Voluntary association

[Eric Roosevelt]

It seems like freeing oneself from authorities feels like a very natural goal for most people. Very few people like to be dominated.

But then we have the problem that a lot of institutions and corporations that provide important governing functions or basic goods (such as food and housing), still rely on systems of authority. As has been noted by many people before me, we often need to co-operate very carefully on a very large scale in order to keep the basic functions of society running. At the end of the day we can't act like we live in bubbles and don't depend on each other in different ways.

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?

Or is the solution perhaps to try to democratize all institutions and corporations in order to break down the systems of control?

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?

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, but without anyone ever telling them to do so.

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.

What are your thoughts on this?

[Brutha]

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Eric Roosevelt]

Originally Posted by Brutha

Actually a corporation is an voluntary association where consenting people agree to work in a certain way.

A voluntary association is actually an unincorporated entity, which basically means it has a different legal status from a corporation.

What I was trying to ask though (perhaps a little unclearly) was whether a truly voluntary organization would be possible, without any type of "wage slavery" or system based on force.

A lot of people didn't necessarily choose their tasks at work, and few people see themselves as having the choice of not working at all. That's not exactly voluntary. They have to work to eat, and work so they can go shopping.

YouTube - The suicidal mental slavery of capitalism (please excuse the crude title)

Originally Posted by Brutha

That assumption is false.
The tasks that need to be done change over time.

We'll still need some of the basic governing functions, and corporations that provide for our basic needs. But yes, new types of jobs are constantly being created.

We don't have to live in a world with LLC corporations.

I don't know very much about them.

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.

Is that basically what the Black Swan is?

In any case, I think there's value in trying to imagine some type of ideal world. It seems useful to at least imagine what we would like to be moving towards. If we imagine it, we may be able to move towards it some day, but if we don't imagine it, we're basically doomed.

Communties for example need to have small world characteristics.

Feel free to expand on this. What kind of characteristics?

[funchy]

Originally Posted by Eric Roosevelt

It seems like freeing oneself from authorities feels like a very natural goal for most people. Very few people like to be dominated.

I think it all depends on your culture & beliefs. Americans are big on self-freedom and a sense of self determination. We only want to work for ourselves and if we give up too much of 'self' we start resisting.

Contrast that to say for example the Amish, a religious subculture who have settlements in the US. They work for what's best for their immediate family, extended family, and small community. They don't work for hourly wages. The work to put food on the tables so their loved ones can eat. Everyone cooperates. Fame, excessive attention, or vanity are frowned upon. Kids, family, neighbors, and their faith are what they work for.

So I believe people can work with others and work hard, if they're raised to believe it's for an important greater good. Americans for the most part have lost that greater-good feeling, and now everything is me-me-me. It's all about greed, climbing the ladder, power, and prestige. The thing most of them haven't figured out is that greed is a big hamster exercise wheel : the more you work, the faster you have to go to keep up. Greedy people can never be satisfied with enough. If anything it's greed not corporations that keep us slaves. We create our own prisons and limit ourselves.