So a while ago when that person did the interview and much drama ensued, there was a discussion here about what the subreddit was actually for. In the sub's description 'ending work' is noted, so perhaps the 'true' antiwork people won and the work reformers were defeated and so on, but my general question is what does this actually mean? Does this sub regard work as inherantly dishonourable?
Many posts here are about how people should work reasonably, how companies shouldn't exploit their workers or how we should adopt a less intense attitude to work. I think these are pretty reasonable critiques, but I would question the points around the apparently inherant dishonourableness of work.
I work in the public sector. I've worked for private entities in the past, it was alright, but I essentially decided I didn't really want to work for the enrichment of a capitalist, I didn't want to spend my time doing reasonably paid but boring work for someone to only make them more wealthy. Similarly, I have indeed experienced poor workplace events or maangement occasionally, so I sympathise with those points.
However, I find the work I do now rewarding, I feel that I'm helping people, I'm contributing to the wider effort, that I'm making a positive contribution. Perhaps there are some aspects of my job or of policies I implement that I disagree with, but I accept that I don't control those things and my disagreements aren't major.
Similarly, there are many jobs that exist which are positive. We will always need police, firefighters, nurses, doctors, teachers, road workers, and so on. Some of jobs can be done by automation, others can't. I don't think we need as many shoe sellers or coffe makers as we have, but those are service people too.
Recalling the old 'Bullshit Jobs' thesis, there are jobs we don't really need, and there are certainly jobs which contribute very little. I believe there's a statistic that financial professionals actually contribute a net loss to the economy for example.
However I'd still ask, why is work inherantly dishonourable? Unless we lived in a true utopia, free from want and danger, I would argue the idea of a 'work free life' is immoral. I want to contribute, I want to improve things, I'm altrustic in general and I would say most people are. I suppose it might be nice to spend my time in education or personal endeavours, producing art or something for example, but there's much to be done, and we do not in fact live in a utopia.
There's a philosophical point here about whether we should avocate for antiwork before building the utopia, or if antiwork would come about naturally as a result of it, but I set that aside for now. I identify as a socialist, I would prefer that people not be ground down by capitalism, I certainly think we have the capacity to improve many aspects of life, but I don't think it's reasonable, morally or practically, to advocate for an antiwork state, or to denigrate work as an activity.