i think of anarchy as an absense of the need for rules. when people reach full consciousness they will do the right thing because they want to.
Exactly as I take it. Some sort of utopian state,
requiring that humanity undergo a fundamental
change, before it's possible.
But, I think small groups CAN achieve such
a status. Everyone has to care deeply about
everyone else though - something I can't see
in any larger construct.
Libertarian Socialists are. Truth be told, that's probably more in my direction.
Certainly NOT. Enforced redistribution
of wealth has nothing in common with
anarchy.
Thing is, anarchy can't really exist. It
collapses. Power collates.
Hey man. I took Poly sci 1000 you can't fool me. Socialism doesn't have to be enforced and if it's anarchy it can't be. Anarchy can exist man it's an inevitability.
No? How then do you prevent people
from taking advantage of one another?
Even in the most egalitarian groups, there
is almost always SOME form of enforcement,
even though it could only be social status.
And yes, Anarchy IS inevitable. As a short term
collapsed state always shows. Whenever things
go to hell, that's your anarchy. Then, some strong
man comes in, and seizes power - perhaps making things
worse, but at least more predictable.