Worker's control [i.e. 'liberty in the workplace' according to you here], if allowed to subordinate the principle of job rotation, could potentially re-create the very divisions of labor that engender hierarchy.
: Here, sir, there's a difference. Namely performing DIFFERENT tasks, taking an interest in DIFFERENT tasks is not the same as establishing a hierarchy with status and authority.
Hmmm. . . 'Taking an interest in DIFFERENT tasks'. . .
Say you 'take an interest' in State Planning; wouldn't that leave MORE laundry for me?
Wouldn't your 'freedom' to pursue the jobs you like interfere with mine?
: Let me give you a scenario, I've just shot and killed my capitalist neo-conservative boss do you think I'm going to hand over my gun and submit to a new party assigned one?
If job rotation was implemented (as I advocate), you wouldn't be 'handing over' ANYTHING---except to yourself, would you?
What do you say to those individuals who want the 'liberty' to do only the work they choose? Such as mental (skilled) work? If they get what they want, then there will be MORE physical (unskilled) work for everyone else.
: No I dont, the fact that what you way you dress, what way you cut your hair, what time up go to work and what time you go home at are not in your control was more what I was thinking off [???], I think you'll find I agree with job rotation, subordinated to workers control but job rotation none the less.
Let me get this straight---you 'agree with' job rotation, but you want it SUBORDINATED to 'liberty in the workplace'?
Job rotation---as I expatiated here---equally distributes unskilled work amongst all; allows each individual the opportunity to find a specialized field; plus: insures that EVERYONE evenly rotates positions pertaining to state administration.
Yet you would subordinate THAT package for 'liberty in the workplace.'
Funny, you (and others) are so quick to call me authoritarian, fascist, etc.---yet whenever I propose to PREVENT any usurption of power through job rotation, you (and others) are equally quick to find vacillations and qualifications to such a proposal.
Call yourself a defender of 'liberty' if you want, Lark, but your nonegalitarian streak is getting more transparent with each post.
You want to hold on to 'some' exemptions that may allow you to enjoy 'meaningful' work OF YOUR CHOICE (your venerated 'liberty,' remember?)---while bagging out of doing 'some' OTHER TYPES OF WORK (which presumably people like me---possessing no college education---will do).
To hell with that! I want EVERYONE to do the 'meaningful' work and the 'menial' work. EQUALLY.
If I wanted 'liberty in the workplace' (read: individual exemptions to do 'some' jobs and reject 'some' other ones), then I'd be happy with CAPITALISM which has LOADS of 'liberty' for some people to take certain jobs while consigning other jobs to other people.
Again: freedom to, or freedom from?.
: Equally both.
For capitalists and other privileged bureacratic usurpers as well as workers?
This may be the only post of yours I answer today.