Talk:Refusal of work

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Synonymity with "general strike"[edit]

Isn't this just another name for a general strike such as those seen in Eastern Europe? General Strikes seem to have played a significant role is toppling Eastern european governments in recent decades Robert Brockway 17:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I think it is too. I think this page should be deleted.

  • No, this is more concerned with an idealogical mindset, rather than a physical action, such as a strike

Merge with Anti-work[edit]

Actually think Anti-work should be the merge target, but less work with this one as target :) Lycurgus (talk) 19:09, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I'd support anti-work being merged with refusal of work, but I suspect that it would be better for this article to be merged into anti-work than vice-versa. "Refusal of work" is in fact a potentially misleading name for this article: I thought it was going to be about "refusal of work" in the temporary sense of industrial action. I'm no adherent of the "anti-work ethic" — in fact, I'm a bit of a workaholic :) — so I'm not going to buy into Lycurgus' objection that it would be less work if this were the target article. In any case, I volunteer to conduct the merger should consensus be achieved to do so (and I most definitely am willing to use "anti-work" as the target article). — Life in General Talk/Stalk 17:38, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Addition to previous comment: I'd also suggest some administrative action on this: this article's edit history should be merged with anti-work and this page itself should redirect to strike action. — Life in General Talk/Stalk 17:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Clearly this article doesn´t deal with "strike action". It seems to me only someone who hasn´t read this article can suggest that. It says it deals with "behaviour that refuses to adapt to regular employment" and not just a mere passing moment of protest towards an employer (what would be strike action). If the merge is to be done I support "anti-work" to be merged INSIDE this article.--Eduen (talk) 23:23, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I understand your point; but my point is exactly that anyone who hasn't already read this article is liable to be confused by its title. Someone searching for "Refusal of work" is most likely searching for an article on strike action; on the other hand, "Anti-work" as a title speaks for itself. — Life in General Talk/Stalk 15:24, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

A link at the beginning of this article to the strike action could be put if the user wants to read about strikes. Refusal of Work is a term that has been around for some time from autonomist, libertarian marxist and anarchist viewpoints.--Eduen (talk) 21:52, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I suppose that's reasonable. I've put in the link so long. And if "Refusal of Work" has been used in this sense before, that would probably be the best solution to this issue. — Life in General Talk/Stalk 03:21, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Seeing as though just about all the contents of the old anti-work article has already been moved here, I've taken the liberty of completing the merger and redirecting anti-work to this article. — Life in General Talk/Stalk 03:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

About the recent changes[edit]

I invite users who want to improve this article to use this space for supporting their proposed changes. In recent editions in this article there has been changes without outside source support and some of this which have important complex implications who actually need a prior debate here to go.

One that really called my attention is one that said "Although anti-thetical to orthodox strains of Marxism with their emphasis on worker control,". On the wikipedia article on "orthodox marxism" one cannot see how the marxism described there advocates "workers control". In fact the opposite is true since the work and practice of people like George Plekhanov, Karl Kautsky cannot really be said to advocate worker´s control and Lenin actually proceded to implement a system of state bureaucratic managerial admistration in soviet enterprises. Worker control actually is associated to marxist tendencies opposed to othodox marxism (see libertarian marxism). But anyway even if were to accept that affirmation one cannot really see its relation to establishing the main content of this article. An introduction to a wikipedia article must be thought for non-experts on the subject and the discussion on "worker control" clearly doens´t belong there if it belongs at all to the discussion on "refusal of work".--Eduen (talk) 19:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

German interlink[edit]

The German article doesn't cover the mainly philosophical and sociological contents of the English article at all. The scope of the German article "Arbeitsverweigerung" contains exclusively legal consequences of work refusal for employees. It's an article of the "Law" kind. Both articles are so different I would recommend deleting the interlink or changing it to (i.e. "criticism of work ethics"). -- (talk) 07:40, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Relationship to state welfare?[edit]

Can anyone shed any light on how "anti-work" agendas and the availability of state welfare payments corrolate? On the face of it, in the absence of such payments, it would seem those adverse to working need to either beg, steal or sponge off relatives, but things may be a little more complicated... (talk) 14:29, 14 January 2014 (UTC)