Ann: FY18 Half Year Results Announcement Date, page-160

Oh dear, so much hot air about semantics. "Slavery" to some, "work of passion" to others, somewhere-in-between to most.

I personally hate fitting in to an organisation. I'm not a team player. I hate pretense and fake politeness. I'm a grumpy SOB.

So yeah sure, it often (but not always) felt like slavery to me. But that's me, and I'm not going to paint the world with the color of my own brush.

Technology will eventyally save people from the drudgery and indignity of having to behave like machines (as it already has made enormous strides in). But of course, it has some way to go before all humans have real choice in whether or not they provide their labor. Perhaps one day, all labor will be trully voluntary. Perhaps there will be no poverty to escape from that "coerces" employment. Perhaps.

This semantic debate about slavery will then be mute.

But then ask yourself. Which condition is preferable, that of the wage slave, or that of the isolated, unemployed, idle and disempowered. I suggest, the latter can be worse than the former.

I value personal choice very much, but it need not lead to the best outcome for the individual. I'm sure we've all experienced being "forced" to do things (or compelled, if you like, by external factors) only to find, in the long run, that it lead to a good outcome (in short, staying in bed is what I wanted, getting up is what I neaded).

My point? We can get hot and sweaty about "wage slavery", but there are other forms of "slavery" (if we insist on the drama of that word) that are more fundamental to the human condition.

But I guess, one step at a time.