Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't think you're giving this enough thought.

Some traits are an emergent property of systems, and while it's technically correct to say that this is blaming "other people," it's not a useful idea. It's like getting mad that someone lied to you, and blaming their neurons.

The system we're in has some undesirable traits, and it's useful to think about them and how they might be fixed.

Unless you're suggesting that every person on earth should be an entrepreneur to be happy, I think it's worth thinking about how to make the rest of the opportunities more hospitable to a happy life.



> Some traits are an emergent property of systems, and while it's technically correct to say that this is blaming "other people," it's not a useful idea.

This is exactly blaming other people, from the article -

> It was during the years of office work that I caught on: I got two weeks' paid vacation per year. ... In other words, no time was truly mine. My boss merely allowed me an illusion of freedom, a little space in which to catch my breath, in between the 50 weeks that I lived that he owned.

There's many ways to work full-time less than 50 weeks out of the year. Instead, the author chooses to point the blame outwards.

The whole article is heavy on that external blame. It's bad, it closes your mind off to many, many possible solutions. There's definitely lots of problems with working full time for just a paycheck, but it's unhelpful to people to wrap that in such a defeatist externally-blaming way. That kills your mind off to finding solutions.


Your point is well taken that it tends to deaden one to looking for solutions - but that does not, in any way shape or form, invalidate the author's arguments.


Step 2 is finding solutions. Step 1 is recognizing that there is a problem. This article (in my view) is aimed at step 1.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: