I think the word you were looking for was destruction, not anarchy. Anarchy simply means “no rulers” from the Greek “an-archon”. Very important distinction. I can be a stickler for definitions. To be perfectly fair, I am sure you were referring to the word as it has been used to describe the violent anarchists who love to stir up trouble with a Molotov cocktail in one hand, and a bomb in the other.
It is analogous to the difference between the civil rights movement of MLK and the Black Panther Party.
He is speaking in character.
Also, I don’t think the Black Panthers were Anarchists. I haven’t read much of their political philosophy, but I’d wager that it is more reasonable than you’d assume.
He means the difference between anarchists and “anarchists” is similar to the difference between MLK and the Black Panthers
I just figured the word he was looking for was “anarchy,”as defined by Merriam-Webster’s as: “a situation of confusion and wild behavior in which the people in a country, group, organization, etc., are not controlled by rules or laws.” Also: “a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority.”. Its from an-archos, a synonym of lawlessness. Which would better illustrate his point, in contrasting it, with a peaceful, comfortable existence. As oppossed to “destruction” which is destroying something so badly that it no longer exists. Very important contrast, I can be a stickler about people correcting others, when it isn’t necessary, helpful, or accurate.
Sorry, shouldn’t have made this post, it’s kind of mean.
No, your post was on-point and helpful.
Whoever has the biggest stick always rules. Unless you think the government doesn’t have the biggest sticks? For good or ill, without the stick, laws are just words on paper.
The US military has the biggest stick the world has ever seen, yet has nothing like hegemony, inside or outside the US. So no, the big stick means diddly squat. It’s the power to persuade that matters.
The fact that chaos is equated to anarchy nowadays is pretty sad. Anarchy is just society without a state. The world (interaction between nations) is mostly anarchistic, as are most interactions between individuals on a day to day basis (in practice). The punishment of a poor review on amazon or yelp is an example of anarchic justice.
There are countries without governments in the world today. They aren’t nice places to live. Thinking we should hold the state’s chains rather than the other way around is completely different than thinking that we should take the state out behind the barn.
Please name them.
Somalia in the 00s is the usual example. I recall reading, though, that Somalia under anarchy was better off than it had been under the corrupt government that preceded it, or under the UN-backed attempt to restore government on a number of quality-of-life measures such as health and life expectancy. The point the author was making is that no government may not better than good government, but it may be better than bad government.