>>927021>>927028Only if there was authority associated with that council. If someone were to be a factory worker and in the council of his factory, he would hold no power over, say, a miner who is similarly deciding how his mine is run. In the case of judiciary, judges would be elected rather than appointed and dismissed by election if necessary. Therefore they are beholden to the people rather than the people being beholden to them.
Compare it to modern America: A government bureaucrat can do just about whatever he wants with no accountability. He is the state, not the common man. If he were just one of the masses who got his authority directly by the constant consent of those masses he would no longer be part of what we now consider the state.
>>927035The resources already exist! It is true that it would be a mess to get people into empty houses, but a worthwhile one! It is perhaps humanity's greatest shame that we can provide for all but fall to do so out of a dogmatic adherence to "the market".
People would presumably not achieve astronomic heights in one field, but that is already becoming true with automation. I could be the best auto-worker imaginable, but if a machine designed to do my job can outproduce me I am instantly reduced to nothing. If we are allowed to embrace the breadth of our interests this automation means surplus and leisure, if we cannot we are left empty.
>>927043See, but that was diversity of labor due to a lack of specialization. We would develop a diversity of labor caused by OVER-specialization. That is, our jobs are automated so we are now liberated to work as our interests compel us, rather than as an appeal to social need.
