• masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Occupy Wall Street,

    There were lots of people playing leadership roles during Occupy. Lots.

    Antifa? Lots.

    BLM? Lots.

    Every goddamn resistance movement in the history of human civilisation? Positively a shitload.

    Stop being unserious.

    • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      I think the fundanebtal problem is what a leader is.

      I heard/read something about how to set up crews/packs/whatevertheyrecalled for competitive dog sledding. You don’t put the fastest or strongest dog in front. You put a curious adventurous dog in front.

      So a ‘leader’ in this case, and i think what we need, isnt bosses or managers, but closer to explorers and scouts, people with initiative courage and creativity to try shit and be examples/report back. Solve disputes with evidence and forging known paths-that can still be disregarded or altered by those farther back.

      And i think most of us can do that in at least one direction.

      Not that we dont need coordinators or administrators at scale, but we dont have to pair those roles with authority/command. We can unbundle shit, cut out the rot/waste, and recombine it in new ways. Ask your radical queer friends about the concept!

      Maybe, for example, administrative tasks pair better with caring tasks or research/social science tasks than authority ever allowed.

      • masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        The fundamental question is not simply what a “leader” is, but also what a “follower” is - both are active roles that require agency.

        We can make this a lot easier for ourselves if we identify and reject the authoritarian and hierarchical baggage that the word “leader” has been hamstrung with. Once we do, we can simply redefine, for ourselves, what the terms “leader” and “follower” mean in ways that actually makes sense in a non-hierarchical context.

        So a ‘leader’ in this case, and i think what we need, isnt bosses or managers,

        Bosses and managers do not lead - you can accuse them of plenty of things, but leading isn’t one of them. The corporate world, in fact, absolutely hates leadership ability in every kind of way possible, and the reason is really not that hard to see. Corporations run on the same kind of toadyism you find in the political party world - absolute loyalty to the people above them in the corporate hierarchy, not responsibility to the people below them.

        Any concept of “leadership” that emerges from these worlds deserves to be rejected out of hand.