Why Quitting Work Is Political

🛑 Labour and consumption have sth in common

In today’s economy, quitting your job isn’t just personal – it’s political.

Anthropologist David Graeber coined the term “Bullshit Jobs” to describe roles that feel meaningless even to those doing them – like box-tickers, taskmasters, and flunkies. These are often bloated by corporate bureaucracy and micromanagement, designed not for productivity but for appearances. (David Graeber, 2018)

The anti-work movement, once dismissed as laziness, now expresses a deeper critique: a rejection of alienation and the idea that our lives must be validated through paid labor. What started as a Reddit sub has become a cultural force. The pandemic and the “Great Resignation” only fueled it.

“It’s not about not working – it’s about not working for a system that doesn’t care.”
(The Whitman Wire – Antiwork Isn’t Laziness)

At the same time, a growing anti-consumption trend challenges the ideology of endless buying. In academic circles, consumption is increasingly seen as a mechanism of control and identity-shaping – one that harms the environment and undermines autonomy.

“Conscious refusal to consume is a form of resistance.”
(ResearchGate: Anti-Consumption)

💡 Takeaway

Labor is political. Consumption is too.
As we question what kind of work and life is worth living, we must ask:
What would a world beyond exploitation and accumulation look like?

🔗 Sources

• Graeber, D. (2018). Bullshit Jobs. Wikipedia
• The Whitman Wire: Antiwork Isn’t Laziness
• ResearchGate: Anti-Consumption and Consumer Resistance
• r/antiwork