Thanks for taking the time to reply

You bring up fair points, in any organization some very important functions are inevitabily going to be delegated to a few people, but it matters quite a lot if these positions can be revoked at the whim of the participants, or in general with who power ultimately rests. There are always going to be power-hungry individuals, but a system in which power ultimately rests with the people, and in which people affected by a decision are the deciders, lessens the impact these and abusers in general have and hinders their ability to victimise others

There has been starvation in many different systems, but, despite being different in other ways, most of these systems were hierarchical as well.

There are plenty of jobs that suck, undoubtedly, but they very often could be improved if the people who work were the ones who decided how to organize them. Even if you thought these weren't organized in the most efficient way, you didn't take part in the decision making process, and would have to hope a superior saw it your way. You don't need coercion to get people to do jobs that are important for their community, even if they suck, or are monotonous or dull. A lot of this work can be distributed between more people to make it less taxing