I trust individuals much more than groups. Groups are the things you really should fear.

As to anarchist states - the paris commune and the spanish ones during the Spanish Civil War went under because of their "peace loving" neighbours made sure of it. Otherwise, several indian communities, hippies, pirates, etc are considered fairly anarchistic in its nature.

I think it was Aristotle that said "Good men doesn't need a law to know wrong from right, while bad man doesn't give a damn about the law anyway"

__________________
To fill a world with ... religions of the Abrahamic kind, is like littering the streets with loaded guns. Do not be surprised if they are used. - Richard Dawkins

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned

MY CAPSLOCK KEY IS BROKEN LOL - Will be stumbled upon several times on the web.

Clash

See my main problem is i don't trust everyone in an anarchistic state to act like a "good man" and in fact i expect more people to be bad than good. That means there needs to be a group to keep the good people safe. The group can be controlled, limited, and can be made to look out for the needs of the whole. The individual is greedy and evil (I'm including myself here) and will not look out for his neighbor.

__________________
"A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent."
-John Calvin

In the case of the Spanish Civil War (and also the Ukrainian Makhnoist revolt and the Kronstadt era), the cause of the defeat was not neighbouring states, nor the opposition (fascists, monarchies, bankers, clergy according to the case), but the betrayal by the authoritarian communists whom were initially on the same side. In all three cases the anarchist revolt was very succesful until this betrayal.

__________________
"Putain putain, c'est vachement bien, nous sommes quand même tous des Européens"

It's not my thread. If the OP wants to discuss the benefits of anarcho-capitalism (which generally appears to be the implied meaning around here), there's not much point in bringing up the other ones.

__________________
"Putain putain, c'est vachement bien, nous sommes quand même tous des Européens"

Make your own thread whenever you feel like it =)

__________________
Client: In six days, do you hear me, six days, God made the world. And you are not bloody well capable of making me a pair of trousers in three months!
Tailor: But my dear Sir, my dear Sir, look at the world, and look at my trousers.
(Beckett)

Well... the title is the benefits of "Anarchy" not "Anarchism."

So that might just answer your question right there.

__________________
Nothing to see here.

Could you give me a Cliff Notes explanation of how anarchism could work on a large scale? It seems that some sort of vertical structure, or bureaucratic organization, is necessary for society to function.

Or perhaps I'm mistaken; I remember reading somewhere that anarchists oppose what they see as illegitimate authorities, but I don't recall reading anywhere that they oppose all authorities. But that might have been Wikipedia where I learned that, and Wikipedia is exactly notorious for its explanations in various philosophies.

__________________
No man is an island...
Each man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in Mankind.
And therefore, never send to know
For whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
—John Donne

Greetings and Felicitations,

Easy to enslave. Unable to defend themselves. Technologically inferior. I would love to see the world fall into anarchy. It would make my job much easier.

Sincerely Yours,
C. David Neely

__________________

My statement was made with anarcho-capitalism in mind. I beleive the thread was created with anarcho-capitalism in mind given that this thread was instigated by a libertarian according to trailblazer.

Just for the record I subscribe more to minarchy than anarcho capitalism. I think there are shady ambiguities to anarcho-capitalism but I am more than willing to entertain anarcho-capitalism as an alternative to large government. I beleive that anarcho-capitalism could work far better than most suspect.

__________________
"Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end - Liberty is the only object which benefits all alike, and provokes no sincere opposition - The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern. - Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." - Lord Action

I believe there already are plenty of people already inclined to act in such a manner and the fact that we have laws, police and prisons hasn't done too much to change that fact.

Not having a government law or a state sponsored police force does not instantly mean people instantly start to murder and pillage for profit. Just because there is no law prohibiting a behavior does not mean people instantly start doing that which is not prohibited, just like simply because something is prohibited does not mean people will instantly stop doing that which is prohibited. People do what they want and most people do not have the inclination or desire to murder or act violently towards others. In addition it not hard to imagine the creation of private police forces that individuals or communities could hire for security purposes.

__________________
"Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end - Liberty is the only object which benefits all alike, and provokes no sincere opposition - The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern. - Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." - Lord Action

Given the situations which have occurred where there have been strikes by police I don't hold out much hope for this. Granted after a week or so of rioting, pillaging, murder, rape, killing and what have you things might settle down. The dismantling of the state would have to happen very, very slowly.

__________________
"There were no D-Day Heroes in 1973" - Cold Chisel Khe Sanh

Granted.

__________________
"Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end - Liberty is the only object which benefits all alike, and provokes no sincere opposition - The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern. - Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." - Lord Action

I have to agree with Mr. Neely, here. The one benefit to anarchy is to remind people that there are ruthless bastards (like myself) out there who will quickly and happily step into the void that anarchy yields. Such is how an empire is forged.

__________________
If common sense were common, we would all have it (including me).

But even in an anarchist community wouldn't the non-ruthless bastards organise collectively to deal with the individual ruthless bastards? When we say "anarchist" we aren't talking wussy, spineless people, we're talking people who don't need or want government and can do for themselves. I don't think your ruthless bastards would stand a chance frankly.

__________________
"There were no D-Day Heroes in 1973" - Cold Chisel Khe Sanh

Exactly.
No matter the variation of anarchism, it is constituted of people who can manage for themselves without -hierarchical or authoritarian- leadership. The feasibility adn succes of this has been proven in the Spanish Civil War where an anarchist army, assembled through free association, overcame the organized forces of the fascist government which had the full support of the banking world, the monarchy, and the clergy.

__________________
"Putain putain, c'est vachement bien, nous sommes quand même tous des Européens"