The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy
- Downloads：1253
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-10-29 09:53:58
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：David Graeber
- ISBN：1612195180
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
From the author of the international bestseller Debt: The First 5，000 Years comes a revelatory account of the way bureaucracy rules our lives
Where does the desire for endless rules， regulations， and bureaucracy come from？ How did we come to spend so much of our time filling out forms？ And is it really a cipher for state violence？
To answer these questions， the anthropologist David Graeber—one of our most important and provocative thinkers—traces the peculiar and unexpected ways we relate to bureaucracy today， and reveals how it shapes our lives in ways we may not even notice…though he also suggests that there may be something perversely appealing—even romantic—about bureaucracy。
Leaping from the ascendance of right-wing economics to the hidden meanings behind Sherlock Holmes and Batman， The Utopia of Rules is at once a powerful work of social theory in the tradition of Foucault and Marx， and an entertaining reckoning with popular culture that calls to mind Slavoj Zizek at his most accessible。
An essential book for our times， The Utopia of Rules is sure to start a million conversations about the institutions that rule over us—and the better， freer world we should， perhaps， begin to imagine for ourselves。
Where does the desire for endless rules， regulations， and bureaucracy come from？ How did we come to spend so much of our time filling out forms？ And is it really a cipher for state violence？
To answer these questions， the anthropologist David Graeber—one of our most important and provocative thinkers—traces the peculiar and unexpected ways we relate to bureaucracy today， and reveals how it shapes our lives in ways we may not even notice…though he also suggests that there may be something perversely appealing—even romantic—about bureaucracy。
Leaping from the ascendance of right-wing economics to the hidden meanings behind Sherlock Holmes and Batman， The Utopia of Rules is at once a powerful work of social theory in the tradition of Foucault and Marx， and an entertaining reckoning with popular culture that calls to mind Slavoj Zizek at his most accessible。
An essential book for our times， The Utopia of Rules is sure to start a million conversations about the institutions that rule over us—and the better， freer world we should， perhaps， begin to imagine for ourselves。
Reviews
Sean Van Duser
，
I’m a big David Graeber fan and this is the type of work I’ve come to expect from him。 Insight dives into what seem like fairly innocuous topics to provide a look at why the world we live in is the way it is。 This didn’t feel quite as sharp or tightly tied together as some of his other work though。 I’d recommend most of his other books I’ve read before this one （debt， the democracy project， and even bullshit jobs though that one is a bit depressing）。 Overall though if you want to know about bure I’m a big David Graeber fan and this is the type of work I’ve come to expect from him。 Insight dives into what seem like fairly innocuous topics to provide a look at why the world we live in is the way it is。 This didn’t feel quite as sharp or tightly tied together as some of his other work though。 I’d recommend most of his other books I’ve read before this one （debt， the democracy project， and even bullshit jobs though that one is a bit depressing）。 Overall though if you want to know about bureaucracy this is an interesting and thoughtful look into it。 。。。more
Clara
，
I loved DEBT and liked BULLSHIT JOBS despite what felt like a lack of rigor， but UTOPIA OF RULES didn't feel grounded in research at all。 That's fine， and Graeber still makes some points that are interesting and got me thinking， but it wasn't really what I was looking for out of this book。 I loved DEBT and liked BULLSHIT JOBS despite what felt like a lack of rigor， but UTOPIA OF RULES didn't feel grounded in research at all。 That's fine， and Graeber still makes some points that are interesting and got me thinking， but it wasn't really what I was looking for out of this book。 。。。more
Paul Norris
，
the problem with these ratings is that 90% of books I actually finish are going to get 4 stars
Gustav
，
Fantastic， as always。 No one managed to convert and communicate such seemingly mundane topics as bureaucracy and debt to engaging writing。 Part of what makes Graeber’s work so engaging， I think， is his capacity to explore inherent contradictions within taken-for-granted systems and structures。 For example， “the iron law of liberalism”， as he terms it， states that the freer a market seeks to become， the more paperwork is required to uphold its conditions。 Efficiency， the ideology masking and main Fantastic， as always。 No one managed to convert and communicate such seemingly mundane topics as bureaucracy and debt to engaging writing。 Part of what makes Graeber’s work so engaging， I think， is his capacity to explore inherent contradictions within taken-for-granted systems and structures。 For example， “the iron law of liberalism”， as he terms it， states that the freer a market seeks to become， the more paperwork is required to uphold its conditions。 Efficiency， the ideology masking and maintaining the real intention of our current economic system， is a social order like any others， and those require institutions。 The laissez-faire （"free"） market is an oxymoron （see also The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time）。Graeber is a master at theorising these contradictions。 Although his narrative style is engaging， it is not particularly empirically grounded， but the thing is， the familiarity of the topic makes this less of an issue。 We， his intended audience， all have experience with the phenomenon of bureaucracy and can therefore relate to his observations。Graeber often initiates his analysis with these curious and intuitive associations， which he then follows up by unpacking its hierarchies and power structures。 Related to this， I particularly enjoyed his concept of structural violence and interpretative labour。 Structural violence， departing from its original meaning， refers to the fact that our liberal social order rests on a foundation of monopolised state violence that keeps the classes in their place。 This violence is always near at hand， but our coercion to its enforced （institutionalised） rules and conventions make it seem like it’s not。 Interpretative labour is， in this context， what characterises a relationship to these bureaucratic structures for the people not familiarised and trained in navigating （and exploiting） its rules。For a brilliant summary of the book， I recommend checking out Todd's review。As always， rest in peace， David。 。。。more
Maya
，
Fascinating musings on bureaucracy， which is an impressive feat。 I wish I had stumbled across this book in college as a sociology student。
Bruce
，
Like Graeber's other two must-reads， Debt: The First 5，000 Years， and Bullshit Jobs: A Theory， the author pulls information from a variety of disciplines and interests and braids compelling and engaging models of our current world。 Less structured than his other works， Utopia is essentially four essays that build on the idea that rules and the cultures that support and are supported by them become necessary for scaling up civilization。Hopefully later editions will have been copy-edited for the n Like Graeber's other two must-reads， Debt: The First 5，000 Years， and Bullshit Jobs: A Theory， the author pulls information from a variety of disciplines and interests and braids compelling and engaging models of our current world。 Less structured than his other works， Utopia is essentially four essays that build on the idea that rules and the cultures that support and are supported by them become necessary for scaling up civilization。Hopefully later editions will have been copy-edited for the numerous literals which occur on most pages， but this work still ranks as a must-read for anyone who is curious about how cultures work， and why。 。。。more
Will Blasingame
，
2。4。 Ya definitely not his best work。。。 His other book， Debt : the First 5000 years， was amazing。 This was less cohesive， less satisfying， and way less reliant on data。
Lauren Kelley
，
David Graeber first came onto my radar earlier this year when I watched a series called Can't Get You Out of My Head from the BBC & Adam Curtis。 This book is extremely well written， and while I am aware of the trap of confirmation bias， explains a lot of my personal beliefs in very concrete ways。 Pulling from pop culture and history Graeber gets into the philosophical and everyday of bureaucracy， but does not fully land on making a damning sentence on it。 Fantastic read， bears re-reading this ti David Graeber first came onto my radar earlier this year when I watched a series called Can't Get You Out of My Head from the BBC & Adam Curtis。 This book is extremely well written， and while I am aware of the trap of confirmation bias， explains a lot of my personal beliefs in very concrete ways。 Pulling from pop culture and history Graeber gets into the philosophical and everyday of bureaucracy， but does not fully land on making a damning sentence on it。 Fantastic read， bears re-reading this time with a notebook and pencil in hand。 。。。more
Lisa
，
My god I just love the way this guy thinks
Yarub Khayat
，
The Utopia of rules : on technology， stupidity， and the secret joys of bureaucracy。By David Graeber272 Pages， First published Feb 23， 2016 كتاب: "يوتوبيا القواعد （أي القواعد الفاضلة）: حول التكنولوجيا والغباء وأفراح البيروقراطية السرية"。لمؤلفه "ديفيد جريبر"。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。وصف الكتاب:- من أين تأتي الرغبة في القواعد واللوائح والبيروقراطية اللانهائية؟ كيف توصلنا إلى قضاء الكثير من وقتنا في ملء النماذج؟ للإجابة على هذه الأسئلة ، يقوم عالم الأنثروب The Utopia of rules : on technology， stupidity， and the secret joys of bureaucracy。By David Graeber272 Pages， First published Feb 23， 2016 كتاب: "يوتوبيا القواعد （أي القواعد الفاضلة）: حول التكنولوجيا والغباء وأفراح البيروقراطية السرية"。لمؤلفه "ديفيد جريبر"。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。وصف الكتاب:- من أين تأتي الرغبة في القواعد واللوائح والبيروقراطية اللانهائية؟ كيف توصلنا إلى قضاء الكثير من وقتنا في ملء النماذج؟ للإجابة على هذه الأسئلة ، يقوم عالم الأنثروبولوجيا ديفيد جريبر - أحد أبرز المفكرين وأكثرهم استفزازاً، الذين يعملون اليوم - برحلة عبر التاريخ القديم والحديث لتتبع التطور الغريب والرائع للبيروقراطية على مر العصور。 بدأ في العالم القديم ، يبحث في كيفية تنظيم الحضارات المبكرة وما هي آثار الأنظمة البيروقراطية المبكرة التي تركت في الأدب الإثنوغرافي، （علم الدراسة المنهجية للأعراق البشرية - الناس والثقافات - لاستكشاف الظاهرة الثقافية）؛ ثم يتقدم الكتاب إلى القرن التاسع عشر، حيث نشأت أنظمة يمكننا التعرف عليها بسهولة على أنها بيروقراطيات حديثة في بعض مجالات الحياة - مثل الأنظمة البريدية الحديثة في ألمانيا وفرنسا - جلبت تلك البيروقراطيات كفاءات هائلة للحياة الحديثة。 لكن غريبر يجادل بأن هناك جانباً أكثر قتامة للبيروقراطية الحديثة نادراً ما تتم مناقشته على الإطلاق！ في الواقع ، ففي "يوتوبيا القواعد" الخاصة بنا، غالباً ما تكون الحرية والابتكار التكنولوجي ضحيةُ للأنظمة التي لا نفهمها إلا بشكل ضعيف。 الكتاب استفزازي وفي الوقت المناسب ، هو نظرة قوية وتاريخ البيروقراطية على مر العصور وقوتها في تشكيل عالم الأفكار؛ يعتبر الكتاب من الكتب الكلاسيكية التي تثير أسئلةً مهمةً حول الطريقة التي تُغيّر بها التكنولوجيا حياتنا الثقافية والسياسية 。。 الموضوعات ذات الصلة المتعلقة بوسائل التواصل الاجتماعي والابتكار والمراقبة والهوية الرقمية。 تلخيصاً للموضوع: يطرح الكتاب فكرة تناقص الممارسات واللوائح البروقراطية، في تفهم متطلبات المحتاجين لخدماتها - تناقص ما يسميه الكتاب "Interpretive Labor"，كما يناقش الكتاب الأسئلة التالية:1 من أين تأتي الرغبة في القواعد واللوائح والبيروقراطية اللانهائية؟ 2 كيف توصلنا إلى قضاء الكثير من وقتنا في ملء النماذج؟ 3 وهل هي حقاً شفرةً لعنف الدولة؟ التسجيل الصوتي لكتاب متوفر مجانا في اليوتيوب، وفيما يلي رابط للاستماع للتسجيل البالغ مدته 8 ساعات。https://youtu。be/4DbN98VSvyM。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。فيما يلي معلومات عن المؤلف، الذي توفي عام 2020، عن عمر ناهز 59 عاماً:-ديفيد رولف جريبر （12 فبراير 1961-2 سبتمبر 2020）، عالم أنثروبولوجي و"فوضوي" أمريكيناشط。 أعماله المؤثرة في الأنثروبولوجيا الاقتصادية، ولا سيما مؤلفاته- :الدين: أول 5000 سنة"، نُشر عام （2011）。و- "وظائف تافهة"، نُشر عام （2018）،وكذلك دوره الرائد في حركة "احتلوا" العالمية، التي تنادي بالعدالة الاجتماعية؛ كل ذلك أكسبه شهرةُ كأحد أبرز علماء الأنثروبولوجيا والمفكرين اليساريين في عصره。 David Rolfe Graeber （ February 12， 1961 – September 2， 2020 ）， was an American anthropologist and anarchist activist。 His influential work in economic anthropology， particularly his books -Debt: The First 5000 Years （2011）。and-Bullshit Jobs （2018），and: his leading role in the Occupy movement， earned him recognition as one of the foremost anthropologists and left-wing thinkers of his time。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。 فيما يلي رابط لمشاهدة تسجيل قصير من لقاء تم مع هذا المؤلف، قبل نشر كتابه موضوع هذه المراجعة، والذي يتضح منه فلسفته الأنثروبولوجية، ونزعته الإنسانية، التي يصفها البعض بالفوضوية:https://youtu。be/BEb4Bda_06c وفيما يلي رابط لمشاهدة تسجيل تم بتاريخ 8 إبريل 2016، يتحدث فيه المؤلف الراحل عن أفكاره وتوجهاته كما وردت في هذا الكتاب، كان ذلك بعد أسبوعين من نشر الكتاب。 https://youtu。be/a00nQryEoW8 وفيما يلي رابط لمشاهدة تسجيل يتحدث فيه الكاتب عن كتابه الذي صدر عام 2011، بعنوات "الدين: أول 5000 سنة"، والذي تسبب في شهرته:https://youtu。be/CZIINXhGDcs وفيما يلي رابط لمشاهدة تسجيل يتحدث فيه هذا المؤلف عن كتابه الذي صدر عام 2018، بعنوان "وظائف تافهة - Bullshit Jobs"، والذي تسبب بالمزيد من الشهرة له:https://youtu。be/kikzjTfos0s 。。。more
Alex Johnston
，
Come for the critique and history of bureaucracy and how our relationship to it can explain much of modern politics， stay for an excellent essay on/review of The Dark Knight Rises。
Emre
，
The main issue with the essays in this book is digression。 Graeber fails to stay on course time to time and it feels like he is ranting at some points。 The essay on the relationship between bureaocracy and technology was ignorant on the scientific facts。 The fundamental reason that we don't have flying cars is not bureaocracy but rather laws of physics。 The points he makes about science-fiction are flawed because those technologies are closer to fiction than science。 The scientific jargon used i The main issue with the essays in this book is digression。 Graeber fails to stay on course time to time and it feels like he is ranting at some points。 The essay on the relationship between bureaocracy and technology was ignorant on the scientific facts。 The fundamental reason that we don't have flying cars is not bureaocracy but rather laws of physics。 The points he makes about science-fiction are flawed because those technologies are closer to fiction than science。 The scientific jargon used in literature can be convincing but it is naive to expect teleportation or human-like robots。 To criticise the lack of technological development in this fashion is being blissfully ignorant of the science。Overall， I saw that Graeber had a rebellious and creative sprit， yet I consider myself as "a man in grey suit" and people like me are the ones who sit down， write the rules in fine print and oil the gears of the bureaucracy。 That might be the reason the essays are felt more like rants than scientific and intellectual discussions。 。。。more
Eli
，
i'm a graeber simp ok i'm a graeber simp ok 。。。more
☆ BON ☆
，
DNF because I am too stupid for this during a week of terrible news and overload 😂
Garrettburt
，
I always enjoy reading Graeber and this was no exception。 I think his concept of interpretive labor， though derived from predecessor concepts， and the systems of actual and implied violence that uphold its burdensome strictures upon oppressed groups will be something I utilize often going forward when thinking about political organizing。 But there's plenty more there to chew on。 Give it a try！ I always enjoy reading Graeber and this was no exception。 I think his concept of interpretive labor， though derived from predecessor concepts， and the systems of actual and implied violence that uphold its burdensome strictures upon oppressed groups will be something I utilize often going forward when thinking about political organizing。 But there's plenty more there to chew on。 Give it a try！ 。。。more
Vladimir
，
As usual， Graeber is on the dime。 Someone might have noticed from my previous reviews that I became obsessed with bureaucracy lately。 It started to ruin my， otherwise， well-organized life。 I noticed that when I was working in USA， but， since these were short visits （2 months the most）， I didn't pay too much attention to it。 However， the trend with stupid bureaucratic rules arrived to Serbia a couple years ago and， each year， things are getting worse。 Graeber explains well the origin of these tre As usual， Graeber is on the dime。 Someone might have noticed from my previous reviews that I became obsessed with bureaucracy lately。 It started to ruin my， otherwise， well-organized life。 I noticed that when I was working in USA， but， since these were short visits （2 months the most）， I didn't pay too much attention to it。 However， the trend with stupid bureaucratic rules arrived to Serbia a couple years ago and， each year， things are getting worse。 Graeber explains well the origin of these trends。 Among other things， I liked the most his analysis of the differences between play and the game and their relationship to the origin of the appeal of bureaucracy。 "A game is a bounded， specific way of problem solving。 Play is more cosmic and open-ended。 Gods play， but man unfortunately is a gaming individual。 A game has a predictable resolution， play may not。 Play allows for emergence， novelty， surprise （a quote from Indian philosopher of science Shiv Visvanathan）。All true。 But there is also something potentially terrifying about play for just this reason。 Because this open-ended creativity is also what allows it to be randomly destructive。 Cats play with mice。 Pulling the wings off flies is also a form of play。 Playful gods are rarely ones any sane person would desire to encounter。Let me put forth a suggestion， then。What ultimately lies behind the appeal of bureaucracy is fear of play。"Rising from the "fear of play" bureaucracy tends to organize every aspect of our lives。 Since creativity arises from our ability to play， ultimately， we get opposite of what we were striving for。 This kills the enthusiasm for academic work （and any creative work in general）， which is summarized with the following comment of Graeber's （anonymous） academic friend:"The point when I decided I just didn’t care about that [academic] job any more was when I stopped turning off the sound on my computer games during office hours。 There’d be some student waiting outside for feedback on his assignment and I was like， ‘Wait， just let me finish killing this dwarf and I’ll get back to you。’ " （I really sympathize with this guy）。 。。。more
Laurence
，
I marvelled at the breadth of knowledge in "Debt the first five thousand years"， and did not think he could do better。Well this is as good， although a very different - three long essays with a prologue and epilogue。 The ideas give a unique insight into 21st century capitalism with a clear exposition of how the people of the world have been， and are still being， taken for suckers。 As Rebecca Solnit says "a deeply original political thinker"。Highlight insights:- The merging of the investor class a I marvelled at the breadth of knowledge in "Debt the first five thousand years"， and did not think he could do better。Well this is as good， although a very different - three long essays with a prologue and epilogue。 The ideas give a unique insight into 21st century capitalism with a clear exposition of how the people of the world have been， and are still being， taken for suckers。 As Rebecca Solnit says "a deeply original political thinker"。Highlight insights:- The merging of the investor class and the executive class- Structural violence- Policing as enforcers of bureacracy- Interpretative labour， which burdens those at the bottom of the social ladder， and never on those using violence- Rules as protection against pure "play"， which is why bureacracy is attractive， but provides false succour because the rules do not apply to the rule makers。Masterly。 Sad that I found him so late in his life。 And now he has left us。 。。。more
Micyukcha
，
What a fascinating view！ 4。5。Maybe I don't read enough anthropologists， but Graeber's ideas knocked me out。 Tracing reason/logic and its relationship to human nature ---> the volume of modern paperwork is impressive。No doubt， there will be a lot of different takes and situations that may differ， but the general theory seems sound in that regardless of your stance on reason （as a mollifying and modifying force for managing human nature vs a tool for humans to access a truer nature， happier outcom What a fascinating view！ 4。5。Maybe I don't read enough anthropologists， but Graeber's ideas knocked me out。 Tracing reason/logic and its relationship to human nature ---> the volume of modern paperwork is impressive。No doubt， there will be a lot of different takes and situations that may differ， but the general theory seems sound in that regardless of your stance on reason （as a mollifying and modifying force for managing human nature vs a tool for humans to access a truer nature， happier outcome）， the groundwork for rules begins and then self-perpetuates。 Establishing a rule lays out a desire for transparency， accountability， efficiency that generates more rules， steering committees， surveys， and forms。 Now -- he also explains， rules aren't all bad， the idea of bureaucracy is actually seductive in some sense， the notion of an accountable and equitable， and processable world appeals to every child。 That isn't how it works in real-world application， but the flame burns。。。 more atomically， he unpacks how rules are actually required for ingenuity。 Without rules， language/grammar， structure， there is just randomness and no opportunity for creativity， collaboration。 So somewhere in this tension of rules and open play， there is conflict but also true human spirit and understanding。A lot of the ideas took my brain a few chews and I'm not sure if Graeber prescribed any solutions or theories for society/life explicitly， although it was still a fascinating descriptive examination of where modern capitalistic society is today and how it has been derived from basic good intentions and human instincts。 Actually， I take back the part about solutions， he is open to reinventing the constitution as an example。 Just as people once prescribed to Gods/Kings for alienable guidance and direction， the founding dead white fathers are seen that way in America and now provide a dam/series of traffic cones that are preventing ideas and solutions that apply to today's world， not 200+ years ago （"nevermind that there wasn't a multiracial society or women couldn't participate - they invented it this way for a REASON！"）。I think it will take some time for me to unpack the limits of imagination and creativity imposed on us， while knowing why the process of process is alluring， without getting into the same spiraling dead ends， but this planted some seeds！ 。。。more
Spencer
，
"But time and again， we have seen the same results。 Whether motivated by a faith in “rationality” or a fear of arbitrary power， the end result of this bureaucratized notion of freedom is to move toward the dream of a world where play has been limited entirely—or， at best， boxed away in some remote location far from any serious， consequential human endeavor—while every aspect of life is reduced to some kind of elaborate， rule-bound game。 It’s not that such a vision lacks appeal。 Who hasn’t dreame "But time and again， we have seen the same results。 Whether motivated by a faith in “rationality” or a fear of arbitrary power， the end result of this bureaucratized notion of freedom is to move toward the dream of a world where play has been limited entirely—or， at best， boxed away in some remote location far from any serious， consequential human endeavor—while every aspect of life is reduced to some kind of elaborate， rule-bound game。 It’s not that such a vision lacks appeal。 Who hasn’t dreamed of a world where everyone knows the rules， everyone plays by the rules， and—even more—where people who play by the rules can actually still win？ The problem is that this is just as much a utopian fantasy as a world of absolute free play would be。 It will always remain a glimmering illusion that dissolves away as soon as we touch it。" 。。。more
Alexander
，
A solid collection of essays by David。 The last bit about the Nolan Batman movies felt。。。tacked on， or maybe I just zoned out and missed the connection。
Jan D
，
Nice read。 I expected it to put forward a general theory of Bureaucracy。 However， it is more a description critique and historical contextualization of bureacracy in a few essay-like chapters。 You get a bit of additional joy from having read some anthropology classics but it is not a required background reading to enjoy this。 Same goes for having read books on vampires or Batman-comics。
Rolando
，
The book is a wakeup call to society on the increasing use of force in a so-called free society。 This may sound wrong to those living in developed countries who rarely see violence on the streets。 But that's not the type of violence the author is referring to。 He is referring to the use of threat and intimidation to enforce rules and laws， usually by the state。 Case in point。 Lockdown rules in the time of the COVID pandemic are forced upon people via threat of incarceration， penalty fees， and ev The book is a wakeup call to society on the increasing use of force in a so-called free society。 This may sound wrong to those living in developed countries who rarely see violence on the streets。 But that's not the type of violence the author is referring to。 He is referring to the use of threat and intimidation to enforce rules and laws， usually by the state。 Case in point。 Lockdown rules in the time of the COVID pandemic are forced upon people via threat of incarceration， penalty fees， and even physical violence if a person resists。 That seems to hold true for all， or almost all， state-approved rules。Accepting the premise that rules and violence， or the threat of violence for that matter， come together is an important one。 It tells us that， contrary to what most people think， whether a rule produces positive outcomes is questionable; whether it produces violence is not。 We usually have no problem accepting the use of threat and intimidation to enforce a rule we agree with。 The problem is， however， that our understanding of the rules that are enforced upon us is inversely proportional to the complexity of the bureaucracy we live in。 And the latter has skyrocketed within the last two centuries。 Some people may argue that increased bureaucracy is a natural consequence of the increase in population， connectivity， and technological advancements。 There is some truth there。 But people tend to overlook that bureaucracy， as most human-made systems， tends to focus on survival rather than efficiency。 And the way bureaucracy expands and self-perpetuates in power is by increasing its complexity， which requires more bureaucrats to untangle that complexity， who come with new productivity metrics and ways to control others， and so on。 The derailment of bureaucracy does not necessarily mean that people are malevolent。 Often， it is caused by a well-intentioned attempt to solve a problem。 For example， the role of universities has traditionally been to attract very talented people who would occasionally teach， while spending the rest of their time thinking how to make significant scientific progress。 Someone， however， noticed that some academics were doing little， so a measure for academic production was created。 Someone else， after seeing a successful academic-industry collaboration， concluded that it would be good to incentivise this type of collaboration and created a metric for industry collaboration。 Once those metrics are forced upon all academics， which they are， the focus is shifted from making important scientific discoveries to maximising the number of scientific articles and grant applications。 Those things are not the same。 They are not even close。 Society does need rules to move away from chaos and avoid suffering， such as being murdered or raped。 So rules and bureaucracy are necessary and can be beneficial。 The author goes as far as to say that rules have a great appeal to us。 We enjoy games with crystal clear rules; we get bored with games whose rules and outcomes are arbitrary。 But， when a bureaucratic system becomes too complex， we don't longer know whether the system is working towards its original goal or for its own survival。 In the same way it is undesirable having a government more concerned on preserving power than on making people’s life better， it is undesirable having a bureaucratic system creating useless， inconsistent， and counterproductive rules as a result of its natural need to survive。 Citizens in democratic countries may use elections to put in check failed governments。 The paradox， and what makes this book very provocative， is that any system we create to put bureaucracy in check will likely be a bureaucratic one。It is also annoying to accept， as the author frequently reminds us， that we all are bureaucrats in some way。 And， even if you are well-intentioned， you have no way to determine whether your system of bureaucratic rules is achieving the intended goals。 Computer scientists have made progress on verifying whether computer systems behave in the expected way。 Bureaucratic systems are significantly more challenging to analyse， though， because they are primarily executed by humans， not by computers。 Nevertheless， we can use the following sanity checks to determine when things might be going wrong:- Inconsistent: clever people look like fools when they attempt to explain it。- Complex: only a few really understand it。- Sloppy: those in charge don’t bother with it， as whether its rules make sense or not is irrelevant。 After all， simplicity may be the key to happiness， as well as to a solid bureaucratic system。 。。。more
Andrew
，
If you want to understand the quandaries of the current world， you have to read two writers who both departed too early: Mark Fisher and David Graeber。 Fisher to totally bum you out and understand why you feel so lonely and fucked up all the time， then Graeber to tell you to put down the porn and the weed and go out there and laugh a bit at the absurdity of it all， and then maybe you might even feel motivated to do a thing。And these essays on bureaucracy in its many forms are vintage Graeber， an If you want to understand the quandaries of the current world， you have to read two writers who both departed too early: Mark Fisher and David Graeber。 Fisher to totally bum you out and understand why you feel so lonely and fucked up all the time， then Graeber to tell you to put down the porn and the weed and go out there and laugh a bit at the absurdity of it all， and then maybe you might even feel motivated to do a thing。And these essays on bureaucracy in its many forms are vintage Graeber， and excellent reading while my decidedly Graeberian-bureaucratic job （for which I just received five months' bonus for some damn reason that baffles even me， not that I'm complaining） is on work-from-home。 And it led me to smile every time I stepped away from my work laptop to edit a new story， to get in a quick workout， or merely to have a coffee and watch the rain。 。。。more
Manuel
，
Nice insightful and entertaining book with several essays on how we were lied to （or we lied to ourselves） regarding the supposed ‘globalization’ movement， which ended up being more of a ‘burocratization’。 Makes sense retrospectively。
ash c
，
I'm going to be honest， I'm not very academic and this was a struggle to understand。 I thought I'd try to take notes and read it through again so that I can bust out a review that's vaguely coherent but I've decided to just jot down my honest thoughts， which were:- What is this book about again？- Graeber is being more rambly than usual- Perhaps I should start with a basic foundational understanding of political theories before jumping straight into fairly complex critiques of them。。。I still can' I'm going to be honest， I'm not very academic and this was a struggle to understand。 I thought I'd try to take notes and read it through again so that I can bust out a review that's vaguely coherent but I've decided to just jot down my honest thoughts， which were:- What is this book about again？- Graeber is being more rambly than usual- Perhaps I should start with a basic foundational understanding of political theories before jumping straight into fairly complex critiques of them。。。I still can't exactly explain what anarchism， populism， or the various post-isms mean。 But what I can say is that I owe it to Graeber to be critical about phenomena that we take for granted， like a fish in water - shared myths like that efficiency is inherently good， or that the act of categorising human nature is natural and an always-has-been。 The Utopia of Rules is a collection of three essays （and a short critique of The Dark Knight Rises） that explores bureaucracy - its history and social utility， its theoretical underpinnings and how we feel about it。 Graeber， as usual， does his thing by identifying a topic not usually discussed in the layperson sphere， lays out his critique， and explains why its important， in a creative and relatable way。Overall， it argues that bureaucracy is an imposition of simple categories on a world that doesn’t fit neatly into categories， and has unintended consequences that we don't usually expect。 The first essay argues that bureaucracy maintains structural violence or is a way that structural violence can be perpetuated。 The powerful can operate oblivious to what is going on around them - the powerless needs to do most of the interpretive labour and empathy。 On violent resistance: "In both cases， journalists treated such outbreaks as the result of either individual insanity， or inexplicable malice。 In fact， to even suggest possible structural explanations- to speak of the evils of slavery， or to point out that before the eighties reforms in corporate culture destroyed earlier assurances of secure lifetime employment and protections for workers against arbitrary and humiliating treatment by superiors， there had not been a single workplace massacre in all American history （other than by slaves） - seemed somehow immoral， since it would imply such violence was in some way justified。" The second essay explains how bureaucracy and various political changes has stifled anticipated technological progress， through a "profound shift in 1970s from investment in tech for alternative futures to investment in tech that further labor discipline and control"。 It also laid out that privatisation， in its many forms， also suppresses technological advances， contrary to the claim that capitalism spurs invention。 For example， some companies suppress inconvenient discoveries that might impact their business。 Graeber also described how managerial ethos The third essay explains how bureaucratic and state programs are formed。 The post office and other services such as pensions， libraries， health clinics etc。 were not originally created by governments。 but were bottom up initiatives by trade unions， neighbourhood associations， organisations etc， that were eventually co-opted by the state。 While it's an overall good step， this usually means that such programs eventually loses its democratic elements and fails to address important ground up needs。 In 19th century Germany， this phenomenon took the form of developed programs for social insurance， free dictation， etc， but they were purged of any demographic， participatory elements。 These programs were a bribe for votes by the governemnt。 "1。 A new communications technology develops out of the military2。 It spreads rapidly， radically reshaping everyday life3。 It develops a reputation for dazzling efficiency4。 Since it operates on non-market principles， it is quickly seized on by radicals as the first stirrings of a future， non-capitalist economic system already developing within the shell of the old5。 Despite this， it quickly becomes the medium too， for government surveillance and the dissemination of endless new forms of advertising and unwanted paperwork" 。。。more
Andrew
，
Recommended at https://twitter。com/writernancyjane/s。。。 Recommended at https://twitter。com/writernancyjane/s。。。 。。。more
An Bui
，
Love the cheeky dig on superhero movies and Christopher Nolan at the end。 Rest in peace this brilliant， kind and genuine mind。
Indy Scarletti （paperindy）
，
This book was recommended to me by my Honours year supervisor， but it was such a fascinating and enjoyable read。 ‘The Utopia of Rules’ is a collection of four essays by anthropologist David Graeber discussing some element of bureaucracy and our relationship with it。It’s hard to talk about this book without making it sound dry - who wants to a non-fiction book about filling in forms？ - but it was so interesting。 It is a bit academic in structure and language， but overall super readable and Graebe This book was recommended to me by my Honours year supervisor， but it was such a fascinating and enjoyable read。 ‘The Utopia of Rules’ is a collection of four essays by anthropologist David Graeber discussing some element of bureaucracy and our relationship with it。It’s hard to talk about this book without making it sound dry - who wants to a non-fiction book about filling in forms？ - but it was so interesting。 It is a bit academic in structure and language， but overall super readable and Graeber’s voice is witty， humorous and smart in a surprisingly non-irritating way for a white male academic。The essays are centred around America， but are likely to resonate with anyone from culturally similar developed Western societies。 Graeber brings in personal anecdotes， pop references， and lessons from history - and over the course of reading this book I’ve found myself noticing so many of the trends and forces he describes around me in the world。Overall， the Utopia of Rules was full of insights and fresh perspectives on the nature， history and implications of bureaucracy and has left me with many things to chew on。 I’ll definitely be purchasing my own copy of this one and recommend it to anyone who has an interest in politics， sociology， anthropology or governance。 A brilliant read that I hope to come back to again！ 。。。more
Carlos
，
A fascinating perspective on the history， nature， dangerous allure and profound power of bureaucracy。 I thoroughly enjoyed reading it， and if time permits， would like to read it a second time soon。
Sigurjón Guðjónsson
，