Agreed.

People who hate the idea of no government existing, or who fear what might happen if there were no government, attempt to re-define "anarchy" to mean "chaos." In reality, having a BIG government (people with political power, whether acquired lawfully or not) HAS resulted in chaos.

The American founding fathers warned about this very issue, time and time again. Limiting political power was their primary motive in setting things up the way they did. They saw political power as the enemy of the people, because they knew it would lead to a chaotic society, just like we have today. Today, people with political power tell other people to wear a mask on their face, inject a mystery drug into their body, and to hand over 50%+ of their earnings to other people who waste it. It is a society in chaos due to political power.

An-archy means "no government" or "no ruler."

Monarcy = one person rules.

Oligarchy = a few people rule.

Anarchy = no person rules.

There are two schools of thought when it comes to anarchy: anarchocommunism (also called left anarchy) and anarchocapitalism (also called voluntaryism).

Anarchocommunists are real communists. Marx said that communism would be where the "state withers away" and is no longer needed. However, socialism would be forced by the state until "good" communism could be beaten into people (more or less).

Anarchocapitalists are real capitalists. They believe that a voluntary society would emerge if there were no government. It would not be a commual society, as in communism, but rather a free, voluntary society where people would create voluntary police forces and similar functions in society.

The best example of anarchocommunism was the British colonies in America in the very early days. They tried a communal system and they nearly starved to death. It was a disaster. It was only when they switched to capitalism that they began to thrive.

Anarchocapitalism existed in Ireland for almost 1,000 years, more or less, due to being on an island. They had no government, per se, as each village decided things for themselves. For this reason, it took England hundreds of years to conquer Ireleand. When they did, the White English made the White Irish into slaves.

More recently, the government of Somalia collapsed due to massive corruption in the 1990's. It was replaced with no government, and the people were generally better off than their neighbors who all had governments. The problem came about due to foreign governments -- United States and Russia -- interferring and trying to back various goon squads to establish a government by force.

So, such a society would have to come about in a philosohpical way, similar to how the USA was founded. Otherwise, it would open the door to gang warfare, since those people do not believe in having no government, and people who are attracted to government tend to be tyrannical by nature.

Regarding Hitler, the jews had used a communist movement to overthrow Russia and institute a new government there. They were trying to do the same thing in post-WWI Germany.

Hitler and his National Socialists were trying to stop the dirty commies. It just so happened that jews were the ones leading the dirty commies, and also had declared world war on Germany.

That's not to say that Hitler was any sort of anarchist. Far from it. He was a dictator. He and many of his followers saw his form of dictatorship as a better option than a jewish communist takeover like in Russia, where brutal murder had been the norm.

All anyone has to do today is take a look around. We have massive government AND we also have chaos.

RULE OF LAW. Either we all respect it, or not. THAT is the key.

It is not respected by the gangs in the hood on the south side of Chicago, and it is also not repected by the gangs wearing suits in Washington, DC.

Agreed.

People who hate the idea of no government existing, or who fear what might happen if there were no government, attempt to re-define "anarchy" to mean "chaos." In reality, having a BIG government (people with political power, whether acquired lawfully or not) HAS resulted in chaos.

The American founding fathers warned about this very issue, time and time again. Limiting political power was their primary motive in setting things up the way they did. They saw political power as the enemy of the people, because they knew it would lead to a chaotic society, just like we have today. Today, people with political power tell other people to wear a mask on their face, inject a mystery drug into their body, and to hand over 50%+ of their earnings to other people who waste it. It is a society in chaos due to political power.

An-archy means "no government" or "no ruler."

Monarcy = one person rules.

Oligarchy = a few people rule.

Anarchy = no person rules.

There are two schools of thought when it comes to anarchy: anarchocommunism (also called left anarchy) and anarchocapitalism (also called voluntaryism).

Anarchocommunists are real communists. Marx said that communism would be where the "state withers away" and is no longer needed. However, socialism would be forced by the state until "good" communism could be beaten into people (more or less).

Anarchocapitalists are real capitalists. They believe that a voluntary society would emerge if there were no government. It would not be a commual society, as in communism, but rather a free, voluntary society where people would create voluntary police forces and similar functions in society.

The best example of anarchocommunism was the British colonies in America in the very early days. They tried a communal system and they nearly starved to death. It was a disaster. It was only when they switched to capitalism that they began to thrive.

Anarchocapitalism existed in Ireland for almost 1,000 years, more or less, due to being on an island. They had no government, per se, as each village decided things for themselves. For this reason, it took England hundreds of years to conquer Ireleand. When they did, the White English made the White Irish into slaves.

More recently, the government of Somalia collapsed due to massive corruption in the 1990's. It was replaced with no government, and the people were generally better off than their neighbors who all had governments. The problem came about due to foreign governments -- United States and Russia -- interferring and trying to back various goon squads to establish a government by force.

So, such a society would have to come about in a philosohpical way, similar to how the USA was founded. Otherwise, it would open the door to gang warfare, since those people do not believe in having no government, and people who are attracted to government tend to by tyrannical by nature.

Regarding Hitler, the jews had used a communist movement to overthrow Russia and institute a new government there. They were trying to do the same thing in post-WWI Germany.

Hitler and his National Socialists were trying to stop the dirty commies. It just so happened that jews were the ones leading the dirty commies, and also had declared world war on Germany.

That's not to say that Hitler was any sort of anarchist. Far from it. He was a dictator. He and many of his followers saw his form of dictatorship as a better option than a jewish communist takeover like in Russia, where brutal murder had been the norm.

All anyone has to do today is take a look around. We have massive government AND we also have chaos.

RULE OF LAW. Either we all respect it, or not. THAT is the key.

It is not respected by the gangs in the hood on the south side of Chicago, and it is also not repected by the gangs wearing suits in Washington, DC.

Agreed.

People who hate the idea of no government existing, or who fear what might happen if there were no government, attempt to re-define "anarchy" to mean "chaos." In reality, having a BIG government (people with political power, whether acquired lawfully or not) HAS resulted in chaos.

The American founding fathers warned about this very issue, time and time again. Limiting political power was their primary motive in setting things up the way they did. They saw political power as the enemy of the people, because they knew it would lead to a chaotic society, just like it has.

An-archy means "no government" or "no ruler."

Monarcy = one person rules.

Oligarchy = a few people rule.

Anarchy = no person rules.

There are two schools of thought when it comes to anarchy: anarchocommunism (also called left anarchy) and anarchocapitalism (also called voluntaryism).

Anarchocommunists are real communists. Marx said that communism would be where the "state withers away" and is no longer needed. However, socialism would be forced by the state until "good" communism could be beaten into people (more or less).

Anarchocapitalists are real capitalists. They believe that a voluntary society would emerge if there were no government. It would not be a commual society, as in communism, but rather a free, voluntary society where people would create voluntary police forces and similar functions in society.

The best example of anarchocommunism was the British colonies in America in the very early days. They tried a communal system and they nearly starved to death. It was a disaster. It was only when they switched to capitalism that they began to thrive.

Anarchocapitalism existed in Ireland for almost 1,000 years, more or less, due to being on an island. They had no government, per se, as each village decided things for themselves. For this reason, it took England hundreds of years to conquer Ireleand. When they did, the White English made the White Irish into slaves.

More recently, the government of Somalia collapsed due to massive corruption in the 1990's. It was replaced with no government, and the people were generally better off than their neighbors who all had governments. The problem came about due to foreign governments -- United States and Russia -- interferring and trying to back various goon squads to establish a government by force.

So, such a society would have to come about in a philosohpical way, similar to how the USA was founded. Otherwise, it would open the door to gang warfare, since those people do not believe in having no government, and people who are attracted to government tend to by tyrannical by nature.

Regarding Hitler, the jews had used a communist movement to overthrow Russia and institute a new government there. They were trying to do the same thing in post-WWI Germany.

Hitler and his National Socialists were trying to stop the dirty commies. It just so happened that jews were the ones leading the dirty commies, and also had declared world war on Germany.

That's not to say that Hitler was any sort of anarchist. Far from it. He was a dictator. He and many of his followers saw his form of dictatorship as a better option than a jewish communist takeover like in Russia, where brutal murder had been the norm.

All anyone has to do today is take a look around. We have massive government AND we also have chaos.

RULE OF LAW. Either we all respect it, or not. THAT is the key.

It is not respected by the gangs in the hood on the south side of Chicago, and it is also not repected by the gangs wearing suits in Washington, DC.

Agreed.

People who hate the idea of no government existing, or who fear what might happen if there were no government, attempt to re-define "anarchy" to mean "chaos." In reality, having a BIG government (people with political power, whether acquired lawfully or not) HAS resulted in chaos.

The American founding fathers warned about this very issue, time and time again. Limiting political power was their primary motive in setting things up the way they did. They saw political power as the enemy of the people.

An-archy means "no government" or "no ruler."

Monarcy = one person rules.

Oligarchy = a few people rule.

Anarchy = no person rules.

There are two schools of thought when it comes to anarchy: anarchocommunism (also called left anarchy) and anarchocapitalism (also called voluntaryism).

Anarchocommunists are real communists. Marx said that communism would be where the "state withers away" and is no longer needed. However, socialism would be forced by the state until "good" communism could be beaten into people (more or less).

Anarchocapitalists are real capitalists. They believe that a voluntary society would emerge if there were no government. It would not be a commual society, as in communism, but rather a free, voluntary society where people would create voluntary police forces and similar functions in society.

The best example of anarchocommunism was the British colonies in America in the very early days. They tried a communal system and they nearly starved to death. It was a disaster. It was only when they switched to capitalism that they began to thrive.

Anarchocapitalism existed in Ireland for almost 1,000 years, more or less, due to being on an island. They had no government, per se, as each village decided things for themselves. For this reason, it took England hundreds of years to conquer Ireleand. When they did, the White English made the White Irish into slaves.

More recently, the government of Somalia collapsed due to massive corruption in the 1990's. It was replaced with no government, and the people were generally better off than their neighbors who all had governments. The problem came about due to foreign governments -- United States and Russia -- interferring and trying to back various goon squads to establish a government by force.

So, such a society would have to come about in a philosohpical way, similar to how the USA was founded. Otherwise, it would open the door to gang warfare, since those people do not believe in having no government, and people who are attracted to government tend to by tyrannical by nature.

Regarding Hitler, the jews had used a communist movement to overthrow Russia and institute a new government there. They were trying to do the same thing in post-WWI Germany.

Hitler and his National Socialists were trying to stop the dirty commies. It just so happened that jews were the ones leading the dirty commies, and also had declared world war on Germany.

That's not to say that Hitler was any sort of anarchist. Far from it. He was a dictator. He and many of his followers saw his form of dictatorship as a better option than a jewish communist takeover like in Russia, where brutal murder had been the norm.

All anyone has to do today is take a look around. We have massive government AND we also have chaos.

RULE OF LAW. Either we all respect it, or not. THAT is the key.

It is not respected by the gangs in the hood on the south side of Chicago, and it is also not repected by the gangs wearing suits in Washington, DC.

Agreed.

People who hate the idea of no government existing, or who fear what might happen if there were no government, attempt to re-define "anarchy" to mean "chaos." In reality, having a BIG government (people with political power, whether acquired lawfully or not) HAS resulted in chaos.

An-archy means "no government" or "no ruler."

Monarcy = one person rules.

Oligarchy = a few people rule.

Anarchy = no person rules.

There are two schools of thought when it comes to anarchy: anarchocommunism (also called left anarchy) and anarchocapitalism (also called voluntaryism).

Anarchocommunists are real communists. Marx said that communism would be where the "state withers away" and is no longer needed. However, socialism would be forced by the state until "good" communism could be beaten into people (more or less).

Anarchocapitalists are real capitalists. They believe that a voluntary society would emerge if there were no government. It would not be a commual society, as in communism, but rather a free, voluntary society where people would create voluntary police forces and similar functions in society.

The best example of anarchocommunism was the British colonies in America in the very early days. They tried a communal system and they nearly starved to death. It was a disaster. It was only when they switched to capitalism that they began to thrive.

Anarchocapitalism existed in Ireland for almost 1,000 years, more or less, due to being on an island. They had no government, per se, as each village decided things for themselves. For this reason, it took England hundreds of years to conquer Ireleand. When they did, the White English made the White Irish into slaves.

More recently, the government of Somalia collapsed due to massive corruption in the 1990's. It was replaced with no government, and the people were generally better off than their neighbors who all had governments. The problem came about due to foreign governments -- United States and Russia -- interferring and trying to back various goon squads to establish a government by force.

So, such a society would have to come about in a philosohpical way, similar to how the USA was founded. Otherwise, it would open the door to gang warfare, since those people do not believe in having no government, and people who are attracted to government tend to by tyrannical by nature.

Regarding Hitler, the jews had used a communist movement to overthrow Russia and institute a new government there. They were trying to do the same thing in post-WWI Germany.

Hitler and his National Socialists were trying to stop the dirty commies. It just so happened that jews were the ones leading the dirty commies, and also had declared world war on Germany.

That's not to say that Hitler was any sort of anarchist. Far from it. He was a dictator. He and many of his followers saw his form of dictatorship as a better option than a jewish communist takeover like in Russia, where brutal murder had been the norm.

All anyone has to do today is take a look around. We have massive government AND we also have chaos.

RULE OF LAW. Either we all respect it, or not. THAT is the key.

It is not respected by the gangs in the hood on the south side of Chicago, and it is also not repected by the gangs wearing suits in Washington, DC.

Agreed.

People who hate the idea of no government existing, or who fear what might happen if there were no government, attempt to re-define "anarchy" to mean "chaos." There is no proof that this would be the case.

An-archy means "no government" or "no ruler."

Monarcy = one person rules.

Oligarchy = a few people rule.

Anarchy = no person rules.

There are two schools of thought when it comes to anarchy: anarchocommunism (also called left anarchy) and anarchocapitalism (also called voluntaryism).

Anarchocommunists are real communists. Marx said that communism would be where the "state withers away" and is no longer needed. However, socialism would be forced by the state until "good" communism could be beaten into people (more or less).

Anarchocapitalists are real capitalists. They believe that a voluntary society would emerge if there were no government. It would not be a commual society, as in communism, but rather a free, voluntary society where people would create voluntary police forces and similar functions in society.

The best example of anarchocommunism was the British colonies in America in the very early days. They tried a communal system and they nearly starved to death. It was a disaster. It was only when they switched to capitalism that they began to thrive.

Anarchocapitalism existed in Ireland for almost 1,000 years, more or less, due to being on an island. They had no government, per se, as each village decided things for themselves. For this reason, it took England hundreds of years to conquer Ireleand. When they did, the White English made the White Irish into slaves.

More recently, the government of Somalia collapsed due to massive corruption in the 1990's. It was replaced with no government, and the people were generally better off than their neighbors who all had governments. The problem came about due to foreign governments -- United States and Russia -- interferring and trying to back various goon squads to establish a government by force.

So, such a society would have to come about in a philosohpical way, similar to how the USA was founded. Otherwise, it would open the door to gang warfare, since those people do not believe in having no government, and people who are attracted to government tend to by tyrannical by nature.

Regarding Hitler, the jews had used a communist movement to overthrow Russia and institute a new government there. They were trying to do the same thing in post-WWI Germany.

Hitler and his National Socialists were trying to stop the dirty commies. It just so happened that jews were the ones leading the dirty commies, and also had declared world war on Germany.

That's not to say that Hitler was any sort of anarchist. Far from it. He was a dictator. He and many of his followers saw his form of dictatorship as a better option than a jewish communist takeover like in Russia, where brutal murder had been the norm.

All anyone has to do today is take a look around. We have massive government AND we also have chaos.

RULE OF LAW. Either we all respect it, or not. THAT is the key.

It is not respected by the gangs in the hood on the south side of Chicago, and it is also not repected by the gangs wearing suits in Washington, DC.

Agreed.

People who hate the idea of no government existing, or who fear what might happen if there were no government, attempt to re-define "anarchy" to mean "chaos." There is no proof that this would be the case.

An-archy means "no government" or "no ruler."

Monarcy = one person rules.

Oligarchy = a few people rule.

Anarchy = no person rules.

There are two schools of thought when it comes to anarchy: anarchocommunism (also called left anarchy) and anarchocapitalism (also called voluntaryism).

Anarchocommunists are real communists. Marx said that communism would be where the "state withers away" and is no longer needed. However, socialism would be forced by the state until "good" communism could be beaten into people (more or less).

Anarchocapitalists are real capitalists. They believe that a voluntary society would emerge if there were no government. It would not be a commual society, as in communism, but rather a free, voluntary society where people would create voluntary police forces and similar functions in society.

The best example of anarchocommunism was the British colonies in America in the very early days. They tried a communal system and they nearly starved to death. It was a disaster. It was only when they switched to capitalism that they began to thrive.

Anarchocapitalism existed in Ireland for almost 1,000 years, more or less, due to being on an island. They had not government, per se, as each village decided things for themselves. For this reason, it took England hundreds of years to conquer Ireleand. When they did, the White English made the White Irish into slaves.

More recently, the government of Somalia collapsed due to massive corruption in the 1990's. It was replaced with no government, and the people were generally better off than their neighbors who all had governments. The problem came about due to foreign governments -- United States and Russia -- interferring and trying to back various goon squads to establish a government by force.

So, such a society would have to come about in a philosohpical way, similar to how the USA was founded. Otherwise, it would open the door to gang warfare, since those people do not believe in having no government, and people who are attracted to government tend to by tyrannical by nature.

Regarding Hitler, the jews had used a communist movement to overthrow Russia and institute a new government there. They were trying to do the same thing in post-WWI Germany.

Hitler and his National Socialists were trying to stop the dirty commies. It just so happened that jews were the ones leading the dirty commies, and also had declared world war on Germany.

That's not to say that Hitler was any sort of anarchist. Far from it. He was a dictator. He and many of his followers saw his form of dictatorship as a better option than a jewish communist takeover like in Russia, where brutal murder had been the norm.

All anyone has to do today is take a look around. We have massive government AND we also have chaos.

RULE OF LAW. Either we all respect it, or not. THAT is the key.

It is not respected by the gangs in the hood on the south side of Chicago, and it is also not repected by the gangs wearing suits in Washington, DC.