I doubt it -- anarchism was the rule of the world before organized commerce and greed arrived -- you have to remember that sex was the initial motivator for commerce, the richer you were, the more wives you got. I don't see how we could ever go back to sustainable, localized economies. When apples are out of season -- I like it that I can buy imported ones from 15,000 miles away. And I want my iPod too -- we wouldn't have those if it wasn't for the cheap labor in China -- Apple Computer's share prices are shooting through the ceiling as a result, and you can be sure very few Chinese workers will ever see a penny of the huge windfall shareholders receive.

meaning...a state of society without government or law no rules do as you want do you think it will work? i dont, if it worked that would be utopia. people cant live in peace no laws= trouble

I don't think it could work, especially not now. Too many people are self-serving and immoral. I think that society requires some sort of law and organization to be functional.

Initially, maybe years would pass before things finally settled down. But in the end yes. I think it would work. In my opinion in this country in particular there are far to many laws that hold down the people. Some are in your face some are more subtle. Most would say that people need these laws in order to maintain a civil relationship. It should be clear by now that, that isn't working. The more laws there are the more people there will be that want to break them, therefore creating violence. On top of that you have your Policemen,Judges, Presidents, so on and so forth. These people of "power"are no different than anyone else on the planet. Yet they hold this "power"over everyone else's heads. No one likes to be ordered to do things. If there were no laws and everyone had equal power over there own lives then I think things would even out. Sure, at first there would be craziness. But after the dust settled and the shock of true freedom died off people could feel as if they were in control over there lives, without having to worry if what they said or did would be punishable by a court of law. What gives anyone the right to decide anyone else fate? In this country all you need is a piece of paper from a collage stating your qualified to be in charge of another human being. Im not to sure if i did much explaining really. Its hard to truly explain this and get a concrete point across without ranting. Good question though. Real good question.

Anarchy comes from Greek for no ruler. It does *not* mean no laws or no organization. It's just that these laws/rules/whatever you want to call them can not be imposed by a coercive authority on unwilling people. Instead they must have democratic say (be it through majority voting, consensus, or whatever) - whatever the outcome, all must feel that it was arrived at fairly. So, yes, it could, and has work(ed). Current autonomous communities and institutions (schools, hospitals) in Southern Mexico and Argentina are examples, as well squatter communities (for example, the West Side piers of Manhattan until the 1970s). Most people are at least somewhat of the way towards anarchy; they distrust politicians, don't let friends boss them around, and try to have workgroups decide things so that noone is left out. Autonomous community centers, cafes, bookstores, and communities abound all over the world. It's just that you'll see any sort of immediate anarchist "revolution." Revolution is a process, both physical and mental, of liberating oneself from the oppression of capitalism and the state. Two splendid resources on anarchy: http://www.geocities.com/capitolHill/1931/ http://flag.blackened.net/ Best, Daniel

If it could, then it would. Are there any anarchic tribes out there? If so, then that is what anarchy is capable of. As long as there are bullies, the weaker people will gang up together in order to defeat the bullies, bullies will band together and so on until we end up with governments all over again. By handling things such as law and order, the government frees up heaps of my time so that I may get on with the rest of my life. Mind you, every single one of us is free to live outside of the law. Perhaps now is time for you to research the meaning of the word 'outlaw'.

For a short time. New nations were formed from this.

Can you imagine the face on a supreme court justice when he makes his decree and learns that it isn't going to apply because people won't listen to him any longer? All people should have the same power over others! But how do you do this?

But we live in anarchy already. So if we believe the order in which we currently live works, then the answer is a definite yes. If we don't believe it does work, then we must find an alternative to the current order.

all governments start and end in anarchy. anarchy itself, however, can never be a true solution because we are only human. it's true that democracy, or so we call it, does not do an efficient job; however, it is the best (political freedoms, that is).

at first, anarchy could work (in theory, but i think it would slowly fade back to a government) but as soon as the anarchists try to make rules, they are making government, so modern anarchists, who dont really know the meaning of anarchy could NOT make it work for long until huiman greed made them want more power and eventually a dictatorship is formed, more anarchists throw this government over and reform another governmetn, the cycle repeats over and over again

You're missing the point of anarchy. The best thing about anarchy as a (non)form of government is that it DOESN'T work! Anarchy is for people who prefer to take their chances with a supposed war of all against all than to be oppressed in any way by a supposed government.

Yeah... Anarchy is not the destruction of all organisation, just the destruction of the state, and governmental control... It would work through grassroots democracy, however, there are some people who will try to gain power over others, which is in my opinion a morally questionable concept... this would be difficult to stop, but in theory they would not succeed due to general dissent, and the rejection of that idea...

In my opinion, this system could work only for people who have attended a high spiritual level. Due to their high advancement, they don't really need a leader to rule them. They know what to do, when to do, how to do, and for what. They expect no payment for their service (in order of money); their "payment" would be the honor of receiving a superior service.

i fully believe it can work. obviously every person would have to take personal responsibility for themselves and their actions. small communities would have to have a very clear goal and communication amongst its people. anarchy calls for the individual to communicate his/her needs and for those immediately surrounding to help reach that. i would obviously support only a nonviolent effort where education and emotions were highly valued and respected. we as a human world need to realize that many things which we value are truly illusions and concentrate on those things which really matter, to me thats what anarchy is about.

Actually, Afghanistan is a modern example of an anarchy. Other world governments are beginning to worry that people will realize that anarchy CAN work, and so are looking into ways of restoring a formal gov't there. Can't let the sheeple get ideas!

Never. Anarchy is a temporary situation filling up the void created by lack of orderliness of governance. Nature has its own way of solving this situation.