What is your issue with definitions?
Anarchy is when there is no government.
However this condition is unsustainable.
People will always live by hierarchic structures and always did:
The family, tribe, race, religion, gang affiliations, personal cliques and alliances.
These structures tend to be hierarchic.
There are cases when there is no time to discuss, decisions should be made and acted upon, and hierarchy saves precious time
The example you referred to was not the one I meant, even if it is relevant too.
Definitions form the basis of thought. Without understanding the definitions being used, we can waste our lives discussing things and not understanding what is being said.
An-archy literally means 'no rulers' - it does not merely mean 'no government'. As soon as anyone attempts to 'rule' someone against their will - they have broken the state of an-archy by creating them-self to be a ruler. All this is needed is for me to, for example, direct you to stand in a certain location and attempt to force you.. At that point, I am attempting to rule you.
Your mind is biased here.
Hierarchy requires subordination - the receiving of commands against the will. This is neither balanced, nor sustainable. You are referencing a history through mental lenses that have no concept of actual lived anarchy and are judging that such a state is as you say it is - when it is not.
Just because many people involve themselves in hierarchy, is not evidence that it is impossible to be without hierarchy.
Decisions can be made quickly without hierarchy. A team can communicate on an equal footing, with a shared understanding that some people are in a better position to make certain determinations than others - without having a forced hierarchy. The issue is control and how to live without being controlled while being effective.
You can look at the cases where entire police forces have quit in South America and other areas, for example, to see that the crime levels actually DROP during those periods. Also, when driving experiments have been performed that involved the total removal of all enforced lines painted on the roads, the levels of accidents dropped significantly. By empowering people to THINK CONSCIOUSLY and take real responsibility - instead of deferring to hierarchies - we transform people from partially dead, unthinking, zombies - into real people!
Agree about your definition, and this is why anarchy is unsustainable.
An unstable state as I initially stated and elaborated about in my thread about it.
For real?
Governments and gangs are not sustainable?
Which is why during the entire history barring a few tiny patches mankind was hierarchic?
And even other mammals and aves live in hierarchic structures?
Hierarchic societies are older than humanity.
Government is supported by force and violence at present - that is all that is holding together this 'sustainability'. Real sustainability is identified by real balance, whereby there is no (or minimal) dysfunction and there is a real peace. We currently have neither anything approaching a real peace, nor anything approaching a world without dysfunction.
Most of the dysfunction in human reality stems from actions of government.
Many people have thought that control solves problems, but what they have not had is the benefit of experience completely free from all control. When free from all control it becomes obvious that control itself has been causing much of the problems that other forms of control were then used to attempt to 'solve' the problems.
If you think genocides and wars are sustainable then think again. These are the fruits of most of the governments so far.
Violence will emerge whether you like it or not.
The question is how can it be answered and minimized.
It was rhetoric, but this entire exchange is about matters that are too obvious for most 17 years olds.
Governments are corrupt, not by definition, but currently.
Societies that will not be ruled by violence will succumb to societies that are ruled by violence and that impose their rule on peaceful societies.
This is how it always was and will always be.
You ignored my examples about history and animals.
Genocides and wars are game theoretic occurrences.
Inevitabilities.
A part of evolution.
Wars happen in nature too, they are not restricted to governments or even to humans.
No.
It stems from competition, and is not restricted only to humans, or to hierarchical societies or hierarchic species.