Quote from: pine on March 29, 2013, 02:09 pmI'm inclined to think that thinking of anarchy as a concept by itself doesn't make sense. The concept of Anarchy is in the same bracket as the concept of "State". A state can be a state+monarchy, state+republic, state+democracy and so on. But you don't get a State by itself as some kind of platonic ideal or something.Crypto+anarchy. Anarco+communim, Anarco+capitalism make sense, those are systems you can take practical steps to build. Whether they'll work or not is the issue. I think we've seen a slow but certain shift from hierarchical systems to networked systems over a few centuries.What I'd ask SS and northsouth and PurpleHue, is what is their vision of the future, say in 2050 and in 2100.I'm not really sure that you're right about that, to be blunt. I'm not trying to directly contradict your statement, mind you -- but I'd be very, very surprised if this is the only time in the history of mankind that circumstances and affairs have been like they are today. Now naturally the state of technology and weapons is new, but societies on the verge of collapse, economies failing, general discontent by the populace at large... that's happened tons of times.Did anarchy ever come out of it before? Well I don't know. I'm not a history buff. But I'm assuming it didn't, or those who believe it's a good form of gov't would cite it as support. But then, your position is that it's the technology we now have that would allow it to work. I don't know about that. What technology do we really have that radically changes the situation, other than massive levels of communication?Is that enough to bring it about? I won't pretend to know that, and I don't. I also have no clue what 2050 or 2100 will look like. At the rate we're going, we'll have terrible vegetation, vanishing resources, constant wars, and mankind may just destroy itself by then or shortly thereafter. Or we may use our technology to create what today we'd call a utopia. I doubt that very much, given human nature, but it's possible.