My definition of a coercive hierarchy isn’t just some people having more privileges than others — instead, it’s some people having privileges over others. I don’t have a problem with people having more of something, as long as that something isn’t power. In the doctor scenario, the better doctor doesn’t have any real power over the worse doctors. They may have the worse doctors’ respect and their suggestions may hold a lot of weight, but they don’t have actual power over those worse doctors.

I think that it is, indeed, possible to structure our societies without coercive hierarchies. Hierarchies of respect, wealth or influence are likely inevitable, but hierarchies of strict power and unchecked authority are not. So this is the future I wish to see — not one where the man at the top dictate the lives of those at the bottom, but one where direct democracy and consensus building eliminates the need for there to be a man at the top calling the shots. And, where natural hierarchies do arise, instead of tearing them down, those at the top are simply unable to bully those at the bottom.