> It's "authoritarian" to use mechanisms of
> accountability when a member breaks a group's bylaws?
> You're kidding me. Throwing around that word --
> "authoritiarian" -- as a baseless smear term for this,
> the way the right throws around "commie," is getting
> old.
A group's by-laws do not cover me when I'm out and about living my life. I don't think churches even expect the stuff they preach to be enforced in everyday life. It is authoritarian to try and control a person's actions outside of your organization! This is like when the ISO and similar groups made decisions about who their members could date.
Solidarity is a good idea. It's up to an organization and a movement to instill that value in its members.
> Chuck0 knew what the IWW's bylaws were when he joined.
> Why join the org. if you don't want to follow them?
> Street cred?
What the hell are you talking about? I've never crossed a picket line. Do people read the posts here or do they just attack people?
Bizarre!
Chuck