And what level of statelessness is required to be considered anarchy

For most of the outspoken ones that protest in major cities are some of the same members of Antifa and a handful of BLM

which are heavily socialist organizations

Like the Ukrainian rogue militias are a good example of anarchists

I'm referring to majority of self identified anarchists in the US

They, as a people, need something of unity. That is culture. But they fight at a very localized level. For themselves, their families and communities. They don't have much hierarchy, they are more of a brotherhood

Anarachists to have an organization is an oxymoron, haha

Yes the anarchist and communist movements in the U.S. are a clusterfuck

anarchists are retarded

I think too many ppl think Anarchists all believe in 100% no collectivism

or a "typical" hierarchy model

Besides nate here, they don't really believe that

the term "anarchy" literally means "no leader".

btw, anarchists don't have a leader, right?

I mean depends on what form you are looking at

@LoJ that means its literally a unorganized chaos

Most of the time it isn't factionless

Just a VERY minimal state or stateless

And ppl look up the google definition of anarchy and assume that is what every anarchist believes

i've seen some 5'0 asian bitch in portland saying she's a leader of anarchists in portland, and it was so hilarious to me considering that anarchists dont have a leader

Anarchy, in its essence and presented by the word itself, with its Latin root means "no leader". That would mean that everybody would have to operate on social contract because their is no enforcer or central authority/leader

Anything other than that would be properly coined as "pseudoanarchism"

The anarchy that advocates for no cultural unity, nationalism, complete statelessness, equal wealth and no factions is ludicrous

What we see in Ukraine is like just next level Libertarianism

well thats retarded

Where the state doesn't dictate anyone's lives

if thats what anarchy stands for then wtf

Then how will any public roads or infrastructure be completed if there are no tax dollars?

Bud, if you look up every ideologies definition, then ask everyone in that ideology about that definition, half the ideologies definitions aren't support by the people in that ideology

This is common knowledge

>Infrastructure

Anarchists don't believe in Roads

Wouldn't anarchy in general just be anarcho capitalism as you can LITERALLY get away with anything for your own private gain?

._.

When the state has almost no interference into a localized community, ideally, the communities themselves will take care of these things

Anarchy and Dictatorship are so far on the ends of the spectrum that they loop back into each other, in anarchy, a leader will arise (more like druglord or kingpin, think the likes of Pablo Escabar) that controls the local area and everyone will be at the will of the kingpin

Yes

Sort of

Not that same scenario everytime

But you can never be factionless

There are anarchists that recognize this