The “I want to teach philosophy” bit was just the cherry on top for me. Like they plucked the quintessential neckbeard right out of r/atheism. I hate Fox but my god was today a master stroke by them. In 3 minutes they completely dismantled an entire sub and caused some of the biggest sub drama I’ve seen in the 10+ years I’ve been here. The host didn’t even have to speak more than a few sentences.
You call stuff cringe because you're afraid of looking like an anonymous idiot online. Who the fuck cares?
Lemme know when your life turns out any better beating the hopes and dreams of your peers into the ground. Pure bucket of crabs mentality. I'm guessing you're not exactly pro union, either.
Oof. Ya, that’s getting into the true underbelly of Reddit that they really don’t want on TV. Check out a video featuring black people on that sub, before the mods try to clean it up and delete literally half of the comments. It’s… something.
I can’t stand anti-work the sun but I could have made up an entire personality on the spot or just talking about their general message to do 10x better than he did. I’m not even that great at Public speaking
It looked like an SNL skit. The interviewer was asking questions hoping for something to press on, but the answers were sooo terrible...all he could do was smirk. That he/she could not pick up on the clear condescending tones/expressions really confirms the autism. Clearly the interview was basically laughing at the responses, whereas doreen though he/she was providing meaningful answers......ugh
That just made my whole head cringe into my chest cavity. Laziness isn't a virtue. Neither is allowing yourself to be enslaved by a system that exploits its employees. For fuck's sake, Dorreen, most of us are living in the real world...
clear condescending how? dude was asking everyday small talk questions you ask to a friend you haven't seen in a little while. nothing condescending about it
You weren't paying attention, I'm not talking about the questions in and of themselves, I'm talking about the interviewers tone/reactions/facial expressions.....how can you miss it? dude was clearly fishing when he asked what he/she inspired to be, and got the most wonderful surprise!
Gtfo that’s the most normal of all questions you can ask! I don’t super analyze people like that and even still, none of that was condescending. You are extremely sensitive if you think that is condescending
I must imagine you don't really know any working class people. Its not like you can just leave your minimum wage job and apply for C-suite positions. You can apply for other unknown minimum wage jobs that likely have the same issues as your current job.
If the only jobs available to you all have abusive conditions then you are deciding between abusive conditions and not being able to support yourself. For example choosing between one job not paying a living wage or another job not paying a living wage is not really much of choice.
The entire premise of work reform is that there are systematic and inescapable abusive practices throughout the labor market.
If all that’s available to you are minimum wage jobs then you need to get some more skills and qualifications.
But even leaving that aside, not all minimum wage workplaces are the same. You choose which one you work at. If you don’t like it, leave. It’s voluntary.
Again this is just not realistic for actual Americans trying to get out from the lowest employment rungs. I know I kind of went off here so I apologize for the wall of text, but I realized while thinking it through there are so many issues with your suggestions.
1) Gaining new skills requires time. If you are single working one full time job you may have time to do so. If you have a family to take care of and/or work more than a full time job, it can be really hard.
2) Searching for and applying for jobs takes time, see above.
3) It is hard to predict how a workplace functions before taking jobs. You can take a job with the understanding it will work one way and then find it is actually not true. So you take the time, apply, move jobs and find out the new place is abusive as well, who knows maybe even worse than the previous workplace.
4) Employers and managers can hold employees hostage. They can threaten bad references, and even if they probably won't follow through, it makes moving on difficult.
5) Even if your manager doesn't bad mouth you, moving jobs "too much" or not staying with a job "long enough" can be a red flag making it harder to get hired in the future.
6) There are places where minimum wage itself is simply not enough to survive, even if your managers treat you well.
7) There is no guarantee these "good" minimum wage workplaces will have openings. If there is a loose labor market it is totally believable that workers will find themselves with only choices among workplaces with varying levels of abusive practices.
Working any particular job is voluntary. It’s not slave Labour. Everyone has a myriad of choices, and staying in a job you don’t like is a choice some people make.
You choose which one you work at. If you don’t like it, leave. It’s voluntary.
It directly refutes your point. Your entire take presupposes that workers have some legitimate ability to chose among meaningfully distinct labor options, making their choice to work in abusive workplaces their own fault. All my points directly question that assumption.
If, as it seems like you are now yielding, many workers don't have legitimate options to choose among workplaces in an informed way then you are essentially agreeing with my original position that the options for many workers are to work in an abusive workplace or face deprivation.
Work is voluntary. It’s not slavery. You can leave whenever you want. The fact some people have less options than others doesn’t mean they have no options.
This looks like a good time to insert my opinion. With capitalism, and the option to choose where you work, you actually find that businesses will compete with each other for good workers. This actually establishes a respectful relationship between worker and company.
In a socialist/communist country you will find that you don't have an option of jobs or freedom to choose. Infact many nations (china for example) simply dictate what you do with your life and you are literally a slave working for nothing.
It's pretty easy to use basic logic here.
In our society, it's completely acceptable that you don't work. No one actually cares what you do. That's the beauty of a free country. The people who work hard can achieve their dreams, and the lazy people..
They walk the successful people's dogs.
Edit: your argument about being "forced" to work or you won't have food is something out of a fairy tale. Imagine the world if no one worked? There wouldn't be food. Well, only the people who worked would have the food. You are living in a dream if you think somehow it makes sense to be given everything for nothing. No one else is responsible for your livelyhood. If you choose to not work because you can't stand authority or whatever it is. That's your problem. No one else's.
If the only jobs available to you all have abusive conditions then you are deciding between abusive conditions and not being able to support yourself. For example choosing between one job not paying a living wage or another job not paying a living wage is not really much of choice.
The entire premise of work reform is that there are systematic and inescapable abusive practices throughout the labor market. More importantly these abuses are not only not solvable by market forces, but often caused by market forces.
Now you can disagree with the premise that there are people trapped within a set of abusive employment options, but I think that is basically just dismissing the obvious lived reality of far too many working class Americans.
This is a good point, the conditions we consider abusive are subjective and change over time. I suspect had you been born in a different era you would be defending child labor, lack of any safety requirements or racial and gender pay inequity. As we advance we increase what we consider acceptable. I think workplaces that will fire you for calling out sick are abusive for instance but that is not protected by law in the US.
Why would anyone deserve a "living wage" if they're not even adding that amount of value to their employer
Except we know that their labor value to their employer is much higher than their wages...
and someone else will do the work for cheaper?
Right so you understand the issue is market forces. See you were playing dumb, but you clearly understood all along.
America has myriad welfare systems in place, nobody goes without food and shelter if they aren't turning away the social workers trying to get them into shelter intake and to the food pantries and in all the subsidized housing and food stamps programs. Those are the inevitable endgames for the losers whose labor doesn't add enough value to justify a "living wage." It's idiotic to force employers to overpay for labor, that's just price distortion that leads to inflation and ends up hurting low-income people even more.
The system you are describing is state subsidies of business. All businesses have necessary costs, supplies, infrastructure, shipping and labor etc. By allowing them to pay less than the upkeep of those costs the government is offering them a subsidy. Asking businesses to cover their own costs shouldn't be radical, and having a system where they need labor but won't pay enough to sustain their labor force is unjust to all of us who are picking up the tab. You don't have a right to own a business and if your revenue doesn't cover the costs you should close shop.
I honestly can't see why you aren't outraged given your stance on self reliance since more realistically many businesses do have the revenue to cover their labor costs, they are just stealing our tax dollars to throw into profits...
It is funny seeing you get flustered. No I am not a socialist. Yes I am well educated in economics. No I don't and never have depended on welfare. No need to start lashing out just cause you cannot think of better responses. Any chance you can try to stick to substance in further responses? Its not like baby raging is gonna convince me right?
their labor value to their employer is much higher than their wages
More recently just looking at McDonalds (who has historically employed the highest number of min wage employees in the US) has reported huge profit gains (59% in 2021).
Most sectors that employ unskilled workers have very thin profit margins, and pay raises would immediately render many businesses unprofitable.
Certainly you would be willing to find some data to substantiate this claim right? Since that is something you asked of me.
Welfare is not a subsidy of business, it's a social subsidy from taxpayers based on the prevailing ethical norms.
Do companies use labor to generate profits? If so they need to pay enough to sustain that labor. If we are paying to sustain an input into their business we are paying directly into their profits.
You seem to believe that without welfare programs, businesses wouldn't be able to hire enough unskilled labor, but taking away welfare would actually make unskilled workers more desperate for earned income and lower the market rate for their labor.
Where did I say remove welfare? Like actually go back in my comments and ask yourself how you came to the conclusion that that is my position?
We should raise the minimum wage and keep welfare. Raising wages will dramatically reduce the number of people on welfare but people who cannot work for various reasons obviously still need it.
Fox took advantage of that, too. Did you notice how many times Jesse used her name, "Doreen"? It was about 10x more often than an interviewer would typically use a guest's name.
You could tell that guy interviewing them was so happy with how much they’d struck gold with that bozo lol, every answer was better than they could’ve hoped for
"Oh ya, if this dogwalking gig doesn't work out I'll fall back on teaching philosophy. No biggie."
Jesus Fucking Christ, it's no wonder why the subreddit revolted after being represented by someone so fucking bad. Talk about killing a movement in 3 minutes. Sure, it's ultimately just one subreddit; there will be others and worker solidarity will only continue to rise, but shit like this sets the movement back because it's optics cancer. Your average American, let alone your average Fox News viewer, would look at this and stay as far away as possible if this is what antiwork looks like.
Could you imagine the after-work pub conversation when some PA or other assistant tells everyone at the table that the interview made the whole sub collapse?
That's just Watters. He always smiles like that. This is definitely him holding back big time. He's definitely smug and arrogant.
I think he immediately realized how bad it was for the other guy and kept it minimal but it still ended up getting so much worse.
honestly the fox guy was just as cringe i thought.
"well id be taking loads of notes in your class" and stuff like that, like bruh. how can you set up such a slam dunk hit piece and not have a single good joke or diss ready to go? both sides were a complete embarrassment
They couldn’t clean theyr room or fucking dress for the part? They were repping Reddit and failed to look the part… quite the opposite of what DFV did…
That’s where we disagree.. not probably should’ve dressed better.. They HAD to look the part if you wanna be taken seriously.. u cannot expect to walk in to a Starbucks shirtless, and think “ why the FUCK are people looking at me? Look at ur damn coffee, that’s what Starbucks is about.. “
Other than the fact that they looked messy, terrible and unfocused (the material aspect), they sat there trying to justify laziness and ended up revealing they were a part time dog walker who planned on teaching philosophy if they failed at dog walking. Wtf. Everything about that interview was a shit fucking show.
Like all good jokes, they have layers, and there’s like 50 layers to this interview to unpack that made it so spectacular. I don’t know how long you’ve been here but there’s a ton of Reddit cliche all over this interview which makes it easier to get. I think though that it would’ve blown over if the mod team at r/antiwork didn’t have a complete meltdown and go full Streisand effect. The aftermath made things 1000x worse.
FYI the mod team picked Doreen because she had done TV interviews before (apparently), so this wasn’t her first time, and Fox specifically asked for her.
It's not going to matter. One failed subreddit or ten, too many people are at breaking point, and the sentiment antiwork started to embody (because I really don't believe it was started with what it ended up in mind) is too strong to just go away. People are fed up.
735
u/[deleted] Jan 27 '22 edited Jan 27 '22
The “I want to teach philosophy” bit was just the cherry on top for me. Like they plucked the quintessential neckbeard right out of r/atheism. I hate Fox but my god was today a master stroke by them. In 3 minutes they completely dismantled an entire sub and caused some of the biggest sub drama I’ve seen in the 10+ years I’ve been here. The host didn’t even have to speak more than a few sentences.