>There don't have to be hyperspecialized rules with a separate class of people to interpret them. The implementation of such a system would mean the rule of the managerial & intellectual class.
I don't think he suggested a separate class of people to interpret them. But it can require specialised skills.
I think the suggestion that such people would "rule" over everyone else is incorrect though. If policies and procedures are arrived at democratically, then it is the people who will "rule". The important issue though is *what* will such policies and procedures rule over. The answer has to be that they will rule over the economy and not the people. Government of the economy, for the people and by the people.
Without a system of democratically determined policies and procedures to determine day to day administration, economic management would be arbitrary and undemocratic. Unless these are interpreted consistently, the democratic process is likewise thwarted.
But it has it be kept in mind that I am talking in the context of the social management of industry, not government of people. Justin Schwartz and I have been somewhat at cross purposes on that, his comments seem to be premised on socialism being consistent with continued political government and some kind of market economy. My comments are premised on socialism being inconsistent with these things.
It gets a bit confusing when we're all talking about different things. ;-)
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas