came to understand what what i came what i came to believe work seems to be in the adult world i had you know i grew up you know grew up in fairly fortunate situation with a father who is an academic who had you know in a in a fairly comfortable academic job who had what appeared to me to be the closest thing to to not working that seemed to be available compared to what the parents of other people that i knew had you know he was around when other people weren't and seemed to have autonomy to do what it was you want to do of course i came to understand that things were a bit more complicated than that but nevertheless it's not wrong to say as sociologist stanley aronowitz once did that what my father had was the last good job in america  which gets to this question of what are we talking about when we talk about work and why would we be against it and i think it's one of these questions that's useful to ask because it's the one at one level it seem completely obvious it's this ubiquitous thing work it's part of our lives it's a thing that we have to like or dislike or submit to or depend on but what do we mean when we talk about work and the st thing that leaps to mind for most people i think when you say work is the job or it's the more generally it's the things that you have to do in order to pro cure your means of survival and that in itself takes various forms it can be the wage in the form of an hourly wage that you get paid for working you know whether it's in a factory or in a restaurant or whatever but it can be a salaried job that isn't tied to hours it can be freelance work as more and more of us do it's tied to the particular gig you know or work activity that we get paid for can be legal or illegal it can be you know it can be sort of condoned or or persecuted by the state but we begin with that i think that assumption which most of us brought up in a capitalist society like this one take for granted that that's sort of what what work is it's what you do in return for money usually or some way of accessing the means of subsistence and most of us have the experience directly or indirectly of that generally not being something that we do for primarily because we take any value out of it other than it's what pays the bills and yet when you start to talk about being you know critical of work or post work or anti work or various other ways that we talk about this is mixed up with i would say at least two other very distinct things that come up when we say what is work  the st is what you might call the necessary labor of society and that's a vague term and it's a vague term intentionally because this is a what you would call a centrally contested category it's something that we  exact what is necessary that is to say what would you say has to get done for our search for our way of life to go on as we think it ought to and that can mean social reproduction in the sense of the physical reproduction of species somebody has to me is doing the work of raising children whether or not they're getting paid for it often they're not getting paid for it and but there's also the you know the the labor of keeping the roads paved or the buses and trains running or not running that is something that we we think of as something that has to be done and therefore deserves either deserves respect or at least deserve needs to have some mechanism in place to make sure someone does it so that's the nd sense of work it's the stuff that has to get done whether or not it's you know however it's being compensated however it's being organized and then the final sense of work that sometimes comes up and it's a thing that i get even from leftists when they say what's you know i know when i talk about don't post work into work whatever is well are you you know what about the fact that people want to commit themselves to projects that require dedication and discipline and self sacrifice they often ultimately find fulfilling are you against that are you saying everyone must sort of lie in a hammock all day or something and well no not unless that's what you want to do and off sometimes that is what i want to do but of course there is you know in some ways to reject work as whatever it is you have to do to get paid can be to open up the space for whatever it is that you might want to do or whatever it is that might need to get done and so i wanted to sort of start and just sort of set the stage with that that that t distinction between work as what it is you get paid for work as what needs to be done work as what you find fulfilling or self actualizing or however you want to put it and how those things overlap or don't overlap that it's sometimes possible to kind of have you know sort of have an alibi by saying you know what you do is work and therefore makes you  worth to society because you do something that you receive a paycheck for whatever the content of that thing is is secondary to that and so i've you know i've done a variety of jobs including ones where the content of it is things like going through  filing rejected applications for health insurance for private health insurance company it's the content of that work is both inhuman in its immediate impact one people health care and is part of a larger system that should not exist and even kind of a basic social democratic view of the world in which we should have universal single payer health care and nobody should be sitting at a computer logging in rejected applications for health insurance and yet i got paid money for that i took home a paycheck every week and so i was by that standard by the standard that work is what you get paid for and that that and that  paid for something makes you a contributing member of society i was a contributing member of society whereas someone who was doing something that we might regard as necessary for the reproduction of society such as raising children not getting paid for it doesn't necessarily have the same social standing not even speak of the things that we do in the time freed up art or sports or writing you know and so that's that's sort of where i could go on but i won't because it this is i think opens up a very complicated conversation that i hope we can have together about starting with the provocation down with work and opening into the maybe the political conversation of what is work how do we define it how are we politically and culturally constrained think of what work is or isn't and what makes it valuable or not valuable it how does work define us both in terms of providing us access to the material means to live and also to the kind of the cultural markers that allow us to be treated as if we are for contributing members of society and so i'll sort of i think i want to just leave that at that sort of level of generality because i know my contributors here have interesting directions to go with it so i will stop there and from being human i mean essentially that's what it came down to using that ike is what poverty does attempts to do is to isolate you and to prevent you from connecting with other humans and so you cannot flourish i ma you would know what it means to work and or a business owner to oh i don't do any of those and but i love the fact he just he described it to me as being somebody who did not work even though i received a paycheck i mean apply all definitions but my i was fascinated by this i this is must be i thought this was not singular this was not accidental that that the police man does a real job maybe not right and maybe it's not it's not it's not me maybe i shouldn't be so quick to judge his stand as you know me maybe he's correct real work is either making money or beating down people who do not want to paces between the stars right and to arrive at a place and and appear in our skies and i i thought you know we always never think like what does it mean that a u f o is in the sky right i mean we have advancement that's next question what is technological they obviously have serious technology and how is it they came up out having this technology and we often miss it's an i it's a question that i brought up in another if all of human history was leading to technological advancement we almost would say that the dinosaurs suffered because they didn't figure this out but we came along and we determined that  history has a trajectory and it is greater and greater technological complexity and we take that we take that as obvious but we don't understand well what drove technological progress we never sit down and an answer to the possible answer for this is we often we often we often think if you look at human history century there there's no advancement there's no technological progress it's  ticular actually right things are gaining things a lost there is no there's no there's no specific a narrative of improvement as the victorians try to imagine it that we get better and better there's nothing that i mean that or quite recent it's very new in the world but yet we take this experience as quite new and we impose it on the past and we say technology we were all that the humans came out of africa weaves except that now finally and and that in the days resisters and then they didn't and it was just natural that they just went in this direction of better better tools technological expansion and that's my that's my next point so we see it as trances torkel essentially and we write that and that's how we see the u f o i suspect is we have to say that in but this was an imposition but what we're doing actually is imposing what we've experienced over the past three years on a wide area of human experience that was progress or what's been driving progress instead has been the struggle between capitalists and workers and the struggle is this that one wants to cut down costs and the other wants to demand more pay for the work that they do and so in this dynamic the capitalists have been pushing forward technological development meaning that to we can talk about this later but if you say ok how that house possible you sometimes but i i want to conclude by saying that this is not over i mean we can find this all the way back to the dutch moment in capitalism and also to what's happening right now with boeing and any if you look at the whole situation with the max planes what is what is what was that about why were those people that i'm falling out of the sky it was that did not require that much training right if you look at them if you read a few of the if you read the reports coming in from those close to the development the plane that's that that was the stated idea and so we have not left this so that if you look at the all the technology has been packed in this plane and the with the fact that we sort of say that oh it's advancement it's not advancement but it's is and it's always been according to postpone and i'm going to conclude on this point because we need to think about what it means in this context in what we what technological development means is that what we find is that there has that most of what's driven what the the main driving  force of rapid technological change is is rooted in a class struggle whereby wages are a problem and profits are the and and  ok so this is so weird because i can we cannot see your faces the artist the hottest thing ok so we're as you keep saying this non panel provocation is where we're gently trying to help you understand that the audience participation part is coming and so they're really hoping that you will cohere eyes with us because we want to think critically about work and i think we've only been able to skim the surface on the critique of work i think we really need a lot more people trying to think about what work is today the experience of it in relationship to what our expectations and our desires for it are so i've got two sets of questions that i would really like you to if possible help me think about and since it's redman going to start with marx for the st time so mark centered his critique of capitalism on the experience of wage work under industrialization and whereas a lot of others had and still do think of the wage worker as a free person right someone who gets just sort of negotiate a wage contract with someone else and as and and in fact the epitome of what it means to be independent like so strangely if you're dependent on the state for your income your dependent but if you're dependent on an employer for income you're independent i mean it's just it's an odd little kind of rabbit out of the hat sort of thing but it it's often understood that the wage worker is free and equal and so the story goes that a wage worker goes into the job market and they negotiate with other free and equal people who are employers and everyone has something to trades the employer has money and the worker has labor power so they need as equals and then they work out a beneficial bargain right and that's the story and so what marx did is he said  said what you have to do is find out what happens after they sign the contract so he says let us in company with the owner of money and the owner of labor power leave this noisy sphere with it where everything takes place on the surface in plain view of everyone and follow them into the hidden abode of production right here will find the secret have how capital and i would add workers are made into capital and workers right and so he says you have to go down and look at people at work and find out what they're doing to find out how capitalism works and he says once we do this and we go down to the work place we see a change in our dramatics personae he who was previously the money owner now strides out in front as the capitalist the the possessor of labor power follows as his worker right so now once we go down we see that now we see class inequality right where they we had imagined that they were equals once we go into the work place one starts out in front and the other follows then we can see class inequality at the point of production and then he continues the one the capitalist smirks soften portly and is intent on business the other is timid and holding back like someone who has brought his own hide to market and now has nothing else to expect but a hiding right so now we even see subordination and unfreedom not just inequality  we see domination in the relationships of work and it seems to me it's not just the appropriation of the surplus value that the worker creates during the work day that's hidden from view but also the hierarchy and domination in inequality  on freedom of wage work is also serves strangely hidden from view or not talked about right these relations of domination and subordination these workplace hierarchies are usually seen as such in part because they take place in this hidden abode of production is private realm right so the st question i'm interested in our set of question is how do we publicize and politicize and deepen our understanding of how people expect experience hierarchies at their jobs and i'm thinking about different jobs like how often are these these i mean the kind of the most tangible relationships of control and domination and power that we experience as often at work on a daily basis and how do we experience that how often is that kind of filtered through class dynamics or race dynamics or gender dynamics or sexuality in some ways how do you experience these hierarchies in your job in a different jobs in many service jobs direct domination of the kind that marx was imagining you know with the capitalists and the worker like in the model of the factory that kind of direct observation and domination isn't really viable in a lot of jobs right so in a lot of jobs in the service sector you really need workers to be on board right you know to cruelly kind of want to be there in some ways because part of what they're selling is this you know happiness you know the the the pleasure of the whatever the service encounter is that you're working at it and we also need they also need workers often to have some kind of discretion right to deliver a good service  or maybe even they need the inventive power and creativity of the worker so you need to cut them some slack right not be breathing over their neck the entire time but not too much right because you want to make sure that they're still profitable so it's this weird sort of set of dynamics of releasing workers to be themselves but also trying to capture whatever they do and it just seems to me that in across all of these kinds of jobs on the job hierarchy depending on how much autonomy you have as a worker like there's still these experiences of control and hierarchy that are happening constantly in the workplace where we don't often talk about it so i'm interested in you know particularly some of those jobs where you are given a fair amount of freedom how does hierarchy get experienced in those kinds of jobs right is it filtered through common cause is it filtered through friendship i mean what are the relationships like with these hierarchies at work and i just think there's a lot more tendre stand about how they're how that's experience today so that we can think critically about them so that's my st set of questions my nd interest is in the kinds of emotional labor that people do in their jobs particularly the really hidden forms that don't get recognized let alone you know remunerated as part of the pay package so the hidden abode of production that marx was talking about was probably a factor a factory and the possessor of labor power was probably a man and in the one thousand nine hundred and eighty s early haas child wrote this really important book called the managed heart where she coing the term emotional labor to try to register new forms of work in a post industrial service economy with increasing numbers of women workers and more jobs available to everyone that had been understood as women's right jobs that involve a lot of serving a lot of helping a lot of supporting a lot of catering to so the definition of emotional labor for hoss child is you know the you know the use or display of a worker's emotions or appearance of emotions in order to induce a certain state of mind in someone else a client a customer a student a coworker a boss right so you have to kind of manipulate your own either your emotions or your appearance of emotions are affected states in order to facilitate the you know someone else feeling having a certain kind of feeling state and she says a lot more jobs require this and again i think there's just so many something so much complicated emotional labor that we do that's not being sort of covered in the literature get and that's part of what i want us to do with our investigation to is try to think about the forms of emotional labor hostiles saw that expectations of emotional labor were different for different genders women for example were more often expected to do deference work and that was part of the emotional labor that was expected of them often men workers were you know expected to have a different kind of emotional register at work but as hostile notice to it like emotional labor when you when your job involves emotional labor it can be really really complicated and i think that's when the borders between who you are as a non worker and who your as a worker get very blurry right so this is this is a quote from haas child and she's talking about you know someone in a service job like interactive service sector labor where you're supposed to smile and that kind of thing so this is the quote seem to love the job becomes part of the job and actually trying to love it and to enjoy the customers helps the worker in this effort right so put it simply we become what we do in some way so it becomes a very complicated set of questions about who you want to be through the kind of work that you're going to be doing every day so my questions here are about how different people in different jobs experience the emotional labor that's expected and if we could even come up with like terms for these different like inflections of emotional labor that are expected of people are there gendered patterns that you've noticed is emotional labor something that's a burden or is it something that's welcome to go back to marxism original critique of factory labor part of the description of why that work was alienating is because you don't bring enough of yourself into the work and so there becomes this kind disjuncture well in a lot of these jobs they want you to bring yourself to work right they want your personality they want your emotions they want your cooperative enthusiasm and so does that make work better right or is that the there's more opportunity to be alienated from all of those qualities that are now being instrumental lies for purposes other than your own right and then so the last question is like how does it impact your life outside of wage to work like the kinds of emotional labor you're expected to do in waged work how does it affect your life outside which work so those are my question i would also like the intersection of kind of these two questions like how are the hierarchy set work mediated by requests of emotional or affective work like out of the two headed to overlap and intersect with each other which would seem really interesting to  questions to go around this and i think in order to get at what i get to get at the present the present situation and the current changes i need to take a step back and talk about a previous shift in the  experience of time surrounding work is that's my question but how does work relate to our experience of time work or how does our experience of time get get engaged in work and so what i want to start with just as the back up thing is about about capital industrial capital in time discipline there's a rd word in the title and what he traces it what he does because he's a good historian as traces the advent of clocks in england like clocks and especially watches were a rather recent vention he starts you know question tracing that and questioning why and he explains the prior to industrial capital people inner sense of time was determined by work relations but of course a different kind of work that didn't involve clocks so that their time their sense of time was either mediated by tasks how long it takes to milk the cows how long it takes to do a certain task or by relationship to natural rhythms like to the tides or to the sun so the people sense of time had these had these reference really with the advent of industrial capital instead and the factories need for precision time discipline is a quantified time of the clock and one aspect of this that i would like to get into too is part of this is that with this advent of industrial time  and clock time with it also came the division between work time and non work time that the invention of the working day it essentially happens at the same time with the with the notion that  non work time was a necessary time for social reproduction they could do would be accomplished then so the interesting thing about this now i'm still with the industrial part is that it's not this new sense of time new sense of dominant economic form of the factory here in that in that period dominates capital society also in its mode of temporality so that this kind of relationship to time that workers have in the factory progressively spreads over the course of one hundred years also outside of the factory and defines all of our relation to time so that everyone be canned to live their lives by clock time and with time discipline and all its deficien like for instance here's a super stupid example but i think you'd have plenty others just remember junior high not only did we have a rigid rigidly regimented day with classes and everything and in some ways who was a teaching us about time discipline in the same kind of regularities of the factory even though the students of my school were generally not tested to the factory but other students had the rest of the day all completely mapped out to you know so it was not only that you had all the classes but then from three to four o'clock with soccer in from four to five o'clock with piano in five to six o'clock was ballet or something like that and i think with generations after mine it's even got more so you know that this relationship of the precise temporality that it's really a kind of time discipline related to the clock is spread so but then here is when i come to my question so let's take for granted or except at least this part that that during the the period of the domination of industrial capital that there was  a new temporality a new relationship to time that was in some ways based on the temporality as decided by the factory how today has our sense of time or our lived experience of time shifted that's really my question given that industry is no longer the dominant form so let me try to break that up into two questions the st question maybe the easier more more accessible of the two and it has to do with the working day because it seems to me that the working day that's in dust that's introduced with industrial capital is and is in many ways transforming today that the upper reaches of the labor market i mean i think tech companies might be the most easiest for us to access about this or to think about those two in these upper reaches of the labor market there's becoming a progressive in distinction between work time and non work time or maybe work time tends to expand you know you know how on the on the on the various you know like on the microsoft campus i remember this from from from decades ago and i seem it's still the same that there's  brought with pleasure and and other kinds of discipline to in some ways expand the working day you know it's not only on the connector bus but also when you're at home answering email doing other sorts of tasks is what i'm trying to point to here is a kind of diminution or in distinction let's say between work time and non work time at the lower reaches of the labor market there's a similar  breakdown of the working day i think to the extent that it ever really existed think of the kinds of precarious work they create irregular patchwork days you know someone who might wait tables in the afternoon like the security guard in the evening babysit children the next morning something like that there too the the definition of the working day is is becoming more indistinct so here's my hypothesis or question maybe both but this is is it is the worry is to what extent today is the definition or the distinction of the working day changing and i'm particularly interested in the time for reproduction like it to the extent that the time for reproduction is being whittled away or being transformed i'm wondering to what extent that changes aspects of our lives you know some partly what i'm talking about here with this in distinction of the of the working day there are some ways in which student life has some in some ways expands the even calling these places  where tech workers work campuses deals with part of it i mean student life in some sense functions that way if that in distinction of the working day i mean students suits of course are not always working but they're always feel like they ought to be working and maybe even when they're never working the always feel like they ought to be working and so i would guess what i think that there's a there's a similar in distinction that's what i'm what i'm pointing to i guess i'm i'm thinking about the nature of the work and in the consequence of those that's the  st one the harder question the harder way of approaching the same question really is about the way that our sense of time is changing and no longer in line with the kind of factory discipline that i was talking at earlier and one way of approaching this is about the unbounded or or never ending sense of time but one thing i don't think is changing is the relationship to qualification like in some ways our our daily lives are hyper quantified like that even your screen time is now it totally quantified or they mount of time spent on that phone call that it's not a lack of quantification what i think there is and he was referring how it's not only a dissolution of the working day but all kinds of other it's definite times of life that are being dissolved like he was saying it used to be that you could only shot from i don't know eight to five or something that but now online you can shop all night you can do you can do email all night you can do e mail wherever you are there's a kind of hidden he was posing this in distinction like this  lack of boundedness you know the two hundred and forty seven quality he's talking about it leading to all kinds of sleep disorders excessive medications mental disorders you name it this sort of thing but i think that the what he's trying to get at a different temporality a different relationship to time that that it seems to me corresponds it's a way of accessing the different relationship of time to time we have in an age in which industry is no longer the defining factor that's where that's where i'm trying to go with that so a couple of people have mentioned that were interested in you know in this is a coach trying to frame this is a career search project which is super difficult when the lights up here and it's dark down there but just to give you an idea of when i approach this to my experience of this notion of co research comes from a tradition in italy  that the sociologists were the investigators and the workers were in some ways the objects that they should should inform them that instead and this is that potts's that i thought we should work with here is they were all equally capable of theorizing and that what we have to we have to begin with the with in many cases shared experiences and that's what i am hoping we could start with now in response to the some of the questions we brought up start with experiences of your own job but also jobs of others i mean i don't think you should be limited to be lovely to hear things relating to your own jobs that fit with the kind of things we've been saying ok fit with that run completely counter to what we've been saying too that's even better so starting with that but our task is to draw on those experiences and recognize the structures to stand behind them you know to be able to use as experiences a kind of theorising so i don't mean that you have to have completely formulated theoretical thoughts when you start but i think when when we could address some of the kind of work experiences that we've been talking about that we could be thinking of the way of how that is indicative of it or leads us to understand structures that are having to find the right or that with all of these you know we start collecting people's you know experiences and reflections on it then maybe we'll start getting some patterns too and maybe we can do some of that work and say well what's going on here this seems kind of similar to that or that's instruct dramatically different so maybe we could together do some of that theoretical work too and we can start sure if i want to see these or that was so good oh my god there's so much going on here i guess is a couple of points that i would say is that you know relationship to that you know being told constantly to find your passion  and like as if that would be in a job you know just you know i mean i'm trying to reform myself as a college teacher you know sir now i just say try not to be horribly unhappy do what you can to of laziness and just recuperating that word because that sort of you know the opposite of the work ethic it's sort of the you know the the worst thing you can be in some ways and sometimes it's as if that that's that's what we're threatened by if we're not consumed by if there's two options work or laziness you know the hammock in some ways and so why not just like recoup it like instead of saying no no we would be lazy in a post work future we'd be doing serious business more work you know i mean like there's this open suspicious about that kind of response so i'm really tempted by this alternative of well no let's talk about different qualities of laziness you know and really trying to sort of i don't know fight back against this find your passion kind of discourse and the other thing was that so the idea of the algorithm is the new boss so like that's one sector of the labor hire and then at the other you get at crunch time we're a family right i mean is that i think that's the trend is that you know this kind of the hierarchy gets completely depersonalized so there is no you're being ruled by a machine you write by this algorithm at one and of the labor hierarchy at the other end of the labor hire key there's still this we're a family you need to be committed to us and i'm just wondering if that's the way the labor market and the way it's being managed is kind of sort of working out today and then the last one is just about i mean i think that's really important about thinking about work as damage meeting firemen you know i mean that that's leading to a crisis because often you know we talk about ecological crisis we start thinking about consumption  shouldn't consume this you shouldn't consume no you should be producing is what you shouldn't be doing you know i mean like let's talk now not about the low level of exchange but the level of production and that's another way to get that you know what's really driving the engine of ecological crisis and what would be involved in its remedy so those are my points i've just got a little minor more i too thought those really those are really fascinating in the minor really just further questions for the ones like i was really interested that three you know there are three at least three  interventions about that emotional work in the need to be upbeat in fact to really to non profits you know and then and then the grocery store at the end but none of you were were talking about the gender nature of it and i'd be interested to  e three women who were doing those three interventions but i but i'd like to hear more think more about the ways that gender is in force to be performed at work especially with regard to these these kinds of motion like that the need to be upbeat the need to feel you know at a at a nonprofit for instance of you know being positive about the work but also i sum it's a certain kind of work to encourage each other that probably what's going on with us and seeded anyway i would that's something i'd love to find a way to talk more about you know another thing i don't i that's what i'm trying to get at is with flat rather than than vertical rather than cyclical like ok now the rate ok so that the perpetually on call you know at least for this week is is non cyclical i mean so what because one of the things i'm interested in in this question my temporality and no one was i didn't bring up explicitly enough but i guess maybe that's the reason because i'm wondering well what seems to me i had understood that part of the nature of the working day was that it did leave time for reproduction and recuperation you know that there were at least that was you know the ideal that never existed for only the most elite workers you know was the slogan for a wild beast in a cynic list tradition was you know eight hours of work eight hours of leisure eight hours of sleep that was the twenty four hour day so when you take away a non work time like in this know in that flat week what happens to your reproduction but i don't mean just to wash your clothes i mean what happens to your you mentally like that's partly what i'm thinking of is this is the  that was we're all right those are all really great i can't really do justice to everything everyone said i've been trying to just sort of cringed yeah the crunch and yeah and the flight time i think we're all going to be sort of dancing around on that one i mean so i'm just going to try and relate it to to sort of the themes that i was this where they were coming out to me about like what are the things that we you know are sticking out across about work that we want to talk about that we want to think about and you know one of the things was you know there's we're talking about new ways in which work expands temperley into being always on call it spans in terms of what's expected in terms of emotional labor in the way that bad emerges  service work in a way it's gender very much so but in another way we're still talking about what i think is a core you know certainly marxist point that cathy kind of laid out about you know work in its capitalist form as unfreedom basically and i've been i still don't have any other way to say it it can sometimes you know it seems almost like too simple to like it's too you know the freedom it's been such a sort of a corrupted concept in american culture certainly but you know in the sort of the traditional industrial labor version the cat is talking about it's very clear ins in the sense of like the boss buys the right to have you for certain amount of time and then they tell you what to do when they're someone you know and so that's the point someone made a point about you know wage slavery as an idea that yes we are not chattel property of someone else we're not serfs but nevertheless for a certain number of hours we are not free in the way that we're told are free in sort of american civic education in the sense that's what we're talking about in all these other ways where it's not necessarily that you are the boss is coming to you and saying do this or you're fired but it's your expected you know you're expected to produce spontaneously or with the illusion of spontaneity a certain form of labor and that that comes you know in all the ways you know these prisoners are especially gendered ways as with all the talk child's work you know canonically talking about flight attendants and work like this but you know you think about the way this goes into any kind of work even before one is fully an employee you know i think those of us who have gone to certainly my age are gone to job interviews and you know that you are expected to go into a job when you are no matter what kind of crappy job it is and pretend  do you say you can't just say i will show up every day and do the job and i am a warm body who knows how to read no you have to say no this is my passion you know before you've even been hired you have to do that and so that what we're still demanding is freedom from  right and so this gets to a sort of the other thing that i want to touch on is this this thing you know somebody mentioned in her comments about automation you know she's also a fan of star trek i know and so i i feel that sort of sense of why you can't technology be used for human freedom rather than for you know our further complication and so i want to just quickly this there's sort of there's two themes that run through sort of the left socialist critiques of the work that you often see one of which can be portrayed as you laziness we just want to bridge we just want you know no more bosses no more time on the clock time to do every want and the other one is we want to do work which is truly fulfilling we want to take up our time with the stuff that truly is good for us and good for the people around us and good for the world we want to build and i would submit that in the sense of those two arguments in a capitalist context are the same argument there approaching the same problem from opposite sides which are that what we do whether it is traditional factory sense or in its more modern integrations of being either constantly on call to the customer of your app or required to put forth emotional labor we are in mash in these systems of unfreedom that we want to reject for something else and what whether or how whether we can even describe that something else as it laziness or as you know liberated an alienated labor is almost impossible for us to imagine from the standpoint of of us form of society in which most of our time is taken up by something that is not that and so that's why the sort of this negative moment this provocation of down with work i think is sort of necessary and i think that's come out in a lot of the comments of people ma