I made a post on hierarchy a month ago but I have some more specific questions now.
I’ve been hit with the claim that mass production industries that are needed today would not be possible without a hierarchy. That due to regional limitations and the logistics of smartphone manufacturing, technology cannot be produced on the needed scale without a hierarchy of managers.
This is quoted in PCB fabrication, as well as other areas such as medicine and other mass produced goods.
It is also said that managers are needed for efficiency, though I don’t understand that.
Because the anarchist movement, abolishing hierarchy, “runs counter” to the “global direction of humanity and progress”, it is acclaimed to being “doomed to failure” and “idealist”.
What would be the anarchist response to this? Would appreciate detailed responses and/or resources.
I want to improve my anarchist understanding


If I could tell you plainly what specific forms of hierarchy are and are not acceptable, a consistent and coherent ruleset that 100% accurately defines that, I’d have essentially created a grand unified theory of anarchism.
I am not that smart.
I would argue that part of the entire idea of anarchism is that no one is, that people and groups will always have differences, even if they broadly agree on general principles.
Generally speaking, I would say start with the idea of ‘a system is to be judged by what it does or produces, not what it claims to do or produce.’
Apply that principle to everything, every social construct, every machine, every bias or norm, every political system, every monetary or financial system, every mode of production.
There will commonalities in many of these subsets, but many of them will also have unique elements thay require at least some level of specialized knowledge or serious study to well comprehend.
As to anarcho-syndicalism, well I mean wikipedia is a decent starting point ->
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism