Experience, especially in the Ukraine and in Spain, seems to show that anarchy is impossible to achieve without an organised political party to hold people together and teach them about the past, but such parties either fail or turn deeply authoritarian in revolutionary crises. If you just stop obeying on a mass scale, they send in the bully-boys to kill a few of you and frighten the others. There seems to be a similar personal development over time - the two keenest anarchists I've known are appallingly authoritarian figures. Obviously, any kind of power of one person over others is obnoxious, but the best answer seems to be to co-operate as little as possible, always. Italy seems to me rather good at this, despite everything that has happened there.

yeah I have thought of that too and the best I have come up with is blockchain law, with ledgers and records. I dont even know how to conceptualize it.

what do you mean by cooperate as little as possible always?

Isolation?
Or do you mean defiance?

Ok so maybe it's a voting system, but instead of electoral college, it's built like a blockchain.

A blockchain is basically a transfer of money from one person, to a public list of every transaction, and then to another person.

What if it wasn't a transfer of money to a public list, but a transfer of information?

What if you cast your vote from your phone, it uploads to a public list that you can verify your vote is yours with your registered number, and you can also verify anyone in your community if they give you their number? Then it is transparent to the degree that you can prove your individual vote and the votes of others. And then instead of the electoral college making the decisions it can actually be the people.

So it’s just a method to implement a direct democracy?

What about all the problems with direct democracies, or the problems they just don’t solve?

yeah I dont know anything about that, I have just always been skeptical of the electoral college system

Like I said, this is an idea and I don't really know what I mean by it. Basically what I am trying to do is limit human fallibility in the system that is in play by implementing something new into the mix.

Blockchain is designed to decentralize money. I like that. It takes part of the human out of the game and gives you honest organization of where your money actually is.

I like the idea of doing the same with government somehow, at least I think removing much of the centralization could help if there is more accountability to honest distribution of information, voting or otherwise?

yeah I have thought of that too and the best I have come up with is blockchain law, with ledgers and records. I dont even know how to conceptualize it. — Lif3r

We could come up with something in the near future to replace the "State". The problem is how to stop people of corrupting it, and how are we supposed to implement it on society nowadays. Some may call it "Anarcho-Capitalism" but this line of thought, in my view, is not the correct way, because as I already pointed out, Anarchism is, indeed, stupid.

Anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism anyway because capitalism is hierarchical and so antithetical to anarchism.

Anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism anyway — Pfhorrest

Oh my friend, but there is many people that still views it as an anarchist ideology...

Not anarchists though.

Not anarchists though. — Pfhorrest

I'm not disagreeing with you on this one.

Never ever volunteer, never rush to obey the bosses, always express extreme scepticism, make fun of the mugs who believe in the system - stuff like that.

Blind obedience is stupid. Blind dis-obedience is also stupid. Anarchy is 'well-considered) dis-obedience.

Well at least we agree on something.

I'm baffled. Why should I obey anyone?

Why should I obey anyone? — iolo

You don't know why you should obey the rules (not made by you) that regulate traffic or society?

I don't 'obey' anything - I observe rules I think sensible.

Observe, obey oh yes. let us quibble about semantics. Observe is what I do when I see 2 people arguing.

'Obey' is what you do when you allow someone to treat you as a trained dog. I'm not one of those. If they want me to obey, they'll need someone standing over me with a rifle all day, and there's no profit in that, or in shooting me. Why give inadequates power over you unless you have to?

You are constantly obeying rules. You are just not aware of it because you agree with most of them. You have been pre-conditioned by your parents and teachers to obey societies rules without questioning them.

If I agree then I'm not obeying anything - I'm doing what I choose. What society are you talking about? Capitalism? The English occupiers here? It is easier to grin and bear this silliness, but I certainly don't 'obey' these clowns. In schools they used to teach you to respect them by hitting you on the arse with sticks. Happy days! I just developed a tough arse, and they couldn't kick me out because they wanted an Oxbridge scholarship out of me! :)

The Op is "Anarchy is Stupid'

The essence of Anarchy concerns dis-obeying. Perhaps you should just restrict your thoughts on that.

The point about Anarchy is that it is hard to achieve, and people are too easily persuaded into striking prematurely.. Compete disbelief in the bosses' propaganda is an essential start.

Anarchy is not an end in itself, it is a means to an end. Anarchy is the civil disobedience in an autocratic political system in order to achieve a (more) plural democracy.

Anarchy is an attempt to get bullying clowns off our backs. Governments are systems for allowing bullying and exploitation. There are further - economic - questions about how such idiocies could have developed, but I stick to the obvious.

Governments are systems for allowing bullying and exploitation. — iolo

I live in a plural democracy. I have the ability to vote for who I believe best represents my values.

‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947

The point is that all forms of government stink. That's why anarchism exists. Do vote for whomever you please, if that's the way you like to pass the time: it will have very little influence on your capitalist masters. Churchill was the gangster who sent troops to Pontypridd in 1910, to scare the most Liberal working-class seat in Britain. That's why his Liberal Party soon disappeared as a serious force - they demonstrated just how much capitalist democracy was worth.

As day follows night you will always have rulers. Try to make good out of bad situation.
Anarchy is war.