5 ms·

The Rebel is a very interesting piece of work - you can randomly flip it open to any page and find tidbits like this: > "When we are assured that tomorrow, in

The Rebel is a very interesting piece of work - you can randomly flip it open to any page and find tidbits like this: > "When we are assured that tomorrow, in the natural order of events, will be better than today, we can enjoy ourselves in peace. Progress, paradoxically, can be used to justify conservatism. A draft drawn on confidence in the future, it allows the master to have a clear conscience. The slave and those whose present life is miserable and who can find no consolation in the heavens are assured that at least the future belongs to them. The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves." However, even after reading the book the notion of anarchism remains unclear. I couldn't tell you how an anarchist would go about setting up a steel factory (or any other activity requiring highly coordinated human effort) in line with anarchist principles, for example.

piloto_ciego 3y ago
Check out the CNT in Spain.
incompatible 3y ago
In principle, the steelworkers would be like any group of people working together without hierarchy. How would a group of friends decide where to go in the afternoon? If there is more than one option, but only one can be taken, then either they'd split off into multiple groups, or they'd vote on which option has the greater support, perhaps with dissenters leaving.
- photochemsyn 3y ago
  Some positions in a complicated workflow do require far more experience and skill than others, so it would seem a hierarchy of some kind would naturally arise? You really wouldn't want someone with just a few months of experience making potentially catastrophic decisions, for example.
  - incompatible 3y ago
    I suppose any kind of hierarchy would need to be informal, based on workers following the examples set by other workers who they trust to have the right expertise. But unlike in a typical formal hierarchy, this wouldn't need to be those who have simply worked there the longest, or have the greatest drive for power over others, or those who have the best connections with the owners. There wouldn't be any fringe benefits (payment) for having greater influence through expertise.
  - atoav 3y ago
    As someone who has written a work anarchist political theory 15 years ago, my understanding is that many anarchist theories argue among the lines of: The political question is not about whether there are hierarchies, but how to organize them in a way that: 1. hierarchies are not set in stone and won't get people stuck in one space 2. power accumulation and corruption through power is successfully prevented both in the short and the long term (ideally while still keeping the whole thing very mobile on small matters and more stable and careful on grand matters) 3. hierarchies are not steeper than absolutely necessary and there should be a high mobility between hierarchical layers 4. anarchy is about an absence of centralized ruling structure, not about an absence of rules. This might seem a weird distinction, but having a ruler and no rules is not the same as having no ruler and coming up with a set of clear rules Most anarchist theorists would therefore have argued the notion that anarchy requires a higher sense of order and does not represent "chaos" as it is often described. One of the most important prerequisites for that was good education, at least in the CNT educating yourself was seen as one of the prime duties of an anarchist, because if everybody comes into the role of the decider, it is good if you know what you are doing. Democracy is also a system that tries to deal with the way power is given, transitioned by giving the people a vote. In most anarchist or anarchosyndicalist systems voting is also pretty important, it is just much more self-organized, more bottom up than top down and came with ideas like strict term limits and rotations for all positions of power. Often councils where proposed to gain some continuity, with members of these councils often leaving and new ones coming in. Please note that I describe that CNT flavoured anarchism from the top of my head, there are different notions elsewhere (e.g. less collectivist and much more libertarian ones in the US).
    - pdinny 3y ago
      Thank you for this edifying comment. As someone who has, at best, an extremely surface level understanding of anarchism, I found some aspects of what I understood quite appealing but I thought that it may be impractical or too idealistic. This has sparked my interest to actually go deep.
      - TotalCrackpot 3y ago
        I very much suggest you watching some Anark video essays on YouTube, I think he is a very good resource to better learn the theory.
  - toofy 3y ago
    if me and a group of friends are on a sunny weekend building a house together, we’re going to show much more deference to the person who has 20 years of electrician experience when it comes electrical work. and the same would go with plumbing and a plumber. etc… etc… this doesn’t really have anything to do with how an anarchist would view hierarchy. i think most people would show deference to domain knowledge, but this wouldn’t suddenly make the electrician “the boss”.
    - huytersd 3y ago
      It would make the architect the boss because he would tell you what needs to happen next. That scenario with a client deadline means the “architect” is going to push you to finish before the deadline, prod you to get back to work if you’re lazing around and generally fulfill the role of a foreman. Anarchism is a theoretical mental exercise with no basis in anything in the real world. True anarchism is just current day Haiti where there strong rule over the weak because anarchism doesn’t provide any solutions as to how to build and maintain a society without hierarchies.
      - lukan 3y ago
        "It would make the architect the boss because he would tell you what needs to happen next." But he would have no formal power and there would be no underlings. The other people would voluntaritly accept his leadership based on his skills. (Or they would not and leave). So he cannot treat them bad just because he feels like it. That is a different approach to power and I have seen it working in the real world (think of the friends example). But yes, I also have not seen it working stable and consistent enough to base all of society on it. So the explicit anarchistic projects I have seen, definitely had (informal) power structures. So I really love the consensus approach of anarchism when it is working. It is really awesome working together with people who all do it because they want to, not because they have to. But the hypocrosy regarding power is turning me off. Because in reality there are no true equals and also in anarchistic projects there are people having way more power than others. Which I don't think is bad, but it is bad pretending this isn't the case.
      - incompatible 3y ago
  - andoando 3y ago
    The main idea behind anarchism is free association, meaning a group of people can freely decide who leads them. It isnt too far fetched an idea. There are several working implementation of worker owned democratic workplaces, of which the Isreali kibbutz communities are one the largest. Imagine replacing corporate entities with structures where the employees all have share of the company and have direct access to vote in leadership, or decide some other kind of structure (as Valve supposedly does). Theres some challenges to work though but I dont see why any new startup cant take this approach. If I ever get a successful product going Im going to give it a try.
    - TotalCrackpot 2y ago
      You can check Igalia and their videos on YouTube to see their structure for remote IT worker coop that is flat and has over 100 employees.
  - nanomonkey 3y ago
    There is a difference between a hierarchy of control, and a hierarchy of capabilities. Think of a student driver and instructor scenario. The student driver is in direct control of the car, while the instructor has more experience and is a better driver than the student. The instructor can mentor the student and provide safeguards so that the student does not kill themselves while obtaining knowledge. It's accepting these sorts of hierarchies in humanity that allow us to make better decisions, and listen to experts, while not giving up control over our own actions.
- ItCouldBeWorse 2y ago
  One of the dissenters is the chemistry experts, setting the charges in the steel factory, his specialization is something he can hold hostage and he takes it with him. Now you have a crew with no idea, producing low value steel, maybe even destroying the steelworks in the process. Once the factory is worn out, they all decides its to much hassle to run it and go fishing. Societal complexity does not hold up without external pressures.
TotalCrackpot 3y ago
You can choose delegates with some sphere of autonomy in a horizontal way, but in anarchist association you can instantly recall them in a horizontal way too. This helps mitigate creating hierarchy while giving someone autonomy and making it possible to divide labor.
- huytersd 3y ago
  Who can instantly recall them? A group vote or an individual? Because one of them is just democracy and the other is utterly unworkable. The first time someone doesn’t want to work, they’re going to “recall” the boss.
  - TotalCrackpot 3y ago
    Direct democracy, ranging from majority vote to some kind of consensus or consent. Considering someone not working - in anarchy you can always pick with whom you associate with so you can just not associate with a persons who you feel is too lazy.
keybored 3y ago
> However, even after reading the book the notion of anarchism remains unclear. I couldn't tell you how an anarchist would go about setting up a steel factory (or any other activity requiring highly coordinated human effort) in line with anarchist principles, for example. You’ve lost the ability to imagine freedom.
- photochemsyn 3y ago
  Freedom is one of those words subject to endless manipulation. Freedom of action, for example - does that mean people should be free to enslave others? Freedom to expropriate (steal) the product of another's labor? Freedom from the physical laws of conservation of energy and momentum? Take the bicycle - an optimal transport solution for the anarchist. Everyone has a bicycle, everyone is free to ride the bicycle - but how does the bicycle factory work? How do all the factories needed to supply the bicycle factory with rubber, steel, aluminum, precise machine tooling, etc. fulfill those tasks? In turn, how do they get raw materials - ores, etc. - that they need to produce these materials? Do they sign contracts with each other? If one party fails to deliver on a contract, is there a penalty and who enforces that penalty? Certainly the situation can be improved - I'd argue for fixing the highest salary to be no more than 10X the lowest salary, and that gradations should be entirely merit-based (not inheritance-based) - but is that against anarchist principles or not? Flattening hierarchies is possible, but eliminating them? I think if you try to eliminate hierarchies, you just replace them with sneaky covert hierarchies that are gamed by the usual manipulative personality types to their own benefit.
  - keybored 3y ago
    See for example Chomsky’s[1] anarchism.[2] > authority, unless justified, is inherently illegitimate and that the burden of proof is on those in authority. If this burden can't be met, the authority in question should be dismantled. Authority/hierarchy are interchangeable in this context. [1] The guy most known in computer science for his “Chomsky hierarchy”. [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchy101/comments/ss7eze/where_does_noam_chomsky_definitively_utter_the/hwwktk4/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchy101/comments/ss7eze/where_do...
Sorrop 2y ago
Anarchism does not exclude division of labour. That tidbit is very interesting

piloto_ciego 3y ago

Check out the CNT in Spain.

incompatible 3y ago

In principle, the steelworkers would be like any group of people working together without hierarchy. How would a group of friends decide where to go in the afternoon? If there is more than one option, but only one can be taken, then either they'd split off into multiple groups, or they'd vote on which option has the greater support, perhaps with dissenters leaving.

photochemsyn 3y ago
Some positions in a complicated workflow do require far more experience and skill than others, so it would seem a hierarchy of some kind would naturally arise? You really wouldn't want someone with just a few months of experience making potentially catastrophic decisions, for example.
- incompatible 3y ago
  I suppose any kind of hierarchy would need to be informal, based on workers following the examples set by other workers who they trust to have the right expertise. But unlike in a typical formal hierarchy, this wouldn't need to be those who have simply worked there the longest, or have the greatest drive for power over others, or those who have the best connections with the owners. There wouldn't be any fringe benefits (payment) for having greater influence through expertise.
- atoav 3y ago
  As someone who has written a work anarchist political theory 15 years ago, my understanding is that many anarchist theories argue among the lines of: The political question is not about whether there are hierarchies, but how to organize them in a way that: 1. hierarchies are not set in stone and won't get people stuck in one space 2. power accumulation and corruption through power is successfully prevented both in the short and the long term (ideally while still keeping the whole thing very mobile on small matters and more stable and careful on grand matters) 3. hierarchies are not steeper than absolutely necessary and there should be a high mobility between hierarchical layers 4. anarchy is about an absence of centralized ruling structure, not about an absence of rules. This might seem a weird distinction, but having a ruler and no rules is not the same as having no ruler and coming up with a set of clear rules Most anarchist theorists would therefore have argued the notion that anarchy requires a higher sense of order and does not represent "chaos" as it is often described. One of the most important prerequisites for that was good education, at least in the CNT educating yourself was seen as one of the prime duties of an anarchist, because if everybody comes into the role of the decider, it is good if you know what you are doing. Democracy is also a system that tries to deal with the way power is given, transitioned by giving the people a vote. In most anarchist or anarchosyndicalist systems voting is also pretty important, it is just much more self-organized, more bottom up than top down and came with ideas like strict term limits and rotations for all positions of power. Often councils where proposed to gain some continuity, with members of these councils often leaving and new ones coming in. Please note that I describe that CNT flavoured anarchism from the top of my head, there are different notions elsewhere (e.g. less collectivist and much more libertarian ones in the US).
  - pdinny 3y ago
    Thank you for this edifying comment. As someone who has, at best, an extremely surface level understanding of anarchism, I found some aspects of what I understood quite appealing but I thought that it may be impractical or too idealistic. This has sparked my interest to actually go deep.
    - TotalCrackpot 3y ago
      I very much suggest you watching some Anark video essays on YouTube, I think he is a very good resource to better learn the theory.
- toofy 3y ago
  if me and a group of friends are on a sunny weekend building a house together, we’re going to show much more deference to the person who has 20 years of electrician experience when it comes electrical work. and the same would go with plumbing and a plumber. etc… etc… this doesn’t really have anything to do with how an anarchist would view hierarchy. i think most people would show deference to domain knowledge, but this wouldn’t suddenly make the electrician “the boss”.
  - huytersd 3y ago
    It would make the architect the boss because he would tell you what needs to happen next. That scenario with a client deadline means the “architect” is going to push you to finish before the deadline, prod you to get back to work if you’re lazing around and generally fulfill the role of a foreman. Anarchism is a theoretical mental exercise with no basis in anything in the real world. True anarchism is just current day Haiti where there strong rule over the weak because anarchism doesn’t provide any solutions as to how to build and maintain a society without hierarchies.
    - lukan 3y ago
      "It would make the architect the boss because he would tell you what needs to happen next." But he would have no formal power and there would be no underlings. The other people would voluntaritly accept his leadership based on his skills. (Or they would not and leave). So he cannot treat them bad just because he feels like it. That is a different approach to power and I have seen it working in the real world (think of the friends example). But yes, I also have not seen it working stable and consistent enough to base all of society on it. So the explicit anarchistic projects I have seen, definitely had (informal) power structures. So I really love the consensus approach of anarchism when it is working. It is really awesome working together with people who all do it because they want to, not because they have to. But the hypocrosy regarding power is turning me off. Because in reality there are no true equals and also in anarchistic projects there are people having way more power than others. Which I don't think is bad, but it is bad pretending this isn't the case.
    - incompatible 3y ago
- andoando 3y ago
  The main idea behind anarchism is free association, meaning a group of people can freely decide who leads them. It isnt too far fetched an idea. There are several working implementation of worker owned democratic workplaces, of which the Isreali kibbutz communities are one the largest. Imagine replacing corporate entities with structures where the employees all have share of the company and have direct access to vote in leadership, or decide some other kind of structure (as Valve supposedly does). Theres some challenges to work though but I dont see why any new startup cant take this approach. If I ever get a successful product going Im going to give it a try.
  - TotalCrackpot 2y ago
    You can check Igalia and their videos on YouTube to see their structure for remote IT worker coop that is flat and has over 100 employees.
- nanomonkey 3y ago
  There is a difference between a hierarchy of control, and a hierarchy of capabilities. Think of a student driver and instructor scenario. The student driver is in direct control of the car, while the instructor has more experience and is a better driver than the student. The instructor can mentor the student and provide safeguards so that the student does not kill themselves while obtaining knowledge. It's accepting these sorts of hierarchies in humanity that allow us to make better decisions, and listen to experts, while not giving up control over our own actions.
ItCouldBeWorse 2y ago
One of the dissenters is the chemistry experts, setting the charges in the steel factory, his specialization is something he can hold hostage and he takes it with him. Now you have a crew with no idea, producing low value steel, maybe even destroying the steelworks in the process. Once the factory is worn out, they all decides its to much hassle to run it and go fishing. Societal complexity does not hold up without external pressures.

TotalCrackpot 3y ago

You can choose delegates with some sphere of autonomy in a horizontal way, but in anarchist association you can instantly recall them in a horizontal way too. This helps mitigate creating hierarchy while giving someone autonomy and making it possible to divide labor.

huytersd 3y ago
Who can instantly recall them? A group vote or an individual? Because one of them is just democracy and the other is utterly unworkable. The first time someone doesn’t want to work, they’re going to “recall” the boss.
- TotalCrackpot 3y ago
  Direct democracy, ranging from majority vote to some kind of consensus or consent. Considering someone not working - in anarchy you can always pick with whom you associate with so you can just not associate with a persons who you feel is too lazy.

keybored 3y ago

> However, even after reading the book the notion of anarchism remains unclear. I couldn't tell you how an anarchist would go about setting up a steel factory (or any other activity requiring highly coordinated human effort) in line with anarchist principles, for example. You’ve lost the ability to imagine freedom.

photochemsyn 3y ago
Freedom is one of those words subject to endless manipulation. Freedom of action, for example - does that mean people should be free to enslave others? Freedom to expropriate (steal) the product of another's labor? Freedom from the physical laws of conservation of energy and momentum? Take the bicycle - an optimal transport solution for the anarchist. Everyone has a bicycle, everyone is free to ride the bicycle - but how does the bicycle factory work? How do all the factories needed to supply the bicycle factory with rubber, steel, aluminum, precise machine tooling, etc. fulfill those tasks? In turn, how do they get raw materials - ores, etc. - that they need to produce these materials? Do they sign contracts with each other? If one party fails to deliver on a contract, is there a penalty and who enforces that penalty? Certainly the situation can be improved - I'd argue for fixing the highest salary to be no more than 10X the lowest salary, and that gradations should be entirely merit-based (not inheritance-based) - but is that against anarchist principles or not? Flattening hierarchies is possible, but eliminating them? I think if you try to eliminate hierarchies, you just replace them with sneaky covert hierarchies that are gamed by the usual manipulative personality types to their own benefit.
- keybored 3y ago
  See for example Chomsky’s[1] anarchism.[2] > authority, unless justified, is inherently illegitimate and that the burden of proof is on those in authority. If this burden can't be met, the authority in question should be dismantled. Authority/hierarchy are interchangeable in this context. [1] The guy most known in computer science for his “Chomsky hierarchy”. [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchy101/comments/ss7eze/where_does_noam_chomsky_definitively_utter_the/hwwktk4/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchy101/comments/ss7eze/where_do...

Sorrop 2y ago

Anarchism does not exclude division of labour. That tidbit is very interesting