Central coordination without a state hierarchy is entirely possible.
Its not a state, its a insert extremely convoluted term that does everything a state does
These gentlemen think when they have changed the names of things, they have changed the things themselves. That is how these profound thinkers mock the whole world.
In fairness, a lot of socialist theory has a distinction between a “state” and a “government”. The former is the repressive apparatus (police, army and ideological state aparatuses) and the latter consists of the civilian administration which deals with centralised organisation of labor/economy. This is why marx could describe a “stateless society” as developed-communism.
Its not a state, its a insert extremely convoluted term that does everything a state does
In fairness, a lot of socialist theory has a distinction between a “state” and a “government”. The former is the repressive apparatus (police, army and ideological state aparatuses) and the latter consists of the civilian administration which deals with centralised organisation of labor/economy. This is why marx could describe a “stateless society” as developed-communism.
Even the non-repressive function of states need hierarchies. All administration needs specialists, managers, organization.
Think of a hospital, or a large-scale engineering project. There is no conceivable way these could be run without hierarchies and centralized control.