John Doe:
“Doesn`t it make any difference if the hierarchical relationship is voluntary or not, i.e. one can choose to be employed by a company, or choose not to be employed by a company in a society without government intervention in regards to production/trade etc(not authoritarian, even though the company in question may be organized in a hierarchical fashion)?”
Sure, it’s possible that one would choose to become a slave, though probably not willingly. ANd were they to it would most definitely NOT have anything to do with libertarianism/socialism/anarchism/communism other than being it’s opposite. I’m well aware of the efforts of some to try and make slavery, in all its forms i.e.chattel, wage, etc..to seem reasonable, natural, etc…It simply isn’t if one is a libertarian, nor has it ever been deemed to be. One canNOT choose most of the things you’ve listed in any sense related to freedom. Again, libertarian/socialism/anarchism/communism are against all hierarchical relationships as they infringe upon freedom and liberty. This is precisely why one cannot now or ever be a capitalist and a libertarian. Actual libertarians have been writing about this since at least the mid-1800’s. It wasn’t till the around the 1970’s when the term “libertarian” began to be hijacked by the right-wing freemarketeers who thought it would simply make their goals of “freeing up society” for pillage and plunder easier.
Regarding government intervention, well, while I’m no big fan of “the state”, the only reason capitalism has existed as long as it has is precisely due to the state. There have been no societies which have developed in any way outside the use of the state. None. Zero. And, yes, places like Somalia are good examples of places which have tried. Also, the entire notion of “the state” should be looked at a little closer. In a free and democratic society i.e.the only kind which libertarian/anarchism could exist, where all people are free, were there are no hierarchical relationships, etc…there would be no “state” if by state we mean an unaccountable group of people making decisions without democratic participation. If there are this sort of a group, it’s simply not democracy. The us (the people) versus them (the state) is simply a false dichotomy in any free society. If the free people, freely choose to have some folks deal with certain societal functions, well, that’s that. Has nothing to do with a hierarchy of any sort. Or if it does it’s not hierarchical for any power reasons. If the people of the society decide to build bridge over the river, well, I’m not going to insist that they allow me to do it because I know nothing about building bridges. We would simply find who was capable of doing it, and putting them in charge of doing it. He may give orders to others, but this is part of the deal if we want the bridge. However, allowing him the authority to be in charge of the building of the bridge doesn’t in any way, shape or form give him any special privilege, or hierarchical status. So, if a company consists of free people, who have not been compelled to work there under the threat of starvation, and who will receive the benefits of whatever their labor has produced, without anyone taking any profit from his labor(stealing) i.e.capitalist, and would lend itself toward equality, would allow all the folks working at the company to have an input into what they think should happen with the company, and there are some other things, then, yes, I guess it might be able to be done. Renting oneself out for someone else to profit off of i.e.wage slavery, and never been accepted by defenders of freedom and liberty. This is why so much effort has been put into simply trying to adjust what people perceive as being something other than what it is i.e.a hierarchical relationship, which most any elementary child would immediately recognize as hierarchical. Takes lots of work and a little sophistry to try andargue that something is not really slavery if the slave “volunteers” to be a slave. Libertarians do not wish to have slaves, nor be slaves. Capitalism is simply not compatable with this unless the meanings of words are changed.