US lightening rapidity where the "number of manufacturing jobs peaked in 1979 and has steadily decreased ever since. At the same time, manufacturing has steadily increased, with the US now producing more goods than any other country but China."
"What kind of world is going to support all this labor-saving, hi-tech gadgetry when its creators are too short-sighted to maintain the habitability of the planet for their own descendants? There are no solutions that scale up to the mountain of problems it has created..The invisible hand of the “free market” has turned into the boot of environmental catastrophe". https://collapseofindustrialcivilization.com/tag/donald-trump/
Perhaps solution for prosperity of humanity could well be found in Hindu dharmic philosophies. Mark Twain said " So far as I am able to judge, nothing has been left undone, either by man or nature, to make India the most extraordinary country that the sun visits on his rounds. Nothing seems to have been forgotten, nothing overlooked. Land of religions , cradle of human race ,birthplace of human speech , grandmother of legend , great grandmother of tradition. The land that all men desire to see and having seen once even by a glimpse , would not give that glimpse for the shows of the rest of the globe combined."
3
I would have liked more details about the bushmen and how they arrive at their lifestyle, instead this was a story about Keynes, looks like it was pulled right out of a library. Or is this how the author arrives at a well paid, easy , no time job? Want me to do the next article for you? And what was the editor doing? working his 15 hours week?
3
"For while agriculture was far more productive, it exposed rapidly growing populations to a new range of potentially catastrophic risks"
That was our greatest mistake as a life form on this planet. We had it right and didn't know it.
That was our greatest mistake as a life form on this planet. We had it right and didn't know it.
3
Yesterday's column about valuing maintenance is a good complement to this column.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/22/opinion/sunday/lets-get-excited-about...
Maintenance at it's most basic level has always been seen as women's work, and therefore not valued. It doesn't help that it is often repetitive, doesn't require much thought, isn't creative, and is never finished. It will be a hard sell--it has been impossible to get the US to value workers in childcare, eldercare, education etc. -There's no shiny object to show off at the end of the day!
The work of Bushmen and women to provide for their basic needs is similar, thus not too appealing to the Western mind. What we miss is that they spend only a small amount of time on basic needs, and have a lot of time for fulfilling activities. Our lifestyles are the reverse. Acquiring things is our hobby.
Attaching morals to work has also been part of the problem. We still have a Puritanical streak in much of the US--hard work has been seen as morally good and healthy, even to the point of "sacrificing" time with family. Sadly, people in authority have also used that mindset to exploit workers to their own benefit.
Sadly, people on unemployment feel the disdain, as well as the feeling many retirees have of no longer being "relevant" now that they aren't getting a paycheck.
It will take a lot to change the mindset here.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/22/opinion/sunday/lets-get-excited-about...
Maintenance at it's most basic level has always been seen as women's work, and therefore not valued. It doesn't help that it is often repetitive, doesn't require much thought, isn't creative, and is never finished. It will be a hard sell--it has been impossible to get the US to value workers in childcare, eldercare, education etc. -There's no shiny object to show off at the end of the day!
The work of Bushmen and women to provide for their basic needs is similar, thus not too appealing to the Western mind. What we miss is that they spend only a small amount of time on basic needs, and have a lot of time for fulfilling activities. Our lifestyles are the reverse. Acquiring things is our hobby.
Attaching morals to work has also been part of the problem. We still have a Puritanical streak in much of the US--hard work has been seen as morally good and healthy, even to the point of "sacrificing" time with family. Sadly, people in authority have also used that mindset to exploit workers to their own benefit.
Sadly, people on unemployment feel the disdain, as well as the feeling many retirees have of no longer being "relevant" now that they aren't getting a paycheck.
It will take a lot to change the mindset here.
4
I'm sympathetic to the proposition that advances in economic productivity might better be channeled into increasing leisure time in preference to increasing material wealth, but while the society of the Kalahari Bushmen may be instructive in this regard, their example is problematic in more ways than one.
A couple thins to say:
First, premodern Bushman society was extremely violent. One way that ancient Bushmen kept themselves occupied when they weren't foraging for food - and a way they ensured that Nature's bounty would remain sufficient to support them - was by raiding rival human bands and murdering them. Warfare was constant, so much so that a soldier idly playing cards and cleaning his weapons before battle is perhaps the better modern analogue for the Bushman at rest than is the educated rich man at leisure.
Second, premodern Bushmen had limited access to intoxicating drugs. In particular they had no alcohol. Modern Bushman society, by contrast, is ravaged by alcoholism. Contemporary Bushman remain idle much of the time, but that idle time is now consumed by drunkenness. It could be argued that the problem now is that their hunter-gatherer economy has been wrecked and that such work as they can find as farmhands has no meaning for them, and that this is why they drink. It might also be, though, that healthy, productive leisure time in large amounts is unsustainable in the presence of alcohol and other drugs.
A couple thins to say:
First, premodern Bushman society was extremely violent. One way that ancient Bushmen kept themselves occupied when they weren't foraging for food - and a way they ensured that Nature's bounty would remain sufficient to support them - was by raiding rival human bands and murdering them. Warfare was constant, so much so that a soldier idly playing cards and cleaning his weapons before battle is perhaps the better modern analogue for the Bushman at rest than is the educated rich man at leisure.
Second, premodern Bushmen had limited access to intoxicating drugs. In particular they had no alcohol. Modern Bushman society, by contrast, is ravaged by alcoholism. Contemporary Bushman remain idle much of the time, but that idle time is now consumed by drunkenness. It could be argued that the problem now is that their hunter-gatherer economy has been wrecked and that such work as they can find as farmhands has no meaning for them, and that this is why they drink. It might also be, though, that healthy, productive leisure time in large amounts is unsustainable in the presence of alcohol and other drugs.
10
You are radically mistaken about violence among premodern Bushmen!
Extant Khoisan peoples are victims of ethnocide. To understand their lives today one must the changes imposed by Europeans. Please see, for one: Robert J. Gordon, The Bushman Myth.
There are too many statements in this comment stream that seem to be pulled out of the air with no evidence!
Extant Khoisan peoples are victims of ethnocide. To understand their lives today one must the changes imposed by Europeans. Please see, for one: Robert J. Gordon, The Bushman Myth.
There are too many statements in this comment stream that seem to be pulled out of the air with no evidence!
Low wage jobs are seldom satisfying. I am confident that most people in low wage jobs would love for their working hours to be restricted to 15 hours a week if they could keep their present pay checks.
Unfortunately, they do not have that option. They have to choose from between at least 40 hours of drudgery or destitution.
If the U.S. economy was more socialistic, those who currently fear being replaced by machines could enjoy leisure and an adequate standard of living.
Unfortunately, they do not have that option. They have to choose from between at least 40 hours of drudgery or destitution.
If the U.S. economy was more socialistic, those who currently fear being replaced by machines could enjoy leisure and an adequate standard of living.
2
Our productivity has improved to a point where it is possible to support fewer working hours and longer weekends. It is also possible to support universal basic income to some degree. It is only our insatiable appetite that prevents us from taking these steps.
Neither the reduced hour of work nor the universal basic income will negatively impact our quality of life. There will always be the opportunity to augment the universal basic income for those interested in it. As for the others, they will add to their quality of life as also enhance society's quality.
For those interested interested in reading more about these concepts, here is a link to a primer on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
This is not an exhaustive treatise; for that you'll have to read elsewhere. But it will give you a basic (!) idea of the concept.
This idea is more than a theoretical concept. It was put to vote in Switzerland last year, and although it lost, nearly 25% of Swiss folks supported the idea. Not bad for a first time vote.
https://www.google.com/search?q=ubi+switzerland+vote&rlz=1C1GGRV_enU...
Neither the reduced hour of work nor the universal basic income will negatively impact our quality of life. There will always be the opportunity to augment the universal basic income for those interested in it. As for the others, they will add to their quality of life as also enhance society's quality.
For those interested interested in reading more about these concepts, here is a link to a primer on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
This is not an exhaustive treatise; for that you'll have to read elsewhere. But it will give you a basic (!) idea of the concept.
This idea is more than a theoretical concept. It was put to vote in Switzerland last year, and although it lost, nearly 25% of Swiss folks supported the idea. Not bad for a first time vote.
https://www.google.com/search?q=ubi+switzerland+vote&rlz=1C1GGRV_enU...
5
this could have huge import for total sustainability and a new capitalistic currency of art and leisure?
1
In traditional cultures, people work just enough to support a rich relational and cultural life - and "work" is interwoven with daily life to enhance it. In industrial cultures, family is something we are now allowed to do only in our "spare time" as long as it does not interfere with work, which benefits an economic system designed for the few at the top. How is this progress?
57
Much work in our society is done to produce income that is used to maintain or increase status relative to friends and neighbors. If we lived only to sustain our bodies and minds (and those of our dependents) we all could work much less.
6
Automation and robotic work and advancing technological wonders are, indeed, a blessing, if we confine them to what we used to do at the risk of great pain and suffering. If you define 'work' as something pleasurable, intent in raisin our spirits and contentment, and a truly human enlightenment in our social community, I am in. But if you think we shall achieve 'nirvana' in a capitalistic system (like the one currently practiced), where capital always trumps labor, and where it's god, greed, reigns supreme, where the inherent inequality breeds inequities incompatible with justice, then we are doomed. The only difference with the aborigines you described (hunter-gatherers, our forefathers), is that one ought not count that the resources for survival are going to remain unchanged, always available, so we won't have to accumulate food (and other resources) beyond what we currently need. Poverty is a creation of our civilization, especially since we diversified our production by agriculture, giving up on our nomadic life (going were the resources were), and starting to dominate our neighbors by a lucky stroke of extra power available. Our brain, as marvelous an organ it is, it remains duplicitous in it's intent, conveniently forgetting the 'golden rule'.
8
Re "Automation and robotic work and advancing technological wonders are, indeed, a blessing, if we confine them to what we used to do at the risk of great pain and suffering." They are not a blessing and they will not be confined because there is no "we" to confine them. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, robotics, are being all out driven by a tiny sliver of humanity with virtually no grasp or say by the 99.99 percent, who, under the illusion that the more technology takes over the mental, physical, and social effort that keeps their brains, bodies, and face to face relationships in shape, the better. Bushmen didn't have smartphones.
3
The fact that Bushmen are currently working only 15 hours a day does not mean that our ancestors did so as well. The author neglects to note that, over the past 200 years since Homo Sapiens appeared in Africa, that the world experienced several periods of climate change. The environment, now warm and providing abundance, would have been much cooler and drier, leading to severe droughts and food scarcity. Life would have been harder and environmental conditions much more variable.
The author also neglects the role of women in his scenario, as an earlier post noted. Women's foraging has been estimated to provide up to 60-80% of a hunter-gatherer group's daily food. (Hunting is not always successful). In times of drought, women would have had to forage at greater distances and take more time. Much of the preparation and cooking of food was women's work along with childcare. Even women without children would be expected to help out with the childcare of relatives.
So much for utopia.
The author also neglects the role of women in his scenario, as an earlier post noted. Women's foraging has been estimated to provide up to 60-80% of a hunter-gatherer group's daily food. (Hunting is not always successful). In times of drought, women would have had to forage at greater distances and take more time. Much of the preparation and cooking of food was women's work along with childcare. Even women without children would be expected to help out with the childcare of relatives.
So much for utopia.
6
The key word here is nomadic and migration.
Correction: I meant to say "the past 200,000 years".
1
BioWebScape design project is my ideals about how humanity could live their lives, much like the bushman or other more simple times. But I use cutting edge things that you might have seen on TED talks. The Bio part is that biology is all around us and we are more than able to survive onearth as a species and also keep all the other species alive still, not trying to kill them off like we seem about to do these days. The Web part is to do with the world wide web that utilizes the data and informational side of things, use it for our benefit. Scape is used from landscape we don't have to pave the planet, we could live on it and feed and house billions more than we currently do, without trashing the rest, like we also seem to do. Food forests and aquaculture and hydro-culture and all sorts of currently understood systems tied together in a working fabric. We never have to repeat the past mistakes if we learn to be at peace with one another like Jesus was the Prince of.. Just be better than we were the day before.
4
The author doesn't mention the problem of aquisitiveness that dominates our culture, seems to be a human trait and perhaps is limited by some environments. The desire for things, and for things beyond what is necessary for a simple lifestyle is driving the need to work beyond that 15 hour week. It would be interesting to know if the traditional Bushmen had the opportunity to trade with other cultures for novelties, but I notice that Old Man Jagger is wearing sunglasses.
7
A major difference between hunter-gatherers and farming (civilization) is how many things you can collect. Nomads have very few posessions.
Leave it at the fact indigent people's find what to eat, no waste and have time for friendly and artful activities, enjoy life ,such is and don' t spend time having an I - phone tell them what's up.
3
What Keynes and other economists could not anticipate, (largely because the reality is so outrageous), is that whatever benefits accrued by technological progress would be sequestered by the top one percent of capitalist societies. Keynes lived in an era when it was just assumed that working class people would not just stand by and allow a tiny group to commandeer all the benefits of progress for themselves.
140
I've always been amazed at how easily the anti-social authoritarian uses collective reasoning and confirmation bias to gain control over the herd. After winning the intra-herd struggles they continue to create inter-herd to inter-continental conflicts. Many die in these battles.
Over population is always a concern, so are these human monsters part of an evolutionary plan, we don't yet understand?
Over population is always a concern, so are these human monsters part of an evolutionary plan, we don't yet understand?
7
Problem is the human mind never seems to be satisfied with the minimum anymore. The more it is offered the more it wants.
US is a classic example. We build big houses only to fill them with all kinds of unneeded things only to fill them so much that even the big house is no more sufficient, then they start to use garage space for filing up the unnecessary items they bought and the ideas of garage is lost. People go to Costco or Sam's club and fill the carts with extra size food which they know they can never finish.
US thinking has disproved all theories. The only theory that remains is give them more and they will want more
US is a classic example. We build big houses only to fill them with all kinds of unneeded things only to fill them so much that even the big house is no more sufficient, then they start to use garage space for filing up the unnecessary items they bought and the ideas of garage is lost. People go to Costco or Sam's club and fill the carts with extra size food which they know they can never finish.
US thinking has disproved all theories. The only theory that remains is give them more and they will want more
18
The problem is confusing Western culture's mind with the "human" mind. The same work ethic existed prior to 1492 in the Americas but the Western culture destroyed it and learned little. REH Oklahoma Cherokee
1
I remember hearing, back in the '70s and '80s, that advances in technology/automation would lead us to 15 - 20 hour work weeks, with concomitant increases in leisure time. This turned out to be half right. Many jobs are available with this range of weekly hours. Unfortunately salaries for them are so low that two or three jobs are required to provide bare support for a small family.
The predictions from earlier years didn't anticipate that the wealth created by advanced technologies/automation would be concentrated at the very top, leaving meager pickings for the rest.
The predictions from earlier years didn't anticipate that the wealth created by advanced technologies/automation would be concentrated at the very top, leaving meager pickings for the rest.
77
The modern economic "miracle" is a mirage of course. We mortgage our future and assume growth will always pay that mortgage. This also assumes our environment is infinitely provident. Taken to the ultimate (and absurd) conclusion, there may only be failure...the only solution lies in enlightened technology and foresight; and we can only rely so much upon the free market to solve this.
14
OR, reducing our numbers to a sustainable 1 billion, by one-child incentives. Why is 7.5 billion better?
1
The Ju/'hoansi must be regarded as outside of this thought experiment. They are pre-economic people, not the Homo Sapiens economics we are. When the population exceeded what the natural ecosystem services could provide for, the human invention, which stands above the wheel, was to invent agriculture but more specifically agricultural economics. This happened as soon as a farmer needed to trade some grain for a goat or whatever was in short supply that the farmer could not produce on his own. Today we are way above what ecosystem services can provide. So don't expect work to go away but it will change as a growing population increases demand and a growing number of us find jobs in supplementing those services.
3
There are some good responses here. I'll add that part of the problem is consumerism. When people have what they need, they still want more, because they're conditioned to keep buying "stuff." So they feel they don't have enough and have to work three jobs to "make ends meet." I have no doubt this is true for some but there are also others I see killing themselves to make more money. I'll never understand that feeling, but I see why they feel that way: their lack of discontentment is primarily associated with a lack of material wealth, rather than some ambition to create something new or do something for the sake of doing it, they are motivated by money. The US is one of the worst places in the world IMO for this.
19
People generally want to be productive but unfortunately become slightly uncompetitive as they approach middle age. This slight loss of edge causes insecurity and a sensibility of lost entitlement and loss of employment security that ultimately causes poorer job performance and ultimately, a Fox News consumer. Then they become distopic and crazy. Then they all moan and groan at the TV and begin to listen to propaganda and sloven views of the world. We now live in a Trump world that bows down to the rich and powerful as gamesmanship of democratic process is rigged through gerrymandered ideology that controls the world. Goodby democracy.
10
I don't think that people naturally become less competitive in middle age. What I do think is that the jobs people have stifle creativity and provide little in the way of providing meaning to their lives. I have always needed to believe I am making a difference. It's hard to feel that way when the company treats you like the widget (mechanical or thinking automaton) they are producing. How does this person remain invested?
2
Having creativity stifled is tantamount to being less competitive and why matters little. Same outcome, Fox News and entrenched, self-defeating disgruntlement and loss of democracy.
All creatures have the same economic problem and all the survivors have solved it. Homo is no exception in this respect. What makes us different is our collective efforts to beat death. The human adventure began when one of our biological ancestors asked another "What shall we do to avoid dying?", and was understood.
A solution was eventually found but it is, alas, unworkable: we will project seemingly undying (periodic) aspects of the heavens Above into the ways of Earthbound mortals Below. Church and State were founded on this principle and astronomy is everywhere the oldest science.
www.tomebook2.com
A solution was eventually found but it is, alas, unworkable: we will project seemingly undying (periodic) aspects of the heavens Above into the ways of Earthbound mortals Below. Church and State were founded on this principle and astronomy is everywhere the oldest science.
www.tomebook2.com
2
We should be looking at a few basic guarantee we can give people: 1) you won't starve; 2) you won't be left destitute because of medical bills; 3) you will have basic shelter and dignity. Then we start moving more people to professions that require and gain their meaning from human interaction -- that is, education in all its forms. Academic, practical, artistic, musical, etc. If people still want to work 80 hours a week to hoard stuff, let them, but let's remove fear from the equation and let people follow the good instincts that emerge when they feel secure and are treated with dignity.
162
I will vote for you.
4
Modern society is clearly quite messed up. Despite the abundance many people are either working very hard for very little, or accumulating mountains of useless stuff and spending huge amounts of money frivolously. Many, on either side of the spectrum, are stressed out, burn out, are frustrated daily.
7
As we ponder the nature of work in an age of ever-advancing technology, and Democrats try to hone their economic message for the times, may I offer a pithy slogan: "It's the rent, stupid."
It doesn't matter if technology improves, productivity increases, wages increase, or if people become smarter and worker harder if all of the gains are captured by increased rents.
It's not that we're habitually or culturally addicted to work, it's that the benefits from the work we're doing doesn't accrue to us, but rather sits in offshore tax havens, untouchable by the IRS, which has itself been defunded and defanged by our noble and competent countrymen in the GOP.
You may recall the global bestseller, "Capital in the 21st century" by Thomas Piketty from a few years ago. It's still true.
Yet all of the policy suggestions from the Democrats (and there are none from the Republicans) are about increasing wages for the working class.
Where is the policy platform for what to do when the wages go up, but the rent goes up higher?
It seems our system of government refuses to identify, let alone address or solve, the actual problems facing its people. So it is fitting that the current face of our government is the living embodiment of our problems, a hyper-rentier economy, social breakdown, money laundering, and chaos - Don Trump.
"It's the rent, stupid." Think about it.
It doesn't matter if technology improves, productivity increases, wages increase, or if people become smarter and worker harder if all of the gains are captured by increased rents.
It's not that we're habitually or culturally addicted to work, it's that the benefits from the work we're doing doesn't accrue to us, but rather sits in offshore tax havens, untouchable by the IRS, which has itself been defunded and defanged by our noble and competent countrymen in the GOP.
You may recall the global bestseller, "Capital in the 21st century" by Thomas Piketty from a few years ago. It's still true.
Yet all of the policy suggestions from the Democrats (and there are none from the Republicans) are about increasing wages for the working class.
Where is the policy platform for what to do when the wages go up, but the rent goes up higher?
It seems our system of government refuses to identify, let alone address or solve, the actual problems facing its people. So it is fitting that the current face of our government is the living embodiment of our problems, a hyper-rentier economy, social breakdown, money laundering, and chaos - Don Trump.
"It's the rent, stupid." Think about it.
58
The Ju/’hoansi may indeed be a suitable analog for how we should be viewing ourselves and our future as a species. We have become a geological force on this planet. You can see it from space. You can see it in traces in the land, sea and air. We are unrivaled.
Consequently we have created this marvelous and powerful technological civilization, a product of endless generations of toil, labor and productivity. But while doing so we have also labored under a massive, shared, delusion. One of unlimited growth (potential) within a closed loop terrarium we call the Earth. It has an intricate number of systems all in dynamic balance. In effect the planet is alive; and we are its intelligent agent.
But as clever as we have been we have not been equally wise. We rapaciously consumer and pollute all resources, under the aegis of that shared delusion. Resource that are vast, but do have limits. We are reaching them as a species. All at the apex of our civilization. So while we are at this juncture perhaps it is best to consider changing our collective delusion. Perhaps to one more along the lines the Ju/’hoansi already understand.
We live in an abundant land, this planet Earth. We should learn to share better, and develop a high-tech nomadic way of life. Throttle back, and learn to live lightly within all the abundance which is, in comparison with the other planets in the solar system, our shared Paradise.
Just some thoughts.
John~
American Net'Zen
Consequently we have created this marvelous and powerful technological civilization, a product of endless generations of toil, labor and productivity. But while doing so we have also labored under a massive, shared, delusion. One of unlimited growth (potential) within a closed loop terrarium we call the Earth. It has an intricate number of systems all in dynamic balance. In effect the planet is alive; and we are its intelligent agent.
But as clever as we have been we have not been equally wise. We rapaciously consumer and pollute all resources, under the aegis of that shared delusion. Resource that are vast, but do have limits. We are reaching them as a species. All at the apex of our civilization. So while we are at this juncture perhaps it is best to consider changing our collective delusion. Perhaps to one more along the lines the Ju/’hoansi already understand.
We live in an abundant land, this planet Earth. We should learn to share better, and develop a high-tech nomadic way of life. Throttle back, and learn to live lightly within all the abundance which is, in comparison with the other planets in the solar system, our shared Paradise.
Just some thoughts.
John~
American Net'Zen
26
Even with humankind attaining the mythical "golden age of leasure" through accumulated wealth, increased productivity, and the technological advancements to which Maynard Keynes had hinted at, the economic problem will continue to haunt societies. For, in the absence of an impartial governing authority, the fair distribution of wealth and wealth creating productive work would still be a wishful thinking, which will keep perpetuating the vast economic divide between the top 1% and the rest 99% in societies.
35
We already had that here in the USA in the 50's through the 70's when the highest marginal tax rate was 90%. We can do that again, it isn't wishful thinking. It will take work to re-educate people to demand what they deserve but it can be done.
1
Well this was interesting. I do wonder though if something like 15 hours of work is what gives us the equivalent resources for our food too. These bushman didn't have the other expenses that society does now; housing, transportation, education, medical, etc.
What was wonderful to read was that these people still found enough to do for enjoyment, creativity, community and purpose? That is sorely missing in our underutilized workforce. And look at how so many of our young people are on drugs. How do we change this?
What was wonderful to read was that these people still found enough to do for enjoyment, creativity, community and purpose? That is sorely missing in our underutilized workforce. And look at how so many of our young people are on drugs. How do we change this?
10
"Likewise strategies proposed to manage the impacts of automation tend focus mainly on the question of how to find replacement work for those made redundant."
What we have learned is that people can't stop wanting and working – always seeking more for themselves and a competitive advantage over others. It seems to be human nature.
We will either have to pay people to do work that has, until now, been considered to be of a "volunteer" nature, and/or we will have to provide some form of subsistence income to people so they can stay alive after being displaced from their jobs. But then there is, naturally, the question of human population control for the future.
Put another way, consider "Planet of the Apes." In that storyline, simply substitute apes = humans and humans = artificial intelligence, and you get a flavor for where we are heading.
Soon, machine intelligence will subsume us, and that will be the end of our timeline on this planet. Maybe there is some sort of cosmic repository of knowledge, a genetic library of sorts, and in that sense our genome will be stored indefinitely, much like a recipe book existing whether or not the ingredients or will actually exist to produce the final product. We will be finding that out soon enough.
What we have learned is that people can't stop wanting and working – always seeking more for themselves and a competitive advantage over others. It seems to be human nature.
We will either have to pay people to do work that has, until now, been considered to be of a "volunteer" nature, and/or we will have to provide some form of subsistence income to people so they can stay alive after being displaced from their jobs. But then there is, naturally, the question of human population control for the future.
Put another way, consider "Planet of the Apes." In that storyline, simply substitute apes = humans and humans = artificial intelligence, and you get a flavor for where we are heading.
Soon, machine intelligence will subsume us, and that will be the end of our timeline on this planet. Maybe there is some sort of cosmic repository of knowledge, a genetic library of sorts, and in that sense our genome will be stored indefinitely, much like a recipe book existing whether or not the ingredients or will actually exist to produce the final product. We will be finding that out soon enough.
10
I may be ahead of my time. I lost the 'collective appetite for work' as soon as I retired.
81
The salient feature of Bushman life, utterly ignored in this article, was well described by another economist, Thomas Malthus in the 18th century, as he witnessed the explosion of immigrant populations in the "new world", after escaping the economic consequences of overpopulating the "old world". Humans regulated populations by territorial limits, which balanced numbers against resources, as the Bushmen do. Their population density is a tiny fraction of our Western urban teeming masses, vastly overpopulated and drawing resources from every corner of the often starving 3rd world. Stress R Us.
63
Last half of this appears similar to "Sapiens" by Yuval Harari. He argues that rise of agricultural revolution about 10,000 years ago was a “disaster” because, although it led to rapid rise of population by making grains and meat more common and predictable, eventually it led to specialization of activity and loss of nomadic gathering, which required retaining diverse knowledge and decision-making. Initially, many would continue nomadic wandering but return for harvest time, and then eventually it led to almost total loss of wandering, leading to formal construction of “permanent” huts, rise of villages, and of “property” that required guarding and staying put (since much of it was not transportable). It also raised more risk of starvation if disease hit crops, and loss of foraging skills were unable to compensate.
8
Nice summary. Interestingly, Jared Diamond published this same view 30 years ago and it rings even more true today. Take a look.
http://discovermagazine.com/1987/may/02-the-worst-mistake-in-the-history...
http://discovermagazine.com/1987/may/02-the-worst-mistake-in-the-history...
2
Consider a world in which capital accumulation and technological change could greatly reduce the need for people to work. Well, I am a retired professor. I no longer work for money. I work for the utility I derive from work (gardening, painting, walking, etc.), not because I have to work. I suppose, though, that some retired people prefer socializing, watching TV, reading books, and such. Yes, we know how to discover new technologies and how to amass capital, both mechanical and human knowledge. But the problem is how do we arrange government processes to get from where we are today to where we could be tomorrow. This is going to require substantial changes in how we govern ourselves. Will the people who own the capital through hard work, inheritance, luck, genius, etc., be willing to share the returns from capital to people who work, say, 15 hours per week? Hmm. Somehow I don't think the Republicans have a clue about a new society can evolve to accomplish what capital accumulation and technological change could allow.
31
What is the human race? Prediction of its future behavior political and economic?
It seems in the long run the human race is not much different from a virus or bacteria or a species which puts out as abundant a number of itself as possible, in scattershot fashion, hoping some of itself will take in a changing environment. From the human perspective and not the detached overview, humans constantly talk about a fair society, fair distribution of resources, equality, but for all inclination to do so humans not only seem unable to bring this about, something about humans themselves seems to recognize this is only to seek a position of stasis, what occurs to the human race, like a virus or bacteria or other species, when it cannot break out, spread and develop itself further.
What the human race seems to prefer is that it put out a great number of itself, and for all socialism or utilitarianism, "happiness of greatest number of people", this is done only as crude method of hoping at least some of the race has enough quality to meet changing environment, to continue to survive, and apparently human intelligence seems to have developed to focus not so much on increasing quantity of humans and development of fairness among humans as to locate with greater efficiency and speed optimum members of the species to spread with greater ability across earth and into space. The human race appears a viral project to escape confines of planet. What would extraterrestrial species think of us?
It seems in the long run the human race is not much different from a virus or bacteria or a species which puts out as abundant a number of itself as possible, in scattershot fashion, hoping some of itself will take in a changing environment. From the human perspective and not the detached overview, humans constantly talk about a fair society, fair distribution of resources, equality, but for all inclination to do so humans not only seem unable to bring this about, something about humans themselves seems to recognize this is only to seek a position of stasis, what occurs to the human race, like a virus or bacteria or other species, when it cannot break out, spread and develop itself further.
What the human race seems to prefer is that it put out a great number of itself, and for all socialism or utilitarianism, "happiness of greatest number of people", this is done only as crude method of hoping at least some of the race has enough quality to meet changing environment, to continue to survive, and apparently human intelligence seems to have developed to focus not so much on increasing quantity of humans and development of fairness among humans as to locate with greater efficiency and speed optimum members of the species to spread with greater ability across earth and into space. The human race appears a viral project to escape confines of planet. What would extraterrestrial species think of us?
9
Other cultures are always interesting, but they are poor examples for Americans to emulate. Our history of exploitation of each other, our economic assumptions, and greed speak for itself.
We may be capable of reform and modification, but rapacious forces make movement almost impossible.
Almost.
We may be capable of reform and modification, but rapacious forces make movement almost impossible.
Almost.
17
I haven't read Richard Borshay Lee's study, but I wonder if he spoke to/observed the women? Was "work" split between men and women or, as it is in the US today, do women work and the spend their "free time" cooking, organizing family life and raising babies?
118
What difference does it make? Deflecting away from the writer's main points serves no purpose. Not every issue
is gender, despite your world view.
is gender, despite your world view.
5
It makes a rather large difference if you are a woman. If men work 15 hours a week gathering food in hunter/gatherer society and then have no other responsibilities, but women are responsible for childcare around the clock, then hunter/gatherer society is seen to be much more pleasant for men than women.
4
You raise an interesting question. Some of Professor Lee's work is available online, such as the book chapter "Men, Women, and Work" (https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/18024/1/TSpace0046.pdf) on the !Kung people. In this study he states:
"[Womens's] weekly work effort, including housework, is less that that of the men, and even adding the work of child rearing does not raise the women's total work load significantly above the range of the men's. It should be remembered that low fertility helps to space the periods of intensive infant and child care more widely, and after the age of 40 or 45 child care does not figure in the work lives of most women."
So, yeah, we could stand to learn a few things from these hunter-gatherers.
"[Womens's] weekly work effort, including housework, is less that that of the men, and even adding the work of child rearing does not raise the women's total work load significantly above the range of the men's. It should be remembered that low fertility helps to space the periods of intensive infant and child care more widely, and after the age of 40 or 45 child care does not figure in the work lives of most women."
So, yeah, we could stand to learn a few things from these hunter-gatherers.
1
We may need a new version of " we hold these truths to be self evident".
All are created equal and none have a right to hoard resources that it is their duty to share.
No individual shall make more than 10 times that of another. Something along those lines anyway.
All are created equal and none have a right to hoard resources that it is their duty to share.
No individual shall make more than 10 times that of another. Something along those lines anyway.
89
95% estate tax rate. Market it as the "Meritocratic Tax".
2
Massive population growth has not been a factor in Bushmen social and economic survival. Hunter-gatherer societies populations are generally smaller then agrarian ones. Would the Kalahari support a large population? Not likely.
The last fifty years world population growth undercuts any confident assumption that work and income to acquire food will not see intense economic competition. Potable water availability will add to this. Many historic societies like the Bushmen competed intensely and fought wars over access to land, water and resources. No mention of those realities in this text.
The last fifty years world population growth undercuts any confident assumption that work and income to acquire food will not see intense economic competition. Potable water availability will add to this. Many historic societies like the Bushmen competed intensely and fought wars over access to land, water and resources. No mention of those realities in this text.
26
T"he possibility that our hunter-gatherer ancestors might not endure an unremitting struggle against the elements first came to public attention in the 1966"
Actually, colonists in the 17th and 18th centuries had a big problem with citizens defecting to native Americans wherever close contact revealed the charms of that life style.
A national minimum income will, when deployed, help restore the life we are evolved to experience.
Actually, colonists in the 17th and 18th centuries had a big problem with citizens defecting to native Americans wherever close contact revealed the charms of that life style.
A national minimum income will, when deployed, help restore the life we are evolved to experience.
28
The minimum guaranteed income, currently in effect in Finland, is a whopping $645 a month.
Enjoy your relaxing, fun lifestyle on THAT.
Enjoy your relaxing, fun lifestyle on THAT.
Lovely piece and important points. But don't forget about status. We will only slow our working when work can no longer improve our comparative social status.
29
"Yet our collective appetite for work is undiminished." Very clearly wrong. People aren't desperate to work longer and harder. Financial necessity forces the hand. The majority of people would gladly accept shorter work weeks or more holidays if they could be sure of their security. The real problem is people are worried that they'll be let go or seen as lazy if they want to take time off. However, western society is struggling slowly towards common sense, that working to live doesn't need to take up all of our time.
The indiginous tribes revalatory lifesytle shouldn't be surprising. If food is in abundance then hunting and gathering doesn't need to be that time consuming. A few hours each day to track down and kill an animal or set traps whilst someone else forages for edible plants is only a small part of the day. It's only when populations grow large enough that natural resources become too scarce and farming is required that intensive amounts of labor are required. However, quality of life is important as much as simple free time. Technological advancements have made life far more comfortable that the Ju/'honsi have it. The key issue is making stable, well fed societies truely global so that we can get work towards that Jetsons world.
The indiginous tribes revalatory lifesytle shouldn't be surprising. If food is in abundance then hunting and gathering doesn't need to be that time consuming. A few hours each day to track down and kill an animal or set traps whilst someone else forages for edible plants is only a small part of the day. It's only when populations grow large enough that natural resources become too scarce and farming is required that intensive amounts of labor are required. However, quality of life is important as much as simple free time. Technological advancements have made life far more comfortable that the Ju/'honsi have it. The key issue is making stable, well fed societies truely global so that we can get work towards that Jetsons world.
38
The missing ingredient in this discussion is the definition of "work".
Most people I know don't work 40-hour weeks. They work maybe 15 - 20 hours. We might spend 40+ hours at work but that's not the same as "working" - and certainly not "working hard". Lots of time spent surfing and doing errands, etc. Personally, I don't work all that hard, I enjoy my work and I'm well paid for the work I do.
After all, is there any real difference between five bushmen talking around a fire and five employees partaking in a meeting?
Most people I know don't work 40-hour weeks. They work maybe 15 - 20 hours. We might spend 40+ hours at work but that's not the same as "working" - and certainly not "working hard". Lots of time spent surfing and doing errands, etc. Personally, I don't work all that hard, I enjoy my work and I'm well paid for the work I do.
After all, is there any real difference between five bushmen talking around a fire and five employees partaking in a meeting?
83
Much as I would have liked, I was prevented from talking around a fire by the "man" who expected one's person to occupy the desk during the hours dictated. Our well-paid accountants were pressured to rack up no fewer than 50 hrs per week--more was even better. Some of them developed back problems from sitting so long.
With a little talent in subterfuge, I was able to engage in the simple, pleasant, personal task of picking out wallpaper for the whole house while surfing. Absence while running errands was out of the question.
With a little talent in subterfuge, I was able to engage in the simple, pleasant, personal task of picking out wallpaper for the whole house while surfing. Absence while running errands was out of the question.
2
Yes, the quality of the discussion.
One is real, the other contrived on different levels for different purposes.
Nothing is more boring than people on the job who talk about whatever, just to pass the time.
One is real, the other contrived on different levels for different purposes.
Nothing is more boring than people on the job who talk about whatever, just to pass the time.
1
"He argued that this would enable us to meet and maintain a high standard of living by working no more than 15 hours work a week, thus ushering in a “golden era of leisure.”"
I imagine, if you average the total work hours of each adult in the United States over 18, you would easily get 15 hours a week of work...average per adult.
Hence, we have achieved Keynes prediction....as an average across all adults.
Some adults, of course, are working 100 hours a week at two jobs.
Many are not working at all (retired, "disabled", welfare, etc.).
I think I have read that the sum of all adults not working exceeds the sum of those who do in the United States.
So, we are there!! Celebrate!
I imagine, if you average the total work hours of each adult in the United States over 18, you would easily get 15 hours a week of work...average per adult.
Hence, we have achieved Keynes prediction....as an average across all adults.
Some adults, of course, are working 100 hours a week at two jobs.
Many are not working at all (retired, "disabled", welfare, etc.).
I think I have read that the sum of all adults not working exceeds the sum of those who do in the United States.
So, we are there!! Celebrate!
9
I'm suspicious of workers who put the word "disabled" in quotes. Abuse of benefits notwithstanding, real labor often causes serious injury. Ask any hunter-gatherer or farmer.
1
tony: fully 2 out of every 3 Americans on "disability" (SSDI) are fakers...and 7% of the ENTIRE POPULATION is on SSDI. It defies credulity that 7% of everyone is "disabled".
(NOTE: obviously I have no objection to the genuinely disabled getting benefits. I mind paying vast sums of money to let slackers sit home all day and get a sweet government check!)
(NOTE: obviously I have no objection to the genuinely disabled getting benefits. I mind paying vast sums of money to let slackers sit home all day and get a sweet government check!)
15 hours a week is a fantasy. But there's no reason at all that most Americans could not have been allowed 3 day weekends and a 32 hour workweek years ago, with an enormous benefit to their lives. Studs Terkel wrote brilliantly on the tragedy that is US worker policy, set by the few in a nation that doesnt care about the qualify of life or how much satisfaction people derive from their work. And Republicans in power will make that far worse.
145