: Two words: job rotation. According to Marx---and Lenin---everyone should 'administer.'
How about - no one administers other peoples lives? from where does the right to do so come from, and how is such administration to be enforced with those who disagree with it?
Authority exists only where disagreement exists. It is only 'necessary' where disagreement is 'required' to be crushed. Much as it is criticized in the west, authority doesnt become magically benign under other systems.
Lets discuss the role of authority in a socialist society.
: Read this again as: I oppose majority rule, I reject democracy.
Bravo, then why does the above sound disconcertingly authoritarian Barry? Take this opportunity to open my eyes. RD did to a greater extent than most others.
: Ever heard of: 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their work' (1st phase of communism)?
Precisely my point above - by what authority are the preferences of the able over-ruled by the apparent requirement for work?
: Which is a roundabout way of saying the very thing you want to deny: there have always been classes.
Sure it was me who denied the existence of 'class'? What i do criticise is the view of people as being of a class, rather than of themselves. In other words, bunching diverse people together due to a shared circumstance and / or trait - much like racial or sexual discrimination.
Also, it doesnt really tackle the position - why would people become classless, when history suggests that people naturally form hierarchies.