> Do we really need leaders? Well, the thing is that commercial companies - which are owned by a party other than their employees [1] - "need" agents of owners

> Do we really need leaders? Well, the thing is that commercial companies - which are owned by a party other than their employees [1] - "need" agents of owners' control. Whether they "lead" or not is not the main point. The point is that they answer directly to the owners, and through this they have power and control. Without them, the workers would "do what they want" - which may be a good thing or a bad thing, but it won't be what the owners decide. So, in that sense, "we" "need" "leaders", yes. [1] - If workers also own company stock that doesn't changed the structural nature of the ownership relations.