Anarchy is a political structure where there’s basically no one in charge, right? But wouldn’t that just create a power vacuum that would filled by organized crime, corporations, etc.? Then, after that power vacuum is filled, we’re right back at square one, and someone is in charge.

Are there any political theorists that have come up with a solution to this problem?

  • GladiusB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It did. See most Native American tribes. Anarchy is “self-rule” not “pure chaos” as most would like you to think.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I am pretty certain from your response you do not understand their hierarchy or their culture. But please tell me more about what you know if anarchy.

    • Zexks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      It didnt. Thats why they continued to live in tribes. Anarachy by definition is tribal. It will not work beyond a small group of like minded people. And as soon as that group is threatened by any other centrally organized group they will fall.