Anarchism, split form the (De)Motivator thread. :)

[MechAg94]

I doubt Karl Marx ever envisioned Stalin, but he helped create him.

Arguable, but irrelevant as a critique of the ideology (or broader ideas).

Not irrelevant at all.  Any form of govt you consider must account for the Stalins of the world.  Even in a weak govt, there will always be those who seek to control others for one reason or another.  No need to make the same mistakes.

[wooderson]

What you just said doesn't contradict my statement about the argument's irrelevance as a criticism of a particular ideology.

[gunsmith]

I was an anarchist for quite awhile.
Modern anarchist conform to the unwritten rules of their little cliques, the "young whippersnapper"
in the op would be laughed out of any NY squat run by so-called anarchist.
Modern anarchist are all little hitlers who never read Kropotkin and have no clue what the Haymarket was.
In the 1980's I was very involved in the so called anarchist movement and found out that they are all wannabe dictators PERIOD.

The modern Conservative belief in less government is a million % better then the modern anarchist who consistently vote for liberals.

Noam Chompsky, the anarchist savior, is just another liberal anti gunner who happens to have a gift for the written word.

[CAnnoneer]

No political system has the luxury of existing in vacuum. There always are alternative modes of social organization trying to break out and corner the market. Then, ecologically speaking, anarchy is unsustainable because it is too vulnerable to hostile takeover. And the fundamental reason for that is that by its nature, human society is cooperative. Higher forms of cooperation are generally more efficient and produce better results. Better results generate a cumulative advantage that guarantees long-term victory. Anarchy is consistently outperformed.