(CHT Tennyson; click the pic for more.)
Recent Comments
- Roderick on It’s What’s in the Dark – It’s What’s Always in the Dark
- Cordial and Sanguine, Part 56: The Mind Cannot Foresee Its Own Eternal Recurrence, Recurrence the Second on Cordial and Sanguine, Part 53: The Mind Cannot Foresee Its Own Eternal Recurrence
- Roderick on Galloping Around the Cosmos Is a Game for the Young
- Ashton on An Agorist in the Agora, with Business in Byzantium
- Ashton on Words Mean Stuff
- Mariana on That’s Just Wrong
- Irfan Khawaja on An Agorist in the Agora, with Business in Byzantium
- Brandon on Galloping Around the Cosmos Is a Game for the Young
- William Grigg on Galloping Around the Cosmos Is a Game for the Young
- Roderick on That’s Just Wrong
Meta
-
Recent Posts
- Cordial and Sanguine, Part 56: The Mind Cannot Foresee Its Own Eternal Recurrence, Recurrence the Second by Roderick
- Cordial and Sanguine, Part 55: Istanbul Redux by Roderick
- 10 + 11 by Roderick
- KSR FTW by Roderick
- Words Mean Stuff by Roderick
- Galloping Around the Cosmos Is a Game for the Young by Roderick
- Cordial and Sanguine, Part 54: Bleeding Heart Libertarianism in Istanbul by Roderick
- An Agorist in the Agora, with Business in Byzantium by Roderick
- That’s Just Wrong by Roderick
- Molinari Unbound! – Septième Soirée by Roderick
14 Comments
Wow, that poster is excellent evidence of what nonsense anarchism is! Even private businesses recognize the need for authority.
Good post, Roderick.
So, Gene, do you fancy yourself an order-giver or an order-taker?
We each do each when appropriate.
Who decides which one is appropriate and when?
That part about the pay envelope reminded me of Long’s post “Without the gaolers we shall soon want for gruel”. Was that original or was it from a book or writing?
That sounds familiar, but which post was it?
This seems to be it:
http://aaeblog.com/2009/04/16/without-the-gaoler-we-should-soon-want-for-gruel/
Also even if someone has to give orders and someone has to take them it doesn’t logically follow that those roles have to be fixed. Even in syndicalism leaders are elected monthly right?
But all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting — by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a two-thirds majority in the case of ….
The Python show had some good satire!
And by the way, yeah, I made up the gruel quote. I think.
Not to nitpick too much, but that is from Holy Grail, not the show. Part of the theme of authority not being able to get through to peasantry. In that movie at least, poor peasants don’t give a damn about the problems of the king.
Gene: anarchism really has to do with an absence of a ruler, not absence of a boss in employment.
In a society of statist, government-monopolized rule, the individual must “obey” the illegitimate monopolist authority or go to jail. That is not related to whether or not the individual is free to work for a boss or choose to work elsewhere.
But in an anarchist society, there is no artificial authority to rule over others, no artificial government monopoly that most of the people did not agree to live under.
But the poster does show yet another reason why it is a good idea to be self-employed.
Interesting anecdote of the decline of hierarchical production models: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2011/08/experience-going-indie
A great counter example to the sentiment in the postcard (?) is the video game developer, Valve. Valve has been quite successful recently for games like Team Fortress 2 and Half-Life. The company basically doesn’t have a management structure.
The survival guide for employees