Sharing Without Hierarchy

Power Without a Ladder

Reflection

For almost ten years, I’ve been working toward no hierarchy at my free community dinner.

I love the principle.

It suits me.

It matches what I believe about dignity, contribution, and shared life.

In the early days, no hierarchy was said often. Volunteers named it regularly. It sounded right. It sounded generous.

But in practice, it was often enforced by those who already held power — the ones who spoke most confidently, who set the tone, who decided what counted as acceptable. The principle itself became a way of holding authority, rather than releasing it.

That contradiction taught me something early:

you can speak the language of equality and still dominate the room.

Eventually, I became the coordinator — and over time, the sole coordinator — largely because of how that power was being misused. The structure didn’t collapse into hierarchy because I wanted control; it did so because the absence of clarity was being filled by informal authority.

When I practiced no hierarchy from that position, it became something different. Not an ideal, but a discipline.

I learned how difficult it is not to hold onto power once you have it.

I learned how hard it is to do anything without it.

And I learned that power itself isn’t the problem.

The problem is what power replaces when connection is thin.

When people disengage, power rushes in to fill the gap.

When participation drops, coordination hardens.

When responsibility concentrates, pressure follows.

There are times when I feel that pressure acutely. When one person becomes the operator, the organiser, the decision-holder. In those moments, the energy required just to keep things going makes it harder to articulate what no hierarchy actually means — and why it matters.

But I’ve also seen this:

when people are invited into understanding, not just tasks, power loosens.

When connection deepens, authority becomes lighter.

When engagement grows, hierarchy stops being the default solution.

No hierarchy doesn’t mean the absence of leadership.

It means leadership that stays in relationship.

It means power that remains visible, accountable, and shareable.

What I’m still learning is how to speak about this clearly — not as an ideology, but as an invitation. Because this work doesn’t need less power. It needs more people willing to carry it together.