

DaRealGonzo
29.4K posts

@DaRealGonzo
Tech-savvy Pilgrim. It means you are weak if your political compass starts spinning after reading my tweets.



„Eine bestenfalls schlampige Recherche“ – Richter rügt Böhmermann to.welt.de/ZYydPIv













Nehmt dieser Pädo-Stiftung die Steuergelder weg!








A major flaw in the “Bullshit Jobs” thesis is confusing “adversarial” with “unnecessary.” Many adversarial roles appear zero- or even negative-sum at the micro level, but are positive-sum at the macro level. Litigation, compliance, auditing, and other apparently zero-sum activities often provide the enforcement, information, and deterrence that make rule-of-law and market institutions possible. A breach-of-contract suit is usually negative-sum for the parties in that one case. But a world in which contracts cannot be credibly enforced is far worse. The same is true of many forms of institutional friction: they look like deadweight if you isolate the transaction, but they are part of the scaffolding that lets the larger system function. Adversarial systems generate information, constrain discretion, and reduce corruption in ways that are easy to miss if you look only at the immediate transaction. Central planning rested in part on the assumption that many such adversarial processes were wasteful and could be replaced by administrative decision-making. That proved disastrous: you lose the information generated by decentralized contestation and create enormous room for corruption by the people making the decisions. Graeber’s mistake was often Chesterton’s Fence: seeing a role whose purpose was not immediately obvious to him and inferring that it therefore had no purpose. Maybe some jobs really are padded or performative, but many others exist because they form the scaffolding that keeps the systems running.


