Friday, September 04, 2020

REST IN POWER
Remembering David Graeber, a Force Behind Occupy Wall Street
He was an anthropologist, an anarchist, and a provocative polemicist.

By Drake Bennett BLOOMBERG
September 3, 2020
David Graeber, American anthropologist, anarchist activist, and author of Bullshit Jobs: A Theory. PHOTOGRAPHER: MICHA THEINER/EYEVINE/REDUX

David Graeber, who died of undisclosed causes on Wednesday at the age of 59, was a prominent anthropologist who taught at the London School of Economics—and famously, an anarchist—but he disliked being referred to as “the anarchist anthropologist,” as he inevitably was. Most people, he thought, misunderstood what anarchism meant. Even those who didn’t associate it with running street battles and wanton crimes against property dismissed it as farcically utopian. “Most people don’t think anarchism is a bad idea, they think it’s insane,” he told me. “Yeah, sure it would be great not to have prisons and police and hierarchical structures of authority, but everybody would just start killing each other. That wouldn’t work, right?”

Graeber thought it could. His Kansas-born father had enlisted with the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War, alongside anarchists who had briefly run Barcelona according to their principles. (Graeber’s mother had her own left-wing bona fides, once starring in an International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union musical that improbably became a Broadway hit SEE PINS AND NEEDLES). Indeed, Graeber believed that it was much of contemporary life, lived in the grip of economic and political realities no one bothered to question, that was truly insane. He made his name by assaulting what he saw as its central pillars, both in his brilliant, idiosyncratic writing and in his participation and leadership of large-scale, left-wing street demonstrations in Quebec City, Philadelphia, New York, and Genoa, Italy.

Silicon Valley entrepreneur Peter Thiel and David Graeber debate the future of technology in New York on Sept. 19, 2014.
PHOTOGRAPHER: HIROYUKI ITO/REDUX

The most influential of those was in fall 2011. Graeber was one of a core of organizers who, in a series of interminable meetings run according to anarchist principles—all decisions had to be made by consensus, no matter the size of the group—planned what would become the months-long occupation of a small private park near Wall Street named Zuccotti Park. It was Graeber who, among other things, suggested they call themselves “the 99%.” In the following weeks, Graeber, in interviews and essays, provided some of the most articulate encapsulations of the ideas animating the nebulous movement known as Occupy Wall Street.

His book Debt: The First 5,000 Years, published a few months earlier, would become an intellectual touchstone for the occupation, arguing that the concept of debt, whether applied by ancient despots, colonial powers, or modern investment banks peddling mortgage-backed securities, had a long and sordid past. “If history shows anything,” Graeber wrote, “it is that there’s no better way to justify relations founded on violence, to make such relations seem moral, than by reframing them in the language of debt—above all, because it immediately makes it seem that it’s the victim who’s doing something wrong. Mafiosi understand this.” Graeber’s book includes a description of 18th century English debtors’ prisons, where aristocratic inmates served out their brief sentences being waited on by liveried servants, while poor debtors were shackled to the walls of filthy, tiny cells. In the wake of the housing collapse and Too Big to Fail, the resonance was hard to miss.

profiled Graeber for Bloomberg Businessweek during Occupy Wall Street, and he was already starting to think about other things: Why were the fruits of technological innovation so lame? Why are so many jobs so unfulfilling? Why do we still work so much? He’d tackle these topics in future essays, books, and “work rants.” Were the arguments sometimes simplistic? Yes. Were straw men avoided and opposing points of view soberly weighed? They were not. Graeber was a polemicist, and a delightful one. To read his writing was to find oneself suddenly ping-ponging through thousands of years of history, so that the Hindu Vedas are in conversation with the stand-up comedian Steve Wright, the divorce proceedings of George W. Bush’s brother Neil open a window into the African Lele people’s concept of blood debt, and where corporations, emerging from Medieval canon law, “are the most peculiarly European addition to that endless proliferation of metaphysical entities so characteristic of the Middle Ages—as well as the most enduring.”

In 2015, the year after Ferguson, Mo., broke out in angry demonstrations after a white police officer shot and killed a young black man named Michael Brown, Graeber wrote a piece in Gawker entitled “Ferguson and the Criminalization of American Life.” Citing a recent U.S. Department of Justice investigation of the Ferguson Police Department, he pointed out that, at the time, more than three-quarters of the residents of Ferguson had warrants outstanding for their arrest, most for such things as unpaid parking tickets or unmowed lawns. Because those fines made up a significant chunk of the city’s operating budget, there was institutional pressure to issue as many citations as possible and to make the fines costly. The police, in other words, were acting as the enforcement arm of a shakedown operation. “What the racism of Ferguson's criminal justice system produced is simply a nightmarish caricature of something that is beginning to happen on every level of American life,” Graeber wrote. “Most Americans no longer feel that the institutions of government are, or even could be, on their side. Because increasingly, in a very basic sense, they're not.”

Anthropologist and Occupy Wall Street Leader David Graeber Dies at 59
David Graeber was known as a leader in the Occupy Wall Street movement

By Ashley Boucher September 03, 2020 

David Graeber 
HIROYUKI ITO/GETTY IMAGES

David Graeber, an anthropologist and professor, has died. He was 59.

Graeber died on Wednesday in Venice after he was taken to a hospital by ambulance, CNN reported Thursday. His cause of death has not been released.

"Yesterday the best person in a world, my husband and my friend .@davidgraeber died in a hospital in Venice," his wife Nika Dubrovsky wrote on Twitter

Known for anarchist views and as a leader in the Occupy Wall Street movement, Graeber was a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics. He also previously taught at Yale University and Goldsmiths, University of London.

Yesterday the best person in a world, my husband and my friend .@davidgraeber died in a hospital in Venice.— Nika Dubrovsky (@nikadubrovsky) September 3, 2020

We are very shocked and saddened to learn of David Graeber's death. David was a hugely influential anthropologist, political activist and public intellectual. He will be greatly missed as a friend and colleague. His brilliant work will be read by generations to come. pic.twitter.com/wnZp4xGOaT— LSE Anthropology (@LSEAnthropology) September 3, 2020

"We are very shocked and saddened to learn of David Graeber's death," the London School of Economics said in a statement shared on Twitter. "David was a hugely influential anthropologist, political activist and public intellectual. He will be greatly missed as a friend and colleague. His brilliant work will be read by generations to come."

Graeber was the author of Bull— Jobs: A Theory, which was published in 2018 following a viral 2013 Strike! Magazine essay on the same topic. He also wrote Debt: The First 500 Years, The Utopia of Rules, The Democracy Project and several more.

David Graeber 
PIER MARCO TACCA/GETTY IMAGES
On his website, Graeber wrote that he tried to stay "actively engaged in social movements of one sort or another, insofar as I actually can, living in exile with a full-time job."

"I was involved in the initial meetings that helped set up Occupy Wall Street, for instance, and have been working with the Kurdish Freedom Movement in various capacities as well," he wrote, clarifying that while he has been credited with the "We are the 99 percent" slogan, coming up with the phrase was a group effort.



THEORY. UTOPIA. EMPATHY. EPHEMERAL ARTS – EST. 1990 – 
ATHENS LONDON NEW YORK



David Graeber died suddenly at 59
Published on September 3, 2020 in Global movement/Void Network News

We are shocked by the news- our friend and comrade David Graeber died suddenly in Venice. Graeber’s death was confirmed on the morning of September 3 by his wife, Nika Dubrovsky. Dubrovsky tweeted, “Yesterday the best person in a world, my husband and my friend David Graeber died in a hospital in Venice.”

Graeber was the professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics and wrote the book Debt: The First 5000 Years which was published in 2011. His other books include 2015’s Utopia Rules and 2018’s Bullshit Jobs: A Theory. In addition to his involvement with Occupy Wall Street, Graeber was also known for his activism with the Global Justice Movement.

Void Network had a long friendship and collaboration with David organizing his talks in Greece and sharing ideas, plans and vision. He was the most intelligent anarchist theoretician of our era and we feel heart borken loosing a great friend and comrade.

Ashes to ashes / Dust to dust

Long Live Anarchy

________

Tasos Sagris

Void Network [Theory, Utopia, Empathy, Ephemeral Arts] – http://voidnetwork.gr

“A revolution on a world scale will take a very long time. But it is also possible to recognize that it is already starting to happen. The easiest way to get our minds around it is to stop thinking about revolution as a thing — “the” revolution, the great cataclysmic break—and instead ask “what is revolutionary action?” We could then suggest: revolutionary action is any collective action which rejects, and therefore confronts, some form of power or domination and in doing so, reconstitutes social relations—even within the collectivity—in that light. Revolutionary action does not necessarily have to aim to topple governments. Attempts to create autonomous communities in the face of power (using Castoriadis’ definition
here: ones that constitute themselves, collectively make their own rules or principles of operation, and continually reexamine them), would, for
instance, be almost by definition revolutionary acts. And history shows us that the continual accumulation of such acts can change (almost) everything.”

-Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology

READ DAVID GRAEBER TEXTS here:

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/category/author/david-graeber

'Inspirational' activist author David Graeber dies
Graeber, who was a leading figure of the Occupy Wall Street movement, was 59.


04 SEPTEMBER 2020 PENGUIN BOOKS BLOG


David Graeber. Image: Getty

The writer, academic and political campaigner David Graeber has died at the age of 59. 

The author of Bullshit Jobs (2018) and The Democracy Project (2014), Graeber was also a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics and was a leading figure of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Known for his insightful critiques of capitalism, he popularised the phrase "we are the 99%". 

Graeber’s editor at Penguin Press, Tom Penn, said:

“We are devastated to learn of the passing of David Graeber. A voice of boundless influence both in the academy and in political culture, David was a true radical, a pioneer in everything that he did. David's inspirational work has changed and shaped the way people understand the world. 

“In his books, his constant, questing curiosity, his wry, sharp-eyed provoking of received nostrums shine through. So too, above all, does his unique ability to imagine a better world, borne out of his own deep and abiding humanity. We are deeply honoured to be his publisher, and we will all miss him: his kindness, his warmth, his wisdom, his friendship. His loss is incalculable, but his legacy is immense. His work and his spirit will live on.”

Bullshit Jobs was inspired by 2013 essay which went viral and described a society in which huge numbers of people were engaging in meaningless labour which resulted in psychological damage.

Graeber was also working on a new book, written with David Wengrove, The Dawn of Everything: a New History of Humanity, which is due to be published in autumn 2021.

Graeber's death was announced on Twitter by his wife, Nika Dubrovsky, who posted that he died in hospital in Venice. The cause of death has not yet been released.


David Graeber, anthropologist and author of Bullshit Jobs, dies aged 59

The anarchist and author of bestselling books on capitalism and bureaucracy died in a Venice hospital on Wednesday

‘There can be no objective measure of social value’ … David Graeber in 2015. Photograph: Frantzesco Kangaris/The Guardian

Sian Cain
@siancain
Thu 3 Sep 2020 16.18 BST

David Graeber, anthropologist and anarchist author of bestselling books on bureaucracy and economics including Bullshit Jobs: A Theory and Debt: The First 5,000 Years, has died aged 59.

On Thursday Graeber’s wife, the artist and writer Nika Dubrovsky, announced on Twitter that Graeber had died in hospital in Venice the previous day. The cause of death is not yet known.

Renowned for his biting and incisive writing about bureaucracy, politics and capitalism, Graeber was a leading figure in the Occupy Wall Street movement and professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics (LSE) at the time of his death. His final book, The Dawn of Everything: a New History of Humanity, written with David Wengrow, will be published in autumn 2021.

Caring too much. That's the curse of the working classes
David Graeber

Read more


The historian Rutger Bregman called Graeber “one of the greatest thinkers of our time and a phenomenal writer”, while the Guardian columnist Owen Jones called him “an intellectual giant, full of humanity, someone whose work inspired and encouraged and educated so many”. The Labour MP John McDonnell wrote: “I counted David as a much valued friend and ally. His iconoclastic research and writing opened us all up to fresh thinking and such innovative approaches to political activism. We will all miss him hugely.”

Tom Penn, Graeber’s editor at Penguin Random House, said the publishing house was “devastated” and called Graeber “a true radical, a pioneer in everything that he did”.

“David’s inspirational work has changed and shaped the way people understand the world. In his books, his constant, questing curiosity, his wry, sharp-eyed provoking of received nostrums shine through. So too, above all, does his unique ability to imagine a better world, borne out of his own deep and abiding humanity,” Penn said. “We are deeply honoured to be his publisher, and we will all miss him: his kindness, his warmth, his wisdom, his friendship. His loss is incalculable, but his legacy is immense. His work and his spirit will live on.”

Born in New York in 1961 to two politically active parents – his father fought in the Spanish civil war with the International Brigades, while his mother was a member of the international Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union – Graeber first attracted academic attention for his teenage hobby of translating Mayan hieroglyphs. After studying anthropology at the State University of New York at Purchase and the University of Chicago, he won a prestigious Fulbright fellowship and spent two years doing anthropological fieldwork in Madagascar.


David Graeber interview: ‘So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary’
Read more


In 2005, Yale decided against renewing his contract a year before he would have secured tenure. Graeber suspected it was because of his politics; when more than 4,500 colleagues and students signed petitions supporting him, Yale instead offered him a year’s paid sabbatical, which he accepted and moved to the UK to work at Goldsmiths before joining LSE. “I guess I had two strikes against me,” he told the Guardian in 2015. “One, I seemed to be enjoying my work too much. Plus I’m from the wrong class: I come from a working-class background.”

His 2011 book Debt: The First 5,000 Years, made him famous. In it, Graeber explored the violence that lies behind all social relations based on money, and called for a wiping out of sovereign and consumer debts. While it divided critics, it attracted strong sales and praise from everyone from Thomas Piketty to Russell Brand.

Graeber followed it in 2013 with The Democracy Project: A History, a Crisis, a Movement, about his work with Occupy Wall Street, then The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy in 2015, which was inspired by his struggle to settle his mother’s affairs before she died. A 2013 article, On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs, led to Bullshit Jobs: A Theory, his 2018 book in which he argued that most white-collar jobs were meaningless and that technological advances had led to people working more, not less.

“Huge swaths of people, in Europe and North America in particular, spend their entire working lives performing tasks they believe to be unnecessary. The moral and spiritual damage that comes from this situation is profound. It is a scar across our collective soul. Yet virtually no one talks about it,” he told the Guardian in 2015 – even admitting that his own work could be meaningless: “There can be no objective measure of social value.”

Why is the world ignoring the revolutionary Kurds in Syria?
David Graeber
Read more


An anarchist since his teens, Graeber was a supporter of the Kurdish freedom movement and the “remarkable democratic experiment” he could see in Rojava, an autonomous region in Syria. He became heavily involved in activism and politics in the late 90s. He was a pivotal figure in the Occupy Wall Street movement in 2011 – though he denied that he had come up with the slogan “We are the 99%”, for which he was frequently credited.

“I did first suggest that we call ourselves the 99%. Then two Spanish indignados and a Greek anarchist added the ‘we’ and later a food-not-bombs veteran put the ‘are’ between them. And they say you can’t create something worthwhile by committee! I’d include their names but considering the way police intelligence has been coming after early OWS organisers, maybe it would be better not to,” he wrote

David Graeber dies aged 59: "One of the most original anthropologists"

 by  on Sep 4, 2020 in anthropology (general)persons and theories

A few hours ago I was shocked to read that David Graeber has died. He was only 59 years old. Graeber was one the most known and most original anthropologists in the world. He was one of the leading figures of the Occupy movement and got famous among the general public with his books on Debt and Bullshit Jobs.

There is still no official information about what happened besides from that he died in a hospital, according to his wife who tweeted:

https://twitter.com/nikadubrovsky/status/1301504647769792512

David Graeber has always been one of my favorite anthropologists. I liked the way he combined anthropology with activism and search for alternatives to capitalism and other oppressive ideologies and systems. One of the first pieces I read by him was Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology. Everytime there was something in the news about him, I was eager to write about it (while I was still active blogging).

David Graeber in 2006.
Photo: Lorenz Khazaleh

My first encounter with him was here on antropologi.info. He commented om some reviews about his Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology that I linked to and criticized some of his points. Two years later, we met at a conference about anthropology and cosmopolitanism in Britain and chatted a bit about anthropology and the internet and probably also about conference culture. I stíll remember very well that his presentation was one of the highlights, not only because of its content ("Democracy is no Western invention"), but also because of his presentation style. In contrast to most other paper givers, he was actually able to communicate with the audience and use normal language to express complex ideas.

Three years after the conference, in 2009, we ended up in a little fight here on this blog. He had just just signed a petition calling for boycotting Israel and I had blogged about it, using his name in the headline. He did not like this exposure. On the one hand his reaction was surprising, on the other hand it was somehow understandable: His activism had caused him lots of trouble already. A few years before this blog post he was fired from Yale, most likely because of his activism.

The most recent publication by him that I enjoyed is the audio book of his bestseller Bullshit Jobs: A Theory. I listened to it on long walks last summer. "Such a wise book", I often thought while listening. "You learn so much more than just about the book's topic. I definitely should blog about it."

Many more substantial texts have been written about David Graeber's death already, see among others David Graeber: 1961-2020 by Greg Downey at Neuroanthropology who links to a long post with many videos on the website heavy.com: David Graeber Dead: Anthropologist & Anti-Capitalist Thinker Behind ‘We Are the 99%’ Slogan Dies at 59. Interestingly, all major news sites write about him, see Deutsche Welle: Anthropologist and Occupy activist David Graeber dies and last time I checked David Graeber, anthropologist and author of Bullshit Jobs, dies aged 59 has been the most read news story on The Guardian.

UPDATES:

Tribute by his friend and anthropologist Vito Laterza on facebook

Anarchist dissident and historian Andrej Grubacic: In loving memory of our friend, comrade, and mentor…David Graeber Including the introduction from the forthcoming Mutual Aid: An Illuminated Factor of Evolution by David Graeber and Andrej Grubačić

This entry was posted by admin and filed under anthropology (general)persons and theories..


David Graeber, anarchist anthropologist who defended Corbyn, dies at 59
Cnaan Liphshiz


The Baffler presents "No Future for You: David Graeber versus Peter Thiel" at General Society of Mechanics and Tradesmen on Friday night, September 19, 2014.This image:The anthropologist David Graeber in a debate.(Photo by Hiroyuki Ito/Getty Images)Hiroyuki Ito

(JTA) — David Graeber, an anthropologist and self-described anarchist, has died. He was 59.

A well-known figure in far-left circles in the United States and the United Kingdom, Graeber was the author of several books, including “Bullshit Jobs: A Theory,” which was ranked at number 13 in the Los Angeles Times’ July 2018 list of bestsellers in the hardcover nonfiction category.

He died in Venice, Italy, on Wednesday, The Guardian wrote in an obituary. The paper had no information on the cause of death.

The New York-born Graeber was a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics known for “his biting and incisive writing about bureaucracy, politics and capitalism,” the obituary said.

“His iconoclastic research and writing opened us all up to fresh thinking and such innovative approaches to political activism,” said John McDonnell, a Labour lawmaker who had served as second-in-command under former party leader Jeremy Corbyn, according to the Guardian. “We will all miss him hugely.”

In recent years, Graeber had come out in defense of Corbyn, who has faced allegations of anti-Semitism, including by the current and previous chief rabbis of the U.K.

“What actually threatens Jews, the people who actually want to kill us, are Nazis,” he said in one video. The allegations against Corbyn represented the “weaponization” of anti-Semitism, he said in another.


The post David Graeber, anarchist anthropologist who defended Corbyn, dies at 59 appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.


September 04, 2020
David Graeber, Occupy activist and anthropologist, dies at 59


NEWS 
OBITUARIES

David Graeber, Occupy activist and anthropologist, dies at 59
September 3, 2020
Image by Getty/Pier Marco Tacca/Co...

David Graeber, the anthropologist who played a pivotal role in Occupy Wall Street and devoted his academic career to the study of societal inequality and “bullshit jobs,” died September 2 at the age of 59.

Graeber’s death was confirmed on Twitter by his wife, Nika Dubrovsky, who said he died at a hospital in Venice, Italy. No cause of death was given.

Graeber was known for his outspoken politics. He was a founding member of the Anti-Capitalist Convergence, an anarchist group formed in the late 1990s with various chapters throughout North America. He nonetheless rejected the label of anarchist — at least sometimes — noting in his Twitter bio “I see anarchism as something you do not an identity so don’t call me the anarchist anthropologist.”

Born in 1961 in New York, Graeber was brought up in [a revolutionary milieu. His father, Kenneth, served in the Spanish Civil War and was a member of the Youth Communist League. Ruth, his mother, was a garment worker, who acted in the lead role in “Pins and Needles,” a production by the Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union. According to a Guardian profile from 2015, Graeber began identifying as an anarchist at the age of 16. “Anarchy wasn’t dinner table conversation,” he told The New York Times in 2005, “but it was on the horizon.”

A graduate of Phillips Academy Andover, Graeber received his B.A. from the SUNY Purchase in 1984 and earned his master’s and doctorate in anthropology from the University of Chicago, securing a Fulbright fellowship to conduct field research in Madagascar for his doctoral thesis. In 1998, he became an assistant professor at Yale. But in 2005, the school decided not to keep him on for the next academic year. The school gave no reason at the time, but he believed that it was because of his politics.

Graeber rallied supporters to write letters on his behalf (some 4,500 signed petitions supporting him, including prominent anthropologists Marshall Sahlins, Laura Nader, Michael Taussig, and Maurice Bloch), but agreed to take a paid sabbatical from the school in exchange for dropping his appeal.

“So many academics lead such frightened lives,” he told The Times of his decision. “The whole system sometimes seems designed to encourage paranoia and timidity. I wasn’t willing to live like that.”

Graeber acknowledged that, as an anarchist in an Ivy Tower, he was “challenging the way universities are run,” but said he had hoped to live as an activist in New York and a scholar in New Haven.

In 2011, Graeber’s activism crescendoed when he became involved with the Occupy Wall Street protesters at Zuccotti Park. Graeber is often credited with creating that movement’s most recognizable slogan, “We are the 99%.”

“We wanted to demonstrate we could do all the services that social service providers do without endless bureaucracy,” Graeber told The Guardian four years after the Occupy protests began. “People kept giving us money but we weren’t going to put it in the bank. You have all these rules and regulations. And Occupy Wall Street can’t have a bank account. I always say the principle of direct action is the defiant insistence on acting as if one is already free.”

As an anthropologist, Graeber was known for his work on value theory, or how societies determine what is important. His 10 books covered the topics of the value theory, global justice and the Occupy Movement’s experiment in direct democracy. His best-known books included “Debt: The First 5000 Years” and 2018’s “Bullshit Jobs: A Theory,” inspired by his 2013 article “On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs.”

“Bullshit jobs” are, essentially, any kind of work that could be automated or that serves no essential purpose, but are kept in place anyway, despite leaving their workers feeling unfulfilled. “Huge swaths of people, in Europe and North America in particular, spend their entire working lives performing tasks they believe to be unnecessary,” Graeber told The Guardian. “The moral and spiritual damage that comes from this situation is profound. It is a scar across our collective soul. Yet virtually no one talks about it.”

At the time of his death, Graeber had been a professor at the London School of Economics for seven years. In London, he continued his activism, addressing the climate change group Extinction Rebellion in a demonstration at Trafalgar Square in late 2019. He was a supporter of Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party, and his pinned tweet was a graph alleging falsehoods in various British publications surrounding their coverage of the Labour’s alleged antisemitism problem.

as for the Guardian, we will never forget that during the “Labour #antisemitism controversy”, they beat even the Daily Mail to include the largest percentage of false statements, pretty much every one, mysteriously, an accidental error to Labour’s disadvantage pic.twitter.com/XiwYsVMOiZ— David Graeber (@davidgraeber) December 26, 2019

He was not shy to disagree with those he allied with either. His final tweet criticized a statement from the UK chapter of Extinction Rebellion’s Twitter account for being exclusionary.

I don’t know who writes these tweets but they should be fired. This is either awful PR or intentionally trying to alienate someone for internal political reasons. If you’re non-ideological, doesn’t that mean you’re not socialist OR pro-capitalist? Why leave one of the two out? https://t.co/vYxmZqsckD— David Graeber (@davidgraeber) September 2, 2020

For all of his critiques of managerialism and society’s broader flaws, Graeber described himself as ultimately hopeful about the future, telling the New Statesman he was a “professional optimist.”

Coming out in support of a Universal Basic Income, he predicted that in 50 years, the capitalist system would be obsolete. Yet, he was guarded about any replacement. “It could be something even worse. It’s therefore imperative that we end this taboo around trying to figure out something that might be better.”


Occupy Wall Street: A Year Later brittany Oct 19, 2012


David Graeber Apr 8, 2015

Anarchic Revolution and Traditional Judaism 
Yoel Matveev Dec 9, 2010
PJ Grisar is the Forward’s culture reporter. He can be reached at Grisar@Forward.com.


On the death of David Graeber: There is no alternative to an anarchist
His books on debt and "bullshit jobs" made him world famous. David Graeber was one of the most original critics of capitalism that today's left has.  


9/4/2020

When he came along with his gilet and his leather bag, dragging his legs a bit, bowing his head a little forward and always that smile on his face, he had something of an older boy who looked much younger than he was.

And now this news: David Graeber died in Venice.

He was 59 years old. 

There are not many left-wing radicals who do not allow left-wing radicalism to degenerate into clowning, but rather mean it, and who at the same time become global superstars and bestselling authors.

"Anarchist" he called himself - or was named - but whether he really was one can be debated.

He was simply of the opinion that people would cultivate solidarity with one another and take care of one another if they were not cooped up in repressive structures, and he was convinced that "power corrupts".

He did not feel he belonged to other leftist tendencies or even parties, so perhaps he was more of an anarchist for lack of a better alternative.

Graeber still had something of the habitus of earlier revolutionaries and intellectuals, the self-indulgent pomposity of some academic leftists was not his thing, he was much more modest there.

Perhaps that has something to do with his origin.

Graeber grew up in a left-wing Jewish working class family, his father fought in the Spanish Civil War.

The American anthropologist, who had been teaching in London for years, was made world-famous and a figure on the international left by the financial crisis ten years ago.

His book of 
debt. The first 5,000 years was an event, of course also because gambling banks, loans and government budget deficits were the topic of the hour.

Graeber dismantled a few myths and looked at what seemed to be taken for granted with a new, sharp look.

Social relations determined by money produce violence, dehumanization, slavery, he wrote.

Payment relationships established hierarchical relationships between power and powerlessness.

Where everyone is in debt, many only run for survival.

Myths of origin, such as the economy loves, such as the fairy tale that earlier societies simply exchanged use values, Graeber brushed off the table: Such societies never existed.

People have always used equivalents to facilitate exchange.

But money, in the form of banknotes and coins, was very rare until the early modern period.

You didn't need a lot of it if everyone wrote to them and settled no more than twice a year.

Graeber also pointed to the moral questions that come with debt.

To this day we believe that a debtor is somehow "morally obliged" to repay his debts.

But why at all?

After all, the creditor has lent him money, is hoping for a return - the interest - but at the same time knows about the risk of a loan default. But why is it primarily the debtor that we give moral persecution to?

"A wonderful and helpful book", a "liberation", Frank Schirrmacher celebrated at the time in the
FAZ on a whole page of the book, which contributed not insignificantly to Graeber's fame in Germany.

Revolutions, wars, upheavals: they almost always have to do with over-indebtedness.

Of course, I could object to Graeber that debt relationships in premodern societies are not comparable to the investment credit that led to exponential economic growth in capitalism.

All of this was a wonderful thing to discuss with him, and he was speaking at what felt like fifteen thousand words a minute in his New York working class accent.

Source: zei

David Graeber, a writer and activist famous for popularizing the phrase’We are the 99%’ died




MORTIMER NELSON SEP 04, 202O\


Graeber was a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics and a keen criticism of capitalism and bureaucracy and his Anarchist view.

His book “Bullshit Jobs: A Theory” was inspired by an essay from 2013 and made word of mouth. Graeber is a large herb Much of society was working in meaningless jobs that ultimately resulted in psychological consequences. His book “Debt: The First 5,000 Years” focused on the history of how people use credit systems to buy and sell goods.

“David was a very influential anthropologist, political activist and public intellectual,” said Laura Bear, director of the Department of Anthropology at the London School of Economics, in a CNN statement.

“He will be greatly missed as a friend and colleague in our department. The community of our staff and students will not be the same now. But his great work will be read over the next generations.”
Graeber’s wife Nika Dubrovsky wrote about his death. From a post on Twitter.

“Yesterday the best man in the world, my husband and my friend. @davidgraeber died in a hospital in Venice,” she wrote.

The hospital’s press room told CNN that Graeber was in Venice on Wednesday and was not feeling well and his family called an ambulance. His signature has not yet been revealed.
Graeber was born and raised in New York by working class parents. He wrote on his website. His father was a plate stripper who fought as part of an international brigade in the Spanish Civil War, and his mother was a clothing worker who starred female in the musical “Finn and Needle”.

He said on his website that he entered anthropology “after being discovered by some Maya archaeologists because of the strange hobby I developed to translate Maya hieroglyphs.” He earned a bachelor’s degree in anthropology from the State University of New York in 1984.
READ Netanyahu to condone undisclosed plans to sell US arms to UAE: report

Having worked in several places, including Chicago and Madagascar, Graeber became a professor at Yale University. The university’s decision not to continue his contract in 2004 was controversial at the time, and Graeber and others suggested that the decision may have been motivated by his anarchist activism.

Graeber worked at London University’s Goldsmiths from 2007 to 2013 before becoming a professor at the London School of Economics.

Graeber has been involved in the alternative globalization movement since 2000 and was part of the initial meeting that launched Occupy Wall Street. He was credited with popularizing the movement’s slogan “We are 99%”, but pointed out that he did not come up with it.

“No, I personally didn’t come up with the slogan’We are 99%’,” he wrote. “At first we offered to call ourselves 99%. Then two Spanish Indigna and Greek anarchists added “us” and later a non-bomb food veteran put “are” between them. And They say you can’t. Make something worthwhile on the committee!”

CNN’s Brian Ries and Valentina DiDonato contributed to this report.


Mortimer Nelson
Evil tv buff. Troublemaker. Coffee practitioner. Unapologetic problem solver. Bacon ninja. Thinker. Professional food enthusiast.

David Graeber Dead: Anthropologist & Anti-Capitalist Thinker Behind ‘We Are the 99%’ Slogan Dies at 59

David Graeber Dead

Twitter/David GraeberDavid Graeber pictured on his Twitter page in December 2019.

David Graeber, the anthropologist who was influential in the Occupy Wall Street movement and is believed to have coined the phrase, “We are the 99%,” has died at age 59.

Graeber’s death was confirmed on the morning of September 3 by his wife, Nika Dubrovsky. Dubrovsky tweeted, “Yesterday the best person in a world, my husband and my friend . @davidgraeber died in a hospital in Venice.”

Graeber was a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics and wrote the book Debt: The First 5000 Years which was published in 2011. His other books include 2015’s The Utopia of Rules and 2018’s Bullshit Jobs: A Theory. In addition to his involvement with Occupy Wall Street, Graeber was also known for his activism with the Global Justice Movement. On his Twitter page, Graeber described himself as “an anthropologist, sometimes I occupy things & such. I see anarchism as something you do not an identity so don’t call me the anarchist anthropologist.”

Here’s what you need to know:


1. Graeber Said on August 28 That He Was ‘Under the Weather’ but Was Starting to Feel Better

apologies and about that exciting new pirate book!sorry we've been sick and on holidays but the kings book is ready! Also, we're going to do another one. The next one will be about pirates. And pirates are much better than kings.2020-08-28T20:27:27Z

On August 28, Graeber said in a YouTube video that he had been feeling “a little under the weather” but was beginning to feel better. The same day, Graeber tweeted that he had “not been in tip-top shape.”

On August 31, Dubrovsky tweeted a photo from Venice with the caption, “Venice. Dark, wet and chilly.” Graeber was active on Twitter until the day before his death.

In August 2020, Graeber was interviewed in a special edition of the street newspaper The Big Issue. The special edition was edited by British singer Jarvis Cocker.

David Graeber on the Occupy Wall Street Protest & Forgiving Debt of the American PoorDemocracyNow.org – As President Obama prepares to outline a deficit-reduction plan that includes tax increases, as well as cuts to programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, anthropologist David Graeber proposes a radical solution: cancel the debt of the nation's poor. "Debts between the very wealthy or between governments can always be renegotiated and always have been throughout world history. They are not anything set in stone," says Graeber, author of "Debt: The First 5,000 Years," on Democracy Now! today. "It's generally speaking when you have debts owed by the poor to the rich, debts becomes a sacred situation, more important than anything else. The idea of renegotiating them becomes unthinkable." On the Occupy Wall Street protest, Graeber says, "If you look at who showed up [in Egypt and Spain], it was mostly young people, and most of them were people who had gone through the educational system who were deeply in debt and who found it completely impossible to find jobs. … The system has completely failed them … If there's going to be any kind of society worth living in, we're going to have to create it ourselves." For the complete transcript, to download the podcast, or for additional Democracy Now! reports about the U.S. financial crisis, visit http://www.democracynow.org/ FOLLOW DEMOCRACY NOW! ONLINE: Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/democracynow Twitter: @democracynow Subscribe on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/democracynow Daily Email News Digest: http://www.democracynow.org/subscribe Please consider supporting independent media by making a donation to Democracy Now! today, visit http://www.democracynow.org/donate/YT2011-09-19T15:04:33Z

According to Graeber’s LinkedIn page, he is a graduate of SUNY Purchase and attained a Ph.D. in anthropology from the University of Chicago in 1996. Graeber’s first teaching job was as an assistant professor of anthropology at Haverford College. In 1998, Graeber began working as an associate professor at Yale University. He remained in that role until June 2007. Since September 2007, Graeber had been teaching at the University of London’s School of Economics, according to LinkedIn. A profile on SUNY Purchase’s website referred to Graeber as “one of the most brilliant minds of his generation.”


2. Graeber Suspected His Teaching Contract at Yale Was Discontinued Because of His ‘Radical Actions’

david graeber

Getty

2011 Rolling Stone article attributed the phrase “We are the 99%” to Graeber in a piece on the Occupy Wall Street movement. The phrase had been mentioned by economist Josep Stiglitz’s in a May 2011 article for Vanity Fair. Rolling Stone reported that Graeber suspected his teaching job at Yale was discontinued because of his “radical actions.” The article also said he decamped to Austin, Texas, four days after the physical protest began in Zuccotti Park in New York City.

In a March 2015 interview with The Guardian, Graeber referred to the Occupy movement as an “experiment in a post-bureaucratic society.” Graeber said demonstrators wanted to show the public that people could perform the functions of a bank without bureaucracy. He said during the protests there was a plastic bag in Zuccotti Park holding $800,000 in donations because “Occupy Wall Street can’t have a bank account.” Graeber said, “I always say the principle of direct action is the defiant insistence on acting as if one is already free.”


3. Graeber Previously Described Himself as an ‘Eternal Optimist’

David Graeber: debt and what the government doesn't want you to know | Comment is FreeThere is one taboo of economics that the government is hiding from the public, argues David Graeber: it is the fact that if the government balances its books, it becomes impossible for the private sector to do the same. Subscribe to The Guardian ► http://is.gd/subscribeguardian And, he claims, this inevitable debt often gets landed on those in society least able to pay it back. Guardian website ► http://is.gd/guardianhome Endboard videos: ► ► Guardian playlists: Comment is Free ► http://is.gd/cifplaylist Guardian Docs ► http://is.gd/guardiandocs Guardian Animations & Explanations ►http://is.gd/explainers Guardian Investigations ► http://is.gd/guardianinvestigations Other Guardian channels on YouTube: Guardian Football ► http://is.gd/guardianfootball Guardian Music ► http://is.gd/guardianYTmusic Guardian Australia ► http://is.gd/guardianaustralia Guardian Tech ► http://is.gd/guardiantech Guardian Culture ► http://is.gd/guardianculture Guardian Wires ► http://is.gd/guardianwires Guardian Food ► http://is.gd/guardianfood Watch Me Date ► http://is.gd/watchmedate More Guardian videos: Mos Def force fed in Gitmo procedure ► http://is.gd/mosdef Edward Snowden interview ► http://is.gd/snowdeninterview2014 Bangladeshi Sex Workers take steroids ► http://is.gd/sexworkers How your phone spies on you ► http://is.gd/phonespying What is freedom today? ► http://is.gd/zizekcif 30 Stone man enters Mr Gay UK ► http://is.gd/stavros Fighting Isis in Kobani ► http://is.gd/fightingisis How does Ebola kill? ► http://is.gd/ebolakills The SlumGods of Mumbai ► http://is.gd/slumgods Jesus "would have been an atheist" ► http://is.gd/dawkinsjesus The new global menace ► http://is.gd/owenjonescif2015-10-28T13:00:02Z

In 2018, Graeber told the New Statesman that he was born in New York to self-educated parents. His father, Kenneth, fought on the side of the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War, Graeber said. Later, his mother, Ruth, worked as a garment worker and was active in the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union, he said. Graeber said in the interview that he was raised in an environment that embraced anarchism.

Graeber told the New Statesman that he thought of himself as an “eternal optimist.” He added that he felt that in 50 years a new system would be in place that was not capitalist. Graeber warned, “It could be something even worse. It’s therefore imperative that we end this taboo around trying to figure out something that might be better. If we don’t get something better, it will be something worse – it won’t be the same.”


4. Graeber Married His Wife Nika Dubrovsky in April 2019

Twitter/Nika DubrovskyGraeber pictured with his wife on their wedding day in April 2019.

Graeber married Nika Dubrovsky in April 2019. On April 25, Dubrovsky tweeted a photo of the couple with the caption, “Going for a wedding.” Graeber retweeted the photo and added, “I’ve never been married before.” He also said, “I have never been more moved than that someone who actually knows me would want to be with me forever.”

Graeber has tweeted in the past that his wife is a native of St. Petersburg, Russia, and grew up in the Soviet-era. Graeber tweeted that his wife struggled to watch the United Kingdom’s public broadcaster the BBC because it reminded her too much of the Soviet propaganda of her youth. In 2019, the couple founded Yes Women, an art group that sought justice for ostracized women in the former East Germany.


5. Graeber Is Being Mourned on Social Media by His Peers as One of the Greatest Minds of His Generation

Twitter/Nika DubrovskyGraeber and his wife pictured in Berlin, Germany, on August 4.

As news spread of Graeber’s death, his peers and fans took to Twitter to mourn him. Here are some of the most poignant messages of remembrance:

ANARCHIST, Anthropologist and Occupy activist
David Graeber dies

David Graeber, one of the key minds behind the Occupy Wall Street movement, has died at the age of 59. He was a leading voice in the global social justice movement.


Anthropologist and influential anarchist intellectual David Graeber passed away, his wife Nika Dubrovsky confirmed on Thursday. He was an important voice in prompting the 2011 Occupy Wall Street protest movement in New York City.

Dubrovsky and Graeber were on holiday in Venice, Italy, when the 59-year-old author and activist fell ill. The cause of his death has not been confirmed.

Graeber has frequently been dubbed an "anarchist anthropologist" but in his own Twitter bio, the London School of Economics professor said he saw "anarchism as something you do, not an identity," and urged people not to use the label of "anarchist anthropologist" to describe him.

Former Greek finance minister and economist Yanis Varoufakis lamented Graeber's honored his work on debt in a Twitter about the author.

On August 28, he addressed followers of his YouTube account saying he was "under the weather" and was still active on Twitter until September 2.

His sudden passing deals a blow to the global social justice movement which is heavily influenced by Graeber's ideas. Born and raised in New York City, Graeber identified himself as a son of working class parents and in his career, he sought to harness his anthropological training to better understand economics.

Occupy Wall Street and activism

In Graeber's bio on his own website, the anthropologist says he "only really became active in any meaningful way" after becoming involved with the Alter-Globalization movement in the beginning of 2000. He says was involved in the initial meetings that helped establish the Occupy Wall Street movement in the heart of New York's financial district.

"It might be said that all my work since has been exploring the relation between anthropology as an intellectual pursuit, and practical attempts to create a free society, free, at least, of capitalism, patriarchy, and coercive state bureaucracies," he added.

Dutch historian and author Rutger Bregman said Graeber would be remembered as ''one of the greatest thinkers of our time'.'

In a 2011 opinion article for The Guardian, Graeber wrote that he saw the movement as "the opening salvo in a wave of negotiations over the dissolution of the American Empire."

Graeber was an influential voice the 2011 Occupy Wall Street protest movement in New York City seen pictured here in 2012

From debt to 'bullshit jobs'

While his activism has centered on global economics, Graeber's academic career has centered on anthropology. He obtained a BA on the subject from State University of New York, at Purchase, in 1984 and later received a PhD in 1996 from the University of Chicago, based on anthropological fieldwork in highland Madagascar.

Seemingly incongruous, Graeber melded the economics and anthropology for his authored works. One of his most celebrated books, "Debt: The First 5,000 Years" he sought to explain the concept of debt across human civilization.

Read more: Global debt levels surging, but keep your calm

More recently, his book on "Bullshits job: a theory" explored how and why technology has created more unnecessary jobs than was predicted and identifying the capitalist system as the cause.

"Huge swathes of people, in Europe and North America in particular, spend their entire working lives performing tasks they secretly believe do not really need to be performed. The moral and spiritual damage that comes from this situation is profound. It is a scar across our collective soul," he explained in the essay upon which the book was based.

At the time of his passing, the US-born Graeber was active in the London School of Economics faculty of anthropology and resided in the city of London.
Criticisms

Graeber's work was heavily criticized by economists and leaders in the US business community. His books were often dismissed or rejected as leftist political rhetoric.

Economist and Bloomberg columnist Noah Smith described Graeber's book on debt as ''a sprawling, rambling, confused book, mostly about economic history, mixed with some political and moral philosophy.''

Book critic and scholar Paul W. Gleason took aim at Graeber's narrow focus on economic conditions as a sign of human fulfillment in his book about "bullshit jobs."

''While humans are social animals, Graeber focuses overwhelmingly on the meaning and purpose that come from creativity and achievement. He mostly neglects the meaning found in belonging. Families, churches, unions, neighborhoods or even nations, no less than workplaces, can all bestow identity and a sense of purpose,'' Gleason wrote. 

Occupy author examines archeology of debt

Few books have provoked the kind of media hype, discussion and praise that David Graeber's "'Debt: The Last 5,000 Years" has in the past few weeks. DW looks at the movement and the man behind the book.

    

He doesn't stay in one place for long. One minute David Graeber is in London, where he teaches anthropology at Goldsmith College, the next he's in Frankfurt at Blockupy, then in Cologne and Berlin for book releases, next stop New York. It's no wonder that Graeber is so busy: He's published three books in 40 days.

The best-known of the three, "Debt: The First 5,000 Years," was described by journalist and political talk show host Maybritt Illner and culture presenter Dieter Moor as "perhaps the most important book of the year." With the three publications, the man whose slogan is "We are the 99 percent" - now deeply ingrained in the system-critical Occupy movement - has managed to attract more attention than any of his fellow-campaigners before him.

He's an activist, anarchist and anthropologist who appears in all the most influential feuilletons. But what does Graeber have to say for himself?

Chronicling the history of debt

Debt: The Last 5000 Years is a radical look at the roots of the current economic crisis

"Debt: The Last 5,000 Years" is a radical look at the roots of the current economic crisis

In 400 pages, Graeber chronicles the history of debt and, with that, the history of humanity. He begins the book with a slick, but provocative sentence: "Debt doesn't have to be repaid."

He then goes on to describe the economic systems of various indigenous groups and the invention of coinage, finally landing in the present. The assumption that barter trade was initially in existence before it was simplified with the introduction of coinage and later the credit system is, he concludes, idiocy.

Credit systems were in existence long before the invention of money. People who live together in a community are constantly lending things and helping each another, so everyone owes a debt in one way or another. But these debts have nothing to do with money, argues Graeber.

Graeber shows that debt has a moral dimension. He finds it remarkable that the moral imperative that debt must be repaid is now considered more important than other moral and ethical obligations. Why else could it be that governments in poor countries prioritize debt repayments over the basic nutritional requirement of their citizens? Debt, says Graeber, is a moral principle merely enforcing the power of the ruling classes, leading to the repression of the masses.

This system can't function forever. When too many people are in debt, uprisings and revolutions occur. The solution? Debt cancellation, says Graeber.

Success story

FAZ editor Frank Schirrmacher described Graeber's book as a revelation

FAZ editor Frank Schirrmacher described Graeber's book as a "revelation"

This demand is in keeping with Graeber's style, having in the past represented a number of radical positions. He has no allegiance to any political party, calls himself an anarchist, is a member of the union Industrial Workers of the World and has researched power and the meaning of history and slavery in Madagascar. Graeber taught at Yale until 2007 when his contract was controversially not renewed. Critics believe the decision was politically motivated.

The 51-year-old American has secured himself a place on the bestseller list of Germany's prominent news magazine Der Spiegel, reaching fourth place last month. The success story of the book began in fall 2011 with the English edition. The editor of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Frank Schirrmacher, wrote that the book was "a revelation because the author has shown that one is no longer obliged to react in the system of apparent economic rationality." This review made Graeber's risqué theses socially acceptable.

But the media hype really began when the German translation of the book was published in May, in conjunction with the release of Graeber's "Inside Occupy," a monograph about the Occupy movement. The book reveals much about Graeber's political background: He was involved in the Occupy protests as an organizer and follower right from the start, while simultaneously analyzing, promoting and shaping the movement.

All of the major German newspapers were talking about Graeber - Süddeutsche Zeitung, TAZ, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Welt, Der Spiegel and Stern to name just a few. Most critiques of the book were benevolent. Graeber's theories were described as brilliant, illuminating, exciting. Graeber translated between worlds, between critics and supporters of the system, between academics and the media. He presented his complex theories in bite-size, easy to understand sections. He interrupts analyses to build strands of thought, while still remaining entertaining.

Playing by the rules

The media have called Graeber the brains behind the Occupy movement

The media have called Graeber the "brains" behind the Occupy movement

But it's not just the content of the book. It's Graeber, the person. The idea of the "99 percent" in the slogan "We are the 99 percent" comes from him. And even though he himself is one of the 99 percent, he knows the language of the one percent. He also knows the unwritten rules of getting heard in public.

On Maybritt Ilmer's talk show, Graeber was smartly dressed in a black suit-jacket. It was his 67th interview with the German press. Still, he remained polite, succinct and never looked bored. As radical as his thinking may be, his appearances are always in keeping with convention. He's well aware of how much conformity is necessary to inspire interest in non-conformist thinking. He's no madcap revolutionary; rather, he fits into the protocol of prime-time programming.

Above all, he's a figurehead for the so-called 99 percent. The media have bestowed a range of attributes upon him, from "mentor" to "brains" behind the Occupy movement, but also the moniker "intellectual superstar."

Reading his "Inside Occupy," one thing is clear: The last thing that Occupy wants is a leader. "Direct Action," basic democracy and no hierarchy are central to the movement. But Graeber is already easily available for the media. Just as he explains the history of debt, he can also easily formulate what Occupy is all about. Slogans such as "We explain why the system doesn't work" are more likely to be taken seriously when they come from the mouth of a Yale professor than from a 20-year-old with a hoodie and dreadlocks.

In the meantime, the media hype has trailed off, the financial system in still in place, and the reluctance to cancel debt hasn't changed. The revolution hasn't happened yet. Will it take another 5,000 years to rethink the financial system?

Author: Ruth Krause / hw
Editor: Kate Bowen


Looking Busy

The rise of pointless work.

By Michael Robbins THE NATION NOVEMBER 8, 2018


Sears Tower, Chicago, 1977. (AP / Charles Kelly)

Let’s just get this out of the way: All jobs are bullshit jobs. Even if you’re a public defender or work for Médecins Sans Frontières, insofar as your labor is determined by a system of abstract compulsion—insofar, that is, as it exists within capitalism—it’s bullshit. You know this.

REVIEWED

BULLSHIT JOBS: A THEORY

By David Graeber

In his new book, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory, David Graeber is interested in a particular variety of bullshit and work. In 2013, the anthropologist and anarchist (he hates to be called “the anarchist anthropologist”) published an essay slamming the proliferation of “pointless jobs” that seem to exist “just for the sake of keeping us all working.” The response was tremendous: It turns out that many people have jobs that they believe require them to do nothing of value (or to do nothing whatsoever while trying to appear to be doing something).

Graeber sifted through the responses and solicited additional input on Twitter in a quest to categorize the “five basic types of bullshit jobs” and document the absurdist travails of those who hold them. From such data, he constructed a working definition of the subject at hand:

[A] bullshit job is a form of paid employment that is so completely pointless, unnecessary, or pernicious that even the employee cannot justify its existence even though, as part of the conditions of employment, the employee feels obliged to pretend that this is not the case.

Graeber distinguishes these bullshit jobs from “shit jobs,” which serve a purpose but suck. Which is not to say that bullshit jobs don’t suck as well, but they suck precisely because they don’t serve a purpose. Much of the stress they produce—the “spiritual violence,” as Graeber terms it—results from the contortionist maneuvers that employees are forced to perform in order to pretend to be working when they have nothing to do. And as Graeber notes, this sense of purposelessness is widespread: To give just two examples, 37 percent of the UK respondents to a poll on the subject, and 40 percent of the Dutch ones, insisted that their work is utterly useless.

In 1930, John Maynard Keynes predicted that, by the end of the century, technology would have become so far advanced that developed economies would have a 15-hour workweek. So how did we get to our current state, almost two decades into the 21st century? It turns out that Keynes was only half right—technology has advanced spectacularly, but we are far from a 15-hour workweek. Keynes thought that the developed economies would adjust to a growth in productivity by decreasing workers’ hours. Instead, capital absorbed those gains but did not free up the now-superfluous human labor—a tendency that Karl Marx noticed long ago.

For Marx, this pattern is intrinsic to capital, whose constant expansion of its own value requires the reproduction of existing social relations. For Graeber, however, this pattern has less to do with capital’s prerogatives than with human agency; the problem “clearly isn’t economic: it’s moral and political,” he writes. Yet it would be truer to say that the problem is not merely economic, but also moral and political, and even truer to relate these spheres to one another, a point that Graeber himself makes later: “[E]very day it’s more difficult to tell the difference between what can be considered ‘economic’ and what is ‘political.’” But despite a muddled sense of causes and effects, Graeber’s book offers us an engaging—albeit at the same time tremendously disheartening—portrait of labor in 21st-century capitalism.

In his previous books, especially 2009’s Direct Action: An Ethnography and 2011’s Debt: The First 5,000 Years, Graeber’s ear for anecdote lent his activism the air of folktale. Debt’s opening vignette, for example, set at a garden party at Westminster Abbey, offers a charming little parable about our tacit beliefs and assumptions. At the party, Graeber suggests to an attorney he meets that the developing world’s debt should be abolished. “But,” she objects, “they’d borrowed the money! Surely one has to pay one’s debts.”

In Bullshit Jobs, Graeber similarly employs anecdote in order to illustrate just how much insanity we take for granted. Liberally drawing from the respondents to his original essay, he recounts stories that read like Philip K. Dick at his least plausible. Some are sad, others infuriating, and many are both. A number verge on the absurd: One woman’s job was to go around demanding IDs and proof of income from temporarily sheltered homeless people so that “the temporary homeless unit could claim back [the] housing benefit.” If homeless people couldn’t provide the necessary paperwork—as often happened—their caseworkers would kick them out. In another instance, a “subcontractor of a subcontractor of a subcontractor for the German military” describes driving for hours and filling out pages of paperwork simply to prevent a soldier from carrying his computer about 16 and a half feet down a hallway to his new office.

Most of the stories involve jobs that are also nightmarish in their unrelenting tedium. My favorite is the museum guard whose job was to protect an empty room, apparently to make sure no one started a fire in it. To ensure his vigilance, he was forbidden to read a book or even look at his phone.

All of these jobs sound terrible, but are they also bullshit? The people who have to do them think so. But Graeber’s reliance on subjective impressions of whether work produces value is the book’s major weakness. He brings up Marx’s distinction between productive and unproductive labor—between workers who produce surplus value and those who do not—simply to brush it off. And it is telling that he focuses on “information work” and what he calls “salaried paper pushers.” While he claims that these kinds of positions, rather than “waiters, barbers, salesclerks and the like,” account for “the bulk” of service jobs added to the economy since 1990, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics could have set him straight on this score. As Jason E. Smith pointed out in his review of Graeber’s book in The Brooklyn Rail, the bureau’s table of “occupations with the most job growth” actually does include waiters and retail salespeople, not to mention nurses, customer-service representatives, janitors, health aides, fast-food workers, cooks, and construction workers. Most service workers, in other words, are indeed providing valuable services—caring for others and feeding people.

Graeber’s picture of a Dickensian bureaucratization run amok has other problems as well. He correctly notes that our economic system has undergone profound transformations since the 1970s, with declining manufacturing and wages and a rising service and financial sector. But according to Graeber, these changes mean that the existing system isn’t exactly capitalism anymore, but rather a kind of “managerial feudalism”—one that involves “hierarchies,” “class loyalty,” and “moral envy”—that is the result of political will rather than structural determination. However, while one can surely find such attributes at work in the global economy, the system remains capitalist: predicated on the extraction of profit from the labor of others (even when such profit is mediated by financial markets). “Class loyalty” and “moral envy” are the products of such a system.

In his work, the Marxist theorist Moishe Postone (who died earlier this year) explored “the domination of people by time” under capitalism in ways that bolster some of Graeber’s claims. Postone’s discussion of the shift from the “variable” time of the Middle Ages, which was determined by the different kinds of human activity, to the clock time of the modern period, an invariable standard that dictates the workday, parallels Graeber’s own.


Yet there are important differences as well. In his discussion of value, Graeber (like some Marxists, it must be said) attributes to Marx a “labor theory of value” akin to David Ricardo’s, according to which the value of a given commodity is equal to the amount of labor that went into its production. But the point of Marx’s theory, as Postone makes clear, is precisely to refute this: Value for Marx is not a market mechanism focused on exchange relations, but a social mediation. It is that which compels workers to reproduce capitalism. For Marx, capitalism’s alienated social relations are not by-products of capital’s expansion of value—they are how capital gets valorized.

Also, capitalism—like feudalism—is a system of domination. But in comparison, feudal domination was overt and easy to comprehend—no peasant had to wonder what he was working for. This is why Marx’s theory can indeed help to explain the situation that Graeber rightly decries: because it is a theory about how social relations get reproduced, including those that seem irrational and unnecessary
.

Despite Graeber’s focus on surface phenomena like hierarchy and envy, he is correct to conclude that the only thing keeping capitalism going is our refusal to stop it in its tracks through collective action. One of his respondents, whom he calls Lilian, captures the pathos of our continued submission to our own domination: “I get most of the meaning in my life from my job,” she writes. But the “meaning” of most jobs is meaninglessness itself.

Here we find Graeber exploring what is perhaps his true subject: not jobs that seem unnecessary, but the unnecessary compulsion of wage labor. In a free society—one in which your time and work are your own rather than commodities—Lilian’s sentiment would not necessarily be pathological. Work doesn’t need to be drudgery; we can find meaning in our jobs. But a society based on the production of value is by definition unfree, since we don’t really have a choice about whether to participate in it, and because work often becomes merely a tedious means of survival.

We have all experienced the truth of this. After college, I worked briefly as a temp doing data entry for a corporate law firm. I sat in a windowless room with a bunch of other temps, all of us squeezed together at a long table like students in a computer lab. We earned a little over the minimum wage. As often as I could, I would shirk my duties and surf the then-nascent Web. I had my spreadsheets minimized in a corner, ready to click should a paralegal come in to pick up something from the printer. But it was a fellow temp, who sat on my left, who objected to my wretched rebellion. “You’re not getting paid to surf the Web,” he informed me. I was just trying to reclaim a little of my time from those who were stealing it. And it wasn’t even a very effective protest, since I still had to sit in that depressing room and fill out enough spreadsheets to keep from getting fired. But my co-worker was simply expressing an assumption so commonplace that it hardly ever needs to be articulated: Your time does not belong to you.

Some of the first factories in London went bankrupt because laborers refused to work all day, every day. To the factory owners, this proved the workers were indolent loafers, so they reduced wages to the point that workers were forced to put in even more hours to survive. But this was really doing the workers a favor, the owners insisted, because otherwise they’d just get drunk and lie about. “Productive activity,” as André Gorz noted, began to be “cut off from its meaning, its motivations and its object and became simply a means of earning a wage.” Now we’ve all internalized this view of work.

Graeber doesn’t mention a project I recently learned about from Franco Berardi’s Futurability: The Age of Impotence and the Horizon of Possibility, but it represents the ne plus ultra of bullshit work. Berardi reprints an article—one of the most terrifying things I’ve ever read—that describes Candelia, a job-training center in France: 

Sabine de Buyzer, working in the accounting department, leaned into her computer and scanned a row of numbers. Candelia was doing well. Its revenue that week was outpacing expenses, even counting taxes and salaries. “We have to be profitable,” Ms. de Buyzer said. “Everyone’s working all out to make sure we succeed.”

This was a sentiment any boss would like to hear, but in this case the entire business is fake. So are Candelia’s customers and suppliers, from the companies ordering the furniture to the trucking operators that make deliveries. Even the bank where Candelia gets its loans is not real.

The wages are imaginary, too. Nothing is produced in this “job” except the illusion of waged labor, but de Buyzer “welcomes the regular routine.” France has more than 100 of these “staged companies.”

This is the world we’ve inherited—one in which we reflexively inquire of strangers, “What do you do?” which means, of course, “How do you earn a living?” And this is so even when there’s no social need for everyone to be working all the time. Bullshit jobs are only one idiotic facet of this larger decoupling of work from meaningful activity. If the problem were managers and bureaucracy, then we would simply need to eliminate them. But if the problem is capitalism, then we need to change the world. The familiar slogan of Occupy Wall Street and the global justice movement of the early 2000s, both of which Graeber was involved in, was “Another world is possible.” We’re told this is idealistic and naive. But it’s not bullshit.

Michael Robbins is the author of two books of poetry and the essay collection Equipment for Living: On Poetry and Pop Music.

Astra Taylor and David Graeber: Democracy May Not Exist, But ...

In her latest book, Astra Taylor – ‘a rare public intellectual, utterly committed to asking humanity’s most profound questions yet entirely devoid of pretensions’ (Naomi Klein) – argues that democracy is not just in crisis, but that real democracy, inclusive and egalitarian, has never existed. Democracy May Not Exist but We’ll Miss It When It’s Gone (Verso) aims to re-examine what we mean by democracy, what we want from it, and understand why it is so hard to realise.

Taylor was in conversation with David Graeber, author of Bullshit Jobs and Professor of anthropology at the LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS



Calls mount for Germany to rethink Russian gas pipeline plan after Navalny poisoning

Issued on: 03/09/2020 - 
A supporter of Alexei Navalny holds up a picture of the Kremlin opponent after he was taken ill with poisoning OLGA MALTSEVA AFP/File

Text by:FRANCE 

A European response that involves the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline is needed against Russia after the poisoning of Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny with a Soviet-style Novichok nerve agent, some politicians and diplomats in Germany said on Thursday.

Chancellor Angela Merkel said she expected Moscow to join efforts to clear up what happened and that Germany would consult its NATO allies about how to respond, raising the prospect of new Western sanctions on Russia.

"There must be a European response," Norbert Roettgen, head of Germany's parliamentary foreign affairs committee, told Deutschlandfunk radio on Thursday, when asked whether work on the NordStream 2 pipeline from Russia to Germany should stop.

"We must pursue hard politics, we must respond with the only language (Russian President Vladimir) Putin understands - that is gas sales," said Roettgen, a member of Merkel's ruling conservatives.

Navalny is lying in intensive care in a hospital in Berlin after his flight was arranged by activists. A German military laboratory produced "unequivocal evidence" that he had been poisoned with Novichok, the government said on Wednesday.


Moscow has denied involvement in the poisoning of Navalny, a longtime critic of Putin's rule, and the Russian foreign ministry said Germany's assertion was not backed by evidence.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said there was no reason to discuss sanctions against Moscow after Merkel said Germany would consult its NATO allies about how to respond to the poisoning.

Wolfgang Ischinger, chairman of the Munich Security Conference and a former ambassador to Washington, backed a joint response from the EU and NATO and said softer gestures, such as the expulsions of diplomats, may not suffice.

"If we want to send a clear message to Moscow with our partners, then economic relations must be on the agenda and that means the NordStream 2 project must not be left out," said Ischinger, adding that a full boycott would not be a good move.

"We can't put up a wall between the West and Russia, that would be a step too far, but there is a middle ground, something between diplomatic gestures and total boycott," said Ischinger.

(FRANCE 24 with REUTERS)
Devils of the deep: How jumbo squids survive freezing cold, oxygen-deprived waters
August 26, 2020 12.25pm EDT


According to the Norse sagas, the kraken terrorized sailors off the coasts of Norway and Greenland. (John Gibson)

Humans are a picky species. We are happiest in a near-constant environment and experience severe and often fatal injuries if our core temperature falls below 25 C or if oxygen content of the air drops below 10 per cent.

Many other species, however, live in almost constant change.

Consider the red devil squid. Also known as the Humboldt or jumbo squid (Dosidicus gigas), it rises every night from the depths of the ocean for a few hours of frenzied feeding at the surface. Before dawn breaks, it leaves these warm waters and sinks back into the frigid abyss of crushing pressure and low oxygen.

As molecular biochemistry researchers, we wanted to know how squids adapted to daily changes in the environmental conditions imposed by their vertical lives.
Bears, tardigrades and krakens

Despite the obvious differences between one animal and the next, all animals share a considerable number of similar genes. According to a 2005 study, for example, the genome of the chimpanzee is about 96 per cent similar to the human genome.

The regulation of those genes allows animals to adjust to daily or seasonal changes, respond to environmental stresses or tolerate other stresses, such as extreme temperatures or pressures. Epigenetics — chemical marks that alter the availability of DNA — and RNA modifications, which can silence protein production, are two of the several ways genes are regulated.

Genetic regulation is behind the seasonal hibernation of bears, allows many species to survive in low- or no-oxygen environments and lets others withstand extreme dehydration. It even allows some creatures to endure the freezing, oxygen-deprived, radiation-filled vacuum of space, which may be happening now to the thousands of miroscopic tardigrades that crash-landed on the moon in 2019.

It turns out that is also how krakens survive in the abyss.
Krakens in the abyss

We began our study at Experiment, a platform for scientific discoveries, and crowd-funded the support we needed to work on the red devil squid in the Gulf of California, between the two Mexican states of Baja California Sur and Sinoloa.

On one tranquil, pitch-black night in the middle of the gulf, we noticed a flurry of movement around our boat. Jackpot.

A shoal of red devil squid were rising hundreds of metres from the ocean’s depths to the warm, oxygenated surface waters to join a large feeding frenzy. They mainly ate small fish but sometimes there was a bit of cannibalism.

Kenneth Storey with red devil squids during the research cruise in the Gulf of California. (Kenneth Storey), Author provided

Before the first rays of morning appeared, they began their quiet descent, where they would have to deal with oxygen deprivation (hypoxia), high pressures and near-freezing temperatures.

We successfully caught several juvenile and adult jumbo squid before they descended and placed them in sea-water tanks on the ship.

These aggressive two-metre-long predators calmly occupy the deep ocean by depressing global gene expression, essentially turning down the volume of most of their genome while activating a select number of genes that promote their survival. This is known as “metabolic rate depression,” and is the basis for the dormancy often associated with hibernation.

The central mechanism emerging as a vital driving force behind metabolic suppression and squid survival is epigenetics, or more specifically, the squid’s ability to alter its epigenetic code rapidly and reversibly.
Epigenetics of killer squid

Breaking down the word epigenetics helps reveal what it is. First, we have the Greek prefix epi, meaning outside of, over or around, and then we have genetics, which refers to the cell’s DNA code. So, epigenetics is the study of heritable and non-heritable changes that occur on top of or around DNA without altering the DNA sequence itself.

Squids rely on epigenetic mechanisms to survive environmental extremes and retreat into a state of suspended animation by slowing down their metabolic rate. They reduce the squid’s oxygen requirements, turn off non-essential biological processes and sidestep damage from cold temperatures.

The epigenetic tools that alter gene expression in both squids and humans include DNA and histone modifications, and microRNAs. Adding chemical groups (such as methyl groups) to DNA or histones (proteins that spool DNA) can alter the availability or function of the DNA, making it more — or less — available to the cellular machinery that converts DNA into proteins.
Epigenetic modifications can be initiated by a number of factors from environmental conditions to diet. They change the way genes are expressed. (National Institutes of Health)

While we have yet to explore the state of DNA modifications on oxygen-deprived squid, our study of squid histones shows that histones are modified to promote DNA condensation (or spooling), making DNA less accessible when the squid is deep in the ocean. This critical mechanism allows the squid to save energy while it is oxygen-deprived, as genes are turned off when they are tightly wrapped around histones.

A third mechanism that keeps squid metabolism flexible are microRNAs. These short pieces of RNA do not code for proteins, but silence genes by physically binding to gene transcripts and blocking them from being translated into protein.

We found microRNAs in the hearts and brains of red devil squid that could slow their metabolism while they were oxygen deprived, helping protect these organs from damage. In the muscles, which give squids the jet propulsion they need for daily vertical migrations and to escape from predators, we found another microRNA, expressed under low-oxygen conditions, that likely suppressed growth and energy use while the squid was in its metabolically depressed state.
A diver gets too close to a Humboldt squid (BBC Earth Unplugged)

These seemingly tiny changes have big effects, allowing the red devil squid to go back and forth from the surface of the ocean to its bottom, killing and eating everything in their path. But they also have implications for medicine, and can help researchers understand — and find innovative solutions for — health conditions like stroke, ischemia (inadequate blood flow and oxygen to organs) and organ transplants.

Nature has already solved a lot of the problems we face. We just need to figure out how.

Hanane Hadj-Moussa
PhD Candidate in Molecular Biology, Carleton University
Kenneth B Storey
Professor of Biochemistry, Carleton University
Disclosure statement

Hanane Hadj-Moussa receives funding from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Kenneth B Storey receives funding from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.


What’s behind the new push for unionization by journalists


Digital news organizations like Buzzfeed and Vox are among those where journalists are unionizing. (AP Photo/Richard Vogel, File)


August 31, 2020 10.58am EDT


As Labour Day approaches, consider who’s making the news. From essential workers to gig workers and those working from home, the COVID-19 pandemic has put labour issues on journalists’ agendas.

At the same time, journalists are increasingly viewing themselves as “workers first” and forming unions to address longstanding issues in their industry.

By our count, since 2015, journalists have unionized at more than 80 digital and legacy media outlets, including at BuzzFeed, VICE Canada, Vox, Canadaland and 28 brands owned by the conglomerate Hearst Magazines.
Back to the future?

Journalists’ unions are nothing new. In the 1930s, newspaper journalists unionized to protect editorial independence and collectively negotiate working conditions. By the 2000s, legacy media unions faced big challenges: traditional newsrooms were being gutted by layoffs. And digital successors, with their tech start-up feel, seemed to be culturally off-limits to unions.

So it was surprising when staff at New York-based Gawker announced in the spring of 2015 it was unionizing, kicking off a wave of unionization in digital media. Since then, thousands of new members have joined The NewsGuild, the Writers Guild of America, East and the Communication Workers of America Canada.

Organizing has not let up amid the pandemic. The economic fallout from COVID-19 and the demands for racial justice elevated by protests against anti-Black racism give the media union movement renewed cause.

To understand why and how journalists are unionizing, we interviewed 50 media workers and union staff involved in this organizing push for our book, New Media Unions. Three themes emerged that persist as journalists continue to organize.
Protection and voice

Journalists organized to improve their livelihoods, including low pay and precarious employment. Unionizing enables media workers to negotiate legally binding collective bargaining agreements with employers. Contracts have raised labour standards, introducing salary minimums, increased benefits and a process for converting freelancers to full-time employees, for example.

Less than two months into the pandemic, 36,000 U.S. news workers had lost their jobs, been temporarily laid off or had their pay cut, according to The New York Times. Although news sites’ traffic soared as an anxious public sought information about the health crisis, companies’ ad revenue plunged and many outlets closed.

In hindsight, unionizing was a form of emergency preparedness. Before the pandemic, journalists acted to protect their livelihoods in a volatile industry where closures and cuts were commonplace. Severance packages became a bargaining priority. As union drives continue to launch, the pandemic has not diminished journalists’ resolve to build a safety net.

Journalists are unionizing to protect journalism, too. Contracts strengthen divisions between editorial and marketing departments, for example. And as local outlets are bought up by cost-cutting private equity firms, staff are organizing not just to preserve jobs but also local news, whose role as an essential service has been reaffirmed during the pandemic.

Having a formal mechanism to negotiate with management has given many journalists a say in how their employers respond to the pandemic. The L.A. Times Guild proposed pay cuts rather than layoffs, for example, which the Buzzfeed News Union used as a model to save jobs in their newsroom.
Diversity and equity

Racial and gender divides have also been an impetus to organize. Journalists we interviewed classified their workplaces on a narrow diversity spectrum, from “pretty white” to “mostly white” to “overwhelmingly white.”

Journalists are unionizing to change this composition to better reflect the communities they cover. Strategies including reforming informal recruitment practices — hiring from editors’ existing networks, for example — that perpetuate the industry’s homogeneity.

Research and first-person accounts show that women and especially racialized journalists are undervalued and often unable to sustain media careers. Journalists organized for pay equity and have negotiated contracts with salary scales by job title, which close pay gaps.

Beyond contract language that addresses discrimination and harassment, new media unions have negotiated the creation of union-management committees, formal channels where workers can push companies on equity, including retention and promotion of racialized journalists.

When Black Lives Matter protests intensified this summer, journalists’ struggles for racial justice went public. Journalists at the Los Angeles Times, for example, have pressured management to hire more racialized journalists and used the #BlackatLAT hashtag to document the mistreatment of Black journalists.

And after the The New York Times published an op-ed that called for a military response to Black Lives Matter protests, staffers organized a public response, tweeting: “Running this puts Black @nytimes staff in danger.” It led to the resignation of a senior editor.

Care and solidarity

The new media union movement has prioritized an ethic of care. Journalists care deeply about the work that they do, and statements announcing union drives declare workers’ commitment to producing journalism for their communities.

Drives have also been based on friendship.

Many union drives stemmed from friends in newsroom discussing disparities. (Piqsels)

Many campaigns emerged from friends in newsrooms discussing working conditions. They expanded as journalists in secure positions learned that colleagues were paid less for doing the same work, or were unable to pay rent or access health care. Organizing involves making deep personal connections as journalists have one-on-one discussions about problems at work and what a union could achieve.

As journalists were laid off during the pandemic, this care translated into union members setting up relief funds. The Florida Times-Union Guild, for example, has raised more than $15,000 for colleagues in need.

Organizing can blunt the competitive nature of journalism. Workers at outlets that compete for readers now share organizing and bargaining strategies and support union drives with tweets of solidarity. Unions also amplify journalists’ voices in the discussions of wider policy responses to the media crisis, as illustrated by the NewsGuild’s Save the News campaign.

For several journalists we spoke to, union organizing is a way to care for oneself in a job that can take a toll. As one journalist told us:


“Organizing has been good for my mental health. A lot of the time, we as journalists look at the state of the world and get very depressed. One of the cures for me has been to stand up for our newsroom and for other newsrooms. It has given me renewed hope in the industry.”

Unionizing will not fix all the problems facing journalism. But a union remains journalists’ best collective tool to sustain media workers in times of crisis and beyond.


Authors
Nicole Cohen

Associate Professor, Communication, University of Toronto
Greig de Peuter
Associate Professor of Communication Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University
Disclosure statement

Nicole Cohen receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Greig de Peuter receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Partners

How women are changing the face of Canada’s union leadership

About 150 nursing union members show support for long-term care workers at the Orchard Villa Long-Term Care in Pickering, Ont., in June 2020. The facility was hit hard by COVID-19 infections. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Frank Gunn

August 26, 2020 


As Labour Day approaches, close your eyes and picture the typical union member in Canada. If you conjured an image of a man wearing a hard hat or working in a factory, you missed the mark.

The typical union member in Canada is actually a woman who works in the public sector. She may be a teacher, a nurse, an office clerk at city hall or a mail carrier. All of these jobs are more likely to be unionized than those in the majority-male manufacturing, warehousing or construction sectors. In fact, Statistics Canada’s Labour Force Survey data reveals that, as of 2019, women made up 53.1 per cent of union members. That’s up from 45.8 per cent in 1998 and 29 per cent in 1978.

There’s no question that women benefit from unionization. Being unionized boosts women’s wages more than it does men’s, when both are compared to their non-union counterparts.

Unionized women also experience a much smaller gender pay gap when compared to unionized men. In other words, unions help women overcome the effects of gender discrimination in the workplace. This “union advantage” is even greater for women who are affected by other forms of systemic discrimination.

Despite becoming numerically dominant within unions, women are still under-represented in positions of union leadership. The number of women leading national unions in Canada today can be counted on one hand. And women currently lead only three of the country’s provincial and territorial federations of labour.
Glass ceiling persists

The under-representation of women in positions of leadership is not unique to the labour movement. We see similar imbalances in corporate and political spheres.
Chrystia Freeland recently broke the glass ceiling by becoming the first woman to hold the position of finance minister in Canadian history. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld

Although unions are doing better than Canada’s corporate sector, organized labour still has a long way to go when it comes to fully shattering the glass ceiling for women.

The glass ceiling is an often-used metaphor that refers to an invisible barrier that prevents women and other equity-seeking groups, regardless of their skills or qualifications, from advancing into leadership positions within organizations. While in theory, nothing prevents a woman from being elected to a top leadership position, the glass ceiling represents the subtle ways that organizations devalue and doubt women’s leadership skills based on gender stereotypes.

Despite these barriers, women have periodically risen to top leadership positions within individual public sector unions or labour federations over the years. But securing positions of leadership within unions has been a long, hard-fought struggle for women workers.

And even while being severely under-represented in positions of leadership, union women have undeniably had an impact. Their activism paved the way for the labour movement to campaign for and secure pay equity, employer-paid daycare, paid maternity leave and rules banning gender-based discrimination in the workplace.

Unions could do much more to fight gender discrimination by having more women in senior leadership positions.
Public sector unions are trail-blazers

Not surprisingly, public sector unions, where women have always been most concentrated, were the first to see women elected to significant leadership roles.
Grace Hartman, right, then the president of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, speaks at a news conference in July 1983. CP PHOTO/Chuck Stoody

The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) elected Grace Hartman as its national president in 1975. She was the first woman to lead a national union in North America. In 1986, CUPE’s Shirley Carr was the first woman elected to the presidency of the Canadian Labour Congress, Canada’s largest labour umbrella organization.

Public sector unions continue to be trail-blazers. In November 2014, Irene Lazinger of the B.C. Teachers’ Federation was the first woman elected to the presidency of the B.C. Federation of Labour.

In May 2019, Jan Simpson became the first Black woman to lead a national union in Canada when she was elected president of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers. And in November 2019, Patty Coates of the Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation became the first woman to lead the Ontario Federation of Labour.
Private sector unions lag

In contrast, a woman has yet to be elected to the presidency of any major private sector union in Canada. However, there are signs that a long overdue breakthrough may be in the works.

Some private sector unions have redesigned their leadership structures to help women break the glass ceiling within their own ranks. In 2013, Unifor, Canada’s largest private sector union, adopted an executive structure that guarantees the number of women on the union’s executive board be at least equal the proportion of women in the union overall.

In 2017, the Canadian section of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union achieved equal representation of women and men on its national executive board for the first time after delegates to the union’s convention adopted a resolution mandating the expansion of women’s representation.
Two women vying for top union job

Later this year, two women — Bea Bruske of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union and Linda Silas of the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions — are expected to compete for the presidency of the Canadian Labour Congress. It will be the first election in the history of the congress where both major contenders are women

Linda Silas, president of the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, talks with reporters in St. Andrews, N.B., in July 2018. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan

Why does gender representation matter now, more than ever?

So many of the issues we now face because of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting disruptions in work, home and school are borne by women. Racialized and poor women are even more at risk of COVID-19 exposure because of the service and care work they do and the lack of choices they have to engage in social distancing.

More than ever, we need a gendered and equity lens in leadership to understand how the pandemic is being experienced differently, and how union responses can protect those who are most vulnerable.

Unions must continue to enhance efforts to recruit and sustain a critical mass of women, particularly visible minority and LBGTQ women, into leadership roles in the years to come. These efforts cannot be mere tokenism. Rather, they must reflect a commitment to ensuring that the changing face of Canada’s unionized workers is reflected in the leadership of the union movement.


Authors
  
Stephanie Ross

Associate Professor and Director, School of Labour Studies, McMaster University
Larry Savage
Professor, Labour Studies, Brock University






Tony Abbott: why Boris Johnson would want Australia’s controversial ex-PM as a trade envoy

September 3, 2020 

Tony Abbott: the future face of UK trade. EPA/Joel Carrett

The rumour that Tony Abbott, the controversial former prime minister of Australia, is being lined up as a trade envoy for the UK was a summer news story few saw coming.

Appearing before the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, Abbott confirmed that he has had some discussions with members of the British government. However, while he said he is “more than happy to help”, he insisted that nothing is official “as yet”.

Abbott is notorious in Australia for his “ocker” manner and outlook. He is regularly photographed in a pair of “budgie smugglers” with surfboard under arm at his beloved Queenscliff beach in Manly, Sydney.

He is on record with statements concerning indigenous Australians, the environment and the role of women in society that would make the most hardened miner in a local pub wince at the insensitivity. Not many public figures embraced the label “dinosaur”, but even his supporters recognise that Abbott is an unreconstructed example of Australian chauvinist manhood.

What on Earth, then, could drive the British prime minister, Boris Johnson, and his advisers to reach out to someone whose toxicity matches Donald Trump in many quarters?

Opinions vary. Some insist that with the UK in dire need of expertise in its trade negotiations, it makes perfect sense to employ someone highly familiar with the Asia-Pacific economic terrain. The only problem with this hypothesis is that even according to his close confidants Abbott had very little to do with trade during his term of office, or indeed at any time before or after.

Others smell something more suspicious. Abbott is of course an international figure who has moved in influential circles and has strong connections, not least with the conservative establishment in the US. He moves in high places among the policy wonks, thinktanks and institutes with lavish funds at their disposal to entertain friends and allies. Could this appointment reflect the fact that Abbott is a useful ally in these circles?
Flying the flag

Surely there’s a more obvious explanation. This is that Abbott stands symbolically for a set of values and a political orientation which the Johnson government wishes to endorse and align itself with.

In terms of values, Abbott represents a US style of conservatism based on a belief in “family values”, patriotism and the flag. But within that broad appellation we can also identify a distinctively neoconservative stance in terms of the assertion of “western” values and the superiority of the European inheritance, including but not limited to the value of colonialism and imperialism, and what international relations scholars term “offensive realism”. This is the view that, in a world of competing ideologies, military conflicts are inevitable.

In short, Abbott’s world view is not at all dissimilar to that of Steve Bannon, the controversial architect of the first phase of Trump’s administration. Like Bannon, Abbott is an unapologetic culture warrior. He believes that western societies have lost their way and lost confidence in themselves. He thinks the west needs to refind its mojo and reassert the superiority of its values and way of life, particularly in relation to the Islamic world and China.
Johnson is looking to establish ‘Global Britain’ after Brexit. PA

All this implies a kind of permanent war against the forces of the left – such as antifa, the left-liberal establishment of universities and the media and the apologists for identity politics, multiculturalism and cosmopolitanism. It also means committing to permanent conflict externally, on the hostile terrain that is global politics. It is a hawkish, unfashionable view of the world with metropolitan elites, but one virulently supported in Australia by its leading newspaper, the Australian, and by the Rupert Murdoch-owned Sky News.
Culture war

The question remains then, what possible use are all these associations to Johnson? He has strived to confect an image of harmless amiability with a “big tent” politics. He has sought to be a lot of different things to a lot of different groups in order to secure the hallowed middle ground of British electoral politics.

The answer is surely that “culture war” of a kind articulated quite crudely by Abbott and Trump but also in Europe by the likes of France’s Marine Le Pen, the Netherlands’ Geert Wilders, Italy’s Matteo Salvini and Hungary’s Viktor Orban has shown itself to be popular with voters who don’t normally vote for the right. The theme is a great way to draw in working class and precariously employed people who are looking for stronger “authority” figures to deal with what they perceive to be increasingly lawless societies surrendering themselves to immigrants and the multicultural left.

It also serves to insulate a regime from the vagaries of public policy outcomes, of which COVID-19 is the most recent and obvious example. The pandemic is a classic no-win scenario for most governments. Play too lax and one gets blamed for too many deaths. Play it too hard and one suffers the economic consequences of lockdown. A culture war, on the other hand, presents a win-win for conservative regimes across the world looking to maintain power.

Hiring Abbott will not inoculate the UK government against policy failure, as such. But it sends a strong signal to Tory MPs and the wider public that this government wants to be judged less on the flimflam of policy outcomes, over which it has uncertain control, and more on the defence of a certain outlook and a certain way of life that it hopes will chime with the electorate.



Author
Simon Tormey
Professor of Politics, University of Bristol



Black Liberation and Indigenous Sovereignty Are Interconnected

I’m a guest in the Black Lives Matter movement, and making images is how I show my support.

By Josué Rivas, The Nation and Magnum Foundation
JUNE 29, 2020


Black Lives Matter demonstration in Portland, Oregon. June 12, 2020. (Josué Rivas)


The Nation and Magnum Foundation are partnering on a visual chronicle of untold stories of the coronavirus crisis and the struggle for racial justice—read more from The Invisible Front Line.—The Editors

PORTLAND, ORE.—I haven’t seen this kind of energy since Standing Rock. In the weeks since George Floyd was murdered in Minneapolis, my city has exploded with anger, empathy, and a level of organizing that is long overdue. With Black youth leading the fight, this movement is demanding justice for Floyd, justice for Breonna Taylor, justice for Ahmaud Arbery, justice for all African Americans whose lives have been cruelly cut short by the police and vigilantes.
Scenes from a Black Lives Matter demonstration on June 2. (Josué Rivas)


At first I joined these demonstrations just to show my support. As a photographer, I believe strongly that my work should give rather than take, and I didn’t want to be jumping in to document a movement without understanding what my role could be in it. There were plenty of Black photographers already documenting the protests across the country; how did I fit in as an Indigenous storyteller? So I showed up: I went to the marches and listened, talked to activists, and slowly started making images that I thought could be helpful for the movement.

A woman walks in the snow during a blizzard during the Dakota Access Pipeline protests on the Standing Rock Native American reservation, Cannon Ball, North Dakota, November, 2016. (Josué Rivas)

Usually, my work focuses on stories about Indigenous peoples. The seven months I documented the Standing Rock movement created the foundation for how I now approach any story: Intention is crucial. At Standing Rock, we had hundreds of photographers at some points, most of them parachuting in for a weekend and then heading out. The images they made were superficial, relying on stereotypes and clichés and staying on the surface of the movement. That experience cemented my belief that your intention as a photographer matters to the quality of the images you make: the amount of work you do to educate yourself on the issue you’re documenting, the time you spend making connections with the people you’re photographing, always shows itself in the images. And if you believe, as I do, that photographs don’t simply document our world but can also help bring new possibilities into being, that work is worth it.

Indigenous peoples for Black Lives Matter demonstration, June 5, 2020. Portland. (Josué Rivas)


Black Lives Matter demonstration, June 16. (Josué Rivas)


Images have power, but that power can be for good or for bad. I know the pain racist, stereotypical mascots cause for me, I know the shameful example those set for my son. So while I can’t fathom the particular pain that my Black relatives feel when, year after year, videos of Black people being murdered by police are repeated ad nauseam and lead to only piecemeal reforms, I know that if we’re going to create the change we need for all of our liberation, we’ll need images that serve the movement.

Left: A raised fist at a Black Lives Matter demonstration, June 2. Right: A United States Flag hangs and burns on the “Promised Land” statue in Chapman Square, Portland. The statue was commissioned by the Oregon Trail Coordinating Council to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Oregon Trail in 1993. The Promised Land depicts a “pioneer” family—father, mother, and son—at the end of their journey. The plaza in front of the statue is sandblasted with footprints reminiscent of pre-settlement days: jackrabbit, black bear, porcupine, grouse, coyote, elk, and moccasin prints. The father was holding the burning flag. June 3. (Josué Rivas)


When I began to document the demonstrations in Portland, I saw similarities between Black and Indigenous movements. I’m a guest in their movement. It’s not my story to tell; it’s my story to contribute to as best I can. In the first few days, I made sure to share copies of the photos with Black relatives in the demonstrations. I wasn’t on assignment; I wasn’t making the work for a publication or a brand; I was there to make images for the people. After a few days, some of the folks I had taken photos of agreed to let me enlarge several of the images to paste them in downtown Portland. I asked people on my Instagram stories if they knew of any large walls to paste on, and the response was overwhelming: I found multiple spaces to put up the photos. This is my way of showing solidarity with Black lives and bringing these images and the people in them beyond our screens and into our daily lives.

I pasted some of my images across the city to show support for the Black Lives Matter demonstrations (Josué Rivas)


The way this movement is represented will have a big impact on whether it succeeds. We need to take care with our image making; we need to build trust; we need to get consent whenever possible; we need to understand the goals the movement is fighting for. Ultimately, our sovereignty as Indigenous peoples is interwoven with Black liberation. When their image is honored, we are all honored.

Black Lives Matter demonstration. June 10, 2020. (Josué Rivas)


Josué RivasJosué Rivas (Mexica/Otomi) is a creative director, visual storyteller, and educator working at the intersection of art, journalism, and social justice.


The Nation TWITTERFounded by abolitionists in 1865, The Nation has chronicled the breadth and depth of political and cultural life, from the debut of the telegraph to the rise of Twitter, serving as a critical, independent, and progressive voice in American journalism.


Magnum FoundationMagnum Foundation is a nonprofit organization that expands creativity and diversity in documentary photography, activating new audiences and ideas through the innovative use of images.
Alberta oil shipped through Panama Canal to Atlantic Canada to avert COVID-19 threat to energy supply




An oil tanker passes fishermen as it moves through a channel in Port Aransas, Texas, in May 2020. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

August 27, 2020 

On July 20, the tanker Cabo de Hornos delivered an estimated 450,000 barrels of crude oil to the Irving Oil refinery’s Canaport storage facilities in Saint John, N.B.

What made Cabo de Hornos’s delivery different was that it was the first time crude oil had arrived in Saint John by ship from Alberta. It came via the Trans Mountain pipeline to the Westbridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby, B.C., and then through the Panama Canal.

By the end of April next year, a second tanker will arrive at Canaport carrying 350,000 to one million barrels of Western Canadian crude oil. In this case, the oil will have come via pipeline from Alberta to a crude oil exporting terminal in Texas or Louisiana.

For most of the Saint John refinery’s 50 years of operation, it has relied on crude oil from sources outside Canada, including Saudi Arabia, the United States, Norway and Nigeria, to meet most of its demand. In 2019, about 80 per cent came from non-Canadian sources, with the remainder from offshore Newfoundland and Labrador by tanker and Western Canada by rail.

Any event — such as a COVID-19 outbreak in any of these oil-supplying countries — that disrupts the flow of crude oil to the refinery threatens the energy security of most people in Atlantic Canada.

Crude oil supply

Relying on non-Canadian suppliers has never been an issue for the refinery. Even during the low points of Canadian-Saudi relations in the summer of 2018 and periods of increased tension in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia has been one of its principal suppliers. (Part of this may be attributable to the fact that about 60 per cent of the refinery’s output is shipped to New England and U.S.-Saudi relations could be affected if Saudi Arabia’s supplies to the Saint John refinery were disrupted.)

However, COVID-19 is a concern for those running the refinery. In April, Irving Oil applied to the Canadian Transportation Agency to use tankers from unspecified, non-Canadian suppliers for these two shipments, as per the requirements of the Coasting Trade Act. In each application it was made clear that the company’s overriding concern was the impact COVID-19 could have on about 80 per cent of its crude oil supply shipped from non-Canadian sources.

This is a legitimate concern.
Cargo ships navigate through Panama Canal waters in Gamboa, Panama, in June 2020. (AP Photo/Arnulfo Franco)

Globally, the health of ships’ crews has become an increasingly critical issue since the start of the pandemic. In many countries, fear of COVID-19 on ships has stopped shipboard crews from disembarking and returning home to their families, and new crews from boarding ships.

This is forcing shipboard crews to continue working well beyond the end of their contractual period of employment. Reports of mental anguish, self-harm and suicide have also been reported.

A COVID-19 outbreak in an oil-producing country or on board a tanker could disrupt the flow of crude oil to the Saint John refinery and, consequentially, disrupt the flow of its refined products to most of Atlantic Canada and New England.
Oil consumption in Atlantic Canada

Atlantic Canadians consume about 20 per cent more gasoline per capita than Canadians as a whole. With limited access to natural gas, about 31 per cent of the energy used for space heating in the region comes from heating oil (compared with 5.1 per cent nationally).

Irving Oil’s decision to find alternate ways to access Western Canadian crude oil from British Columbia via the Panama Canal or the U.S. Gulf Coast will undoubtedly increase the diversity of its supply. However, Irving’s concerns over COVID-19 and its international suppliers and shippers are equally applicable to Western Canada’s oilfields and any ships used to carry the crude oil.

To be fair, Irving has few other choices: crude-by-rail is a possibility, but there is limited capacity in its rail yard; TransCanada killed the Energy East project and even if it could be revived, it would take years to complete.

Read more: Regulations alone didn't sink the Energy East pipeline

While restructuring Atlantic Canada’s energy system to become less reliant on oil is the obvious answer, there are few short-term solutions. For example, although Churchill Falls could meet part of the region’s energy demand for electricity, heating and transportation, it will not be available until 2041, when the electricity sales contract between Newfoundland and Labrador and Québec comes to an end.

Without access to low-cost electric vehicles and easily accessible charging stations, gasoline will remain the principal fuel of choice for transportation in Atlantic Canada. On the other hand, there are alternatives for space heating, notably electricity and wood, each of which already meet about 30 per cent of the region’s residential demand for heating.

In the meantime, Atlantic Canadians can hope for an effective, widely accepted vaccine and prepare for periodic oil supply disruptions 


AUTHOR
Larry Hughes
Professor and Founding Fellow at the MacEachen Institute for Public Policy and Governance, Dalhousie University
Disclosure statement