> My response about "next,utopia, please" was to Jacob Conrad, not you. He
was
> quoting your words
> but had appropriated them for his own position.
>
> I would also "like to think ... that large permanent institutions
> producing complex things things could be made to work in noncoercive ...
> ways." Chuck0 defies over a hundred years of experience and theory when he
> insist this can never be. Many critics of anarcho-syndicalism (or maybe I
> should say "libertarian socialism") insist it is
> ill-suited to the complexities of society - Chuck0 seems to agree, and
> answers with, "Yeah, they are right, so therefore we must destroy
> industrialized society." It's a perverse position to take.
>
> Brian
Yes, I agree that it's a perverse position to take, for a number of reasons. Chuck, or me, or anybody else, has about as much chance of "destroying industrial society" as the dog next door. (It could be that industrial society will destroy itself, but that's another issue). Nor do I think that we should want to do so even if any of us--Chuck or me or the dog next door--were to suddenly become Zeus, possessed of a whole clutch of thunderbolts.
Jacob C.