In Unconditional Freedom by David Casassas, we are asked to rethink what society means by work. That is, work as distinct from productivity. Work for whom and work to what end? In the history of leftist thinking, this problem occurs time and again and there are huge variations depending to which school one subscribes.
Marx proposed redistributing the means of production, ostensibly with a view to the proletariat enjoying the spoils of their own labour. For anarchists like Bakunin and Kropotkin, the Marxist dictum did not go far enough, seeking instead to emphasise labour as a means of achieving freedom, proposing that work and leisure need not be demarcated by necessity, fulfilment or enjoyment.
Anarchists believed these facets could coexist in a way which allowed everyone to pursue his or her own talents, thus making work – as well as leisure – something that people actively pursued rather than simply endured. In an ideal society, work – insofar as being an assigned necessity – would have more to do with maintenance and wellbeing than the production of surplus for a private or state entity.
Unconditional Freedom seems to fit comfortably into this latter lineage of intellectual anarcho-syndicalism; one championed most fervently in recent times by authors like David Graeber, Marshall Sahlins and James C Scott. In particular, Graeber’s 2018 thesis, Bullshit Jobs, is well worth comparison, for it too argues that the fair redistribution of capital through universal basic income demonstrates a more fair and equitable way of recognising the hidden labour inherent in everyday life: parenthood, housework, the emotional labour of counselling friends, neighbours, partners, relatives.
Colm Tóibín’s Long Island is Waterstones Irish Book of the Year
Author Maggie O’Farrell: I had a teacher at school who took the register, called my name and said to me, ‘Are your family in the IRA?’
Gambling Man by Lionel Barber: A lively account of the rollercoaster life of SoftBank’s billionaire founder
My Animals and Other Animals by Bill Bailey: Tales of the comedian’s feathered, furred and scaled friends
Nor should asking for our fair share of the common lot be seen as in any way shameful or begging. As Casassas himself illustrates, the phrase to “go cap in hand” first originated in the industrial era, when: “If anyone fell ill… when pay time came, the absent worker’s cap would be placed in an agreed-upon spot so that others, on their way out, would drop in some of their wages.”
Therefore, just as “going cap in hand” was borne out of collectivism and mutual aid, so universal basic income ensures that our fellows are fed, sheltered, clothed and comfortable in times of hardship. Society need not be any more complicated than that.
