Anarchists are think bois.

Complex systems need structure. Humans prob come up with some better, upgraded version of state but it’s a Darwinian process. Takes a long time.

I enjoyed the thread. I wish I found more of these conversations on Nostr.

I tend to learn towards some flavor of anarchism, but it certainly has some holes in it. Probably any conceivable way of ordering society will have problems just because humans are flawed and therefore create flawed things.

I was listening to an interview with David Friedman. He and his dad were discussing anarcho-capitalism, they ended the conversation with one thinking it might work, but probably would fail, and the other thinking it might fail, but probably would work. That stuck with me for some reason.

(Assuming you mean *no government*, rather than *no leaders*, which is what anarchism literally means).

It comes down to the economics of violence.

Say you get rid of all govt etc. Pretty soon someone with greater capacity for violence is going to come around and take your stuff, rape your women etc.

So a few of you get together and pool resources to defend yourselves - which is economically much more efficient than trying to all do it alone.

Boom: you now have government. You need to raise taxes (get contributions to the pool), have some sort of decision making about how to defend yourselves etc. Rather than live by volunteering it probably makes sense to have some people to focus on particular aspects of it, and they'll need to be paid for their time.

At that point you might as well use the structure to do other things that are economically more efficient from pooled resources, like maintaining communal roads.

Note that even if you don't get together and pool resources successfully, you will be ruled by whoever has most capacity for violence - and they will be your government instead.