In a capitalist world, it can be hard to remember this. But despite what you are pressured to think, your value as a person does not come through what material value you create for others.

  • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    What do you envision your value being derived from? Just existing doesn’t make someone valuable, it make them a drain on society. You need to contribute something.

    • Adramis [he/him]@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the misunderstanding here is: What does productivity mean?

      I interpreted the OP to mean productivity as “capitalist productivity” - meaning, how much money can you make for your king boss. People can still be productive in lots of ways that aren’t considered “capitalist productivity” - for example, I love to garden, take care of greenscapes, and grow food on a small scale. Some people might not be able to do that, but they are wise and great at navigating social situations, and act as the center of their community. Both of those are productive, but often are not “capitalist productive”, if that makes any sense.

      So I agree with both OP and you - a person’s value isn’t determined by their ability to produce capital.

      • inasaba@lemmy.mlOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly. Far too many people misinterpreted this on /r/antiwork as well — they were never saying that everyone should sit around waiting on someone else to provide everyone for them; they were talking about ending the capitalist work paradigm.

        Many people here have never read a shred of political theory, and it shows. People should start here. It explains just how much of the work we do under capitalism is unnecessary for the wellbeing of society, and only serves to enrich the capitalist class. It is very possible for us all to do less work, have more leisure, and still have plenty for everyone.

        • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Exactly. That’s what I meant by putting “something” in italics. You don’t necessarily need to produce capitalist output in the current sense, but you need to contribute some value to a community unless you’re fundamentally unable to. If you’re unable to contribute (not unwilling) because of an disability or some other constraint, then I think the community should help you with your challenges. But those situations are very exceptional, since even disabled people can usually contribute quite a lot to society. I clarified in a comment lower down but someone removed it without explanation, even though it broke no rules, insulted no one, and clearly outlined the concepts of differing ideologies.

    • CyanFen@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Your name is anticorp yet you speak like a capitalist pig, hmm 🤔

        • inasaba@lemmy.mlOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not everyone has to contribute to make a society functional. From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.

          You’re being exceptionally ableist.

          • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It’s not albiesm to say that people should contribute to society. I even directly said “according to their ability” in the comment above that was removed without explanation. You’re quoting my own words back at me and acting like it’s a disagreement. It is exceptionally rare for someone to be so severely disabled that they are incapable of contributing anything, and in those situations society should help people according to their needs. Being unwilling isn’t a disability, it’s a bad attitude.

            Edit: I’ll ask you again since you’re avoiding the question and instead just issuing personal insults, what do you derive your value from if not your actions and contributions to the society, community, or family you’re a part of? It’s a genuine question that isn’t being answered.

    • MossBear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      What would you say to someone with a chronic illness? What would you say if that person was you or your own kid?

      • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If their illness is to a degree that they’re completely disabled then that’s an exception. Under those situations I think their community should provide what is needed for that person so that they’re comfortable for whatever duration remains in their life.

        • MossBear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Just to go a bit deeper, would you tell your own disabled child that they are a drain on society? Would you think highly of others who told them that? I’m willing to bet in those circumstances your views would change, so why not reconsider them now?

          Laughter is a social good, even if it makes no money. Practicing compassion is a social good. Receiving compassion is a social good. Disabled people are capable of all of these and much more. You are free to believe as you wish, but as someone who has lived on both sides of this issue, I don’t believe your views will sustain themselves under the scrutiny of experience, should that experience ever find you.