"Anarchy Reigns in Social Production" re: unions

Gordon Fitch gcf at panix.com
Fri Aug 16 05:51:22 PDT 2002



> ...
> > Is there an implication here that coercion is necessary to
> > accomplish projects over a certain size? If so, can it be
> > made more explicit?

s-t-t at juno.com:
> I think the implication is that anarchism has a tremendous difficulty
> responding to the complexities of the existing social order. The mere
> possibility of workers' councils (or whatever form and name they take)
> voting away a major portion of society's transportation infrastructure is
> too absurd to digest, and is fairly off-track as far as expropriating the
> expropriators is concerned.

You're not answering my question. In regard to airplanes and computers, there seems to have been an argument that they can't be built in a noncoercive society, but I don't think anyone said so directly, so I'm asking.

If the answer is in the affirmative, then we might go on to consider the possible cost of holding a gun to someone's head to get this or that product of advanced technology. I already made the argument that no necessary limit to the complexity of self-organized systems has been presented, but no one cared about that, so I'm trying to play the game on _your_ court.

-- Gordon



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list