The Abolition of Work (1985)
Context: I am not playing definitional games with anybody. When I say I want to abolish work, I mean just what I say, but I want to say what I mean by defining my terms in non-idiosyncratic ways. My minimun definition of work is forced labor, that is, compulsory production. Both elements are essential. Work is production enforced by economic or political means, by the carrot or the stick. (The carrot is just the stick by other means.) But not all creation is work. Work is never done for its own sake, it's done on account of some product or output that the worker (or, more often, somebody else) gets out of it. This is what work necessarily is. To define it is to despise it. But work is usually even worse than its definition decrees. The dynamic of domination intrinsic to work tends over time toward elaboration. In advanced work-riddled societies, including all industrial societies whether capitalist or "communist," work invariably acquires other attributes which accentuate its obnoxiousness.
Usually—and this is even more true in "communist" than capitalist countries, where the state is almost the only employer and everyone is an employee — work is employment, i. e., wage-labor, which means selling yourself on the installment plan. Thus 95% of Americans who work, work for somebody (or something) else. In the USSR or Cuba or Yugoslavia or Nicaragua or any other alternative model which might be adduced, the corresponding figure approaches 100%. Only the embattled Third World peasant bastions — Mexico, India, Brazil, Turkey — temporarily shelter significant concentrations of agriculturists who perpetuate the traditional arrangement of most laborers in the last several millennia, the payment of taxes (ransom) to the state or rent to parasitic landlords in return for being otherwise left alone. Even this raw deal is beginning to look good. All industrial (and office) workers are employees and under the sort of surveillance which ensures servility.
“I've long believed alas, that in highly organized industrial societies, capitalist or socialist, the stronger tendency is to converge — that if steel or automobiles are wanted and must be made on a large scale, the process will stamp its imprint on the society, whether that me be Magnitogorsk or Gary, Indiana.”
Source: The Age of Uncertainty (1977), Chapter 2, p. 84
Help us to complete the source, original and additional information
John Kenneth Galbraith 207
American economist and diplomat 1908–2006Related quotes

Speech to a May 2009 "Socialist Transformation Workshop" in Guayana, as quoted in Venezuela Nationalizes Gas Plant and Steel Companies, Pledges Worker Control: James Suggett at Venezuela Analysis (22 May 2009) http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/4464
2009

Source: Reform or Revolution (1899), Ch. 7

Under section header: The Enterprise as Society's Mirror
1930s- 1950s, The New Society (1950)
Ericson (1969) cited in: Brian R. Gaines Ed. "General systems research: quo vadis?" http://pages.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~gaines/reports/SYS/GS79/GS79.pdf in: General Systems: Yearbook of the Society for General Systems Research, Vol.24, 1979, pp.1-9.
Source: How Europe Underdeveloped Africa (1972), p. 338.
Source: The Managerial Revolution, 1941, p. 7, as cited in: Albert Lepawsky (1949), Administration, p. 12-13

Source: Nervous Ills their Cause and Cure (1922), p. 20
"The Marxian Critique of Justice," Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Spring, 1972), pp. 244-282