Quote:
|
Is the solution to this problem some sort of voluntary association, where all co-operation is ensured to be between consenting people who have agreed to work in a certain way? How would that work?
|
Actually a corporation is an voluntary association where consenting people agree to work in a certain way.
Quote:
|
It seems to me like the freedom of individuals is an important goal, but that ideas about voluntary association (or even things like voluntary socialism) always need to rely on the assumption that individuals will choose to carry out the same sort of tasks they're doing right now
|
That assumption is false.
The tasks that need to be done change over time.
Quote:
|
How can you maximize the freedom of individuals within a corporation, for example? Could a corporation even function properly if you removed the people in charge?
|
We don't have to live in a world with LLC corporations.
Quote:
|
In other words, if maximizing the freedom of the individual is a worthwhile goal, we seem to have a lot of practical problems that would need to be solved along the way.
|
Indeed the world would change pretty substantially.
The world doesn't change through designing an ideal world and afterwards switching to that ideal world.
The world changes in many small steps and afterwards it's so different that nobody could have imagined.
If you would have told the people who build the first computer that their device will be used in 60 years to send porn around the globe they would probably have thought that you were insane.
A world without centralised power would have some characteristic that sounds to us just as insane as computers being used to send porn around the world sounded 60 years ago or even 100 years ago.
Most people don't even have a grasp about how the world works at a basic level to understand the problem that have to be solved.
Communties for example need to have small world characteristics.
Our communities and states are dynamic systems and most people aren't able to think in a dynamic system perspective and aren't able to understand the language of dynamic systems.