What Happened to David Graeber?
Debate over the late anthropologist David Graeber’s legacy centers on the tension between his provocative big-picture narratives and what critics see as sloppy or selective use of evidence in works like Debt, Bullshit Jobs, and The Dawn of Everything. Commenters argue over whether his conjectural style and attacks on mainstream economics and the “myth of the state” are valuable antidotes to entrenched Enlightenment stories or intellectually irresponsible speculation that misreads both history and economics. The thread also touches on how his views on anarchism, the state, and liberal politics evolved over time, and on the circumstances of his early death during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Reception of the Anthropologist’s Major Books
- “Debt” is described by some as life‑changing, reshaping views on money and macroeconomics; others call it sloppy, factually weak, and conspiratorial.
- “The Dawn/Beginning of Everything” is praised for challenging Enlightenment “just‑so stories” about civilization and expanding the imaginable space of social arrangements, but criticized for heavy conjecture, speculative archaeology, and turning tentative “what ifs” into confident claims.
- “On Kings” is seen as dense and mired in academic theory.
- “Bullshit Jobs” resonated strongly as an explanatory frame for modern work misery, but many commenters regard its empirical base as anecdotal and conceptually confused.
Substantive Critiques of the Scholarship
- Multiple commenters cite economists and other reviewers arguing that:
- The treatment of Adam Smith, money as “debt,” and the Federal Reserve misrepresents economics and economic history.
- The dismissal of barter and prior economic thought ignores existing literature.
- The work is “speculative nonfiction”: ambitious theory built on thin or selectively presented evidence.
- Detailed archaeological critiques of the civilization narrative highlight:
- Overstating egalitarianism or “collective self‑rule” where cited archaeologists are more cautious.
- Using maximalist population models or selective interpretations of figurines, seals, and site layouts to fit a thesis.
Defenses and Positive Views
- Supporters value the author as a counter‑narrative generator: even if speculative, the work exposes arbitrariness in mainstream stories about money, states, and civilization.
- The books are seen as opening political imagination, showing that current institutions are historically contingent and alternatives have existed.
- Some argue that “speculative” critique is still useful in undermining overconfident orthodoxies in economics and archaeology.
“Bullshit Jobs” Debate
- One large survey study is cited as contradicting the theory (few workers see their jobs as useless); another later study is cited as supporting it.
- Commenters note survey limitations and suggest multiple reasons people might misjudge the social value of their work.
- Overall, the concept is influential culturally but empirically contested.
Anarchism, the State, and Evolution of Views
- There is disagreement over whether the later work represents a drift toward liberalism or a radical “post‑anarchist” refinement.
- Some see dismantling the concept of “the state” and questioning “inequality” as deepening, not abandoning, anarchist critique.
- Others find anarchist arguments about coercion and the state rhetorically weak and detached from practical realities of violence, hierarchy, and large‑scale coordination.
Death and COVID‑19
- Commenters recount that the anthropologist died suddenly of necrotic pancreatitis in 2020; his spouse has linked it to COVID‑19 based on symptoms and emerging medical connections, but this remains a reported attribution, not settled fact.