This article was inspired by and gives thanks to another artist of words for his excellent treatise of popular Anarchy. –A gauntlet I put down and Mr. LibertyUnchained was so gallant to pick up.

For full effect I recommend reading his HUB first.

First let me say thank you. This is a passionate subject for some, so please don’t take anything too seriously. I certainly mean no insult toward you.

Excellent I love words, well the older ones that actually meant something, the ones with roots and origins that could track the progress of humanity and civilizations. Not this crap teenager’s spam over everything with no thinking whatsoever till someone makes the mistake of using it in an intelligent forum and an overpaid lexicographer snags it up dooming us all to fantastical devolution.

“a state of society without government or law.” -http://dictionary.reference com/browse/anarchy

If you are assuming I think anarchy is chaos that would be a negative. Lack of government or law does not inherently mean chaos. Chaos is such a strong word. Besides after I shoot someone and take the new dress I wanted free, they are not arguing with me so there is no chaos.

Unfortunately and especially today with the speed of the internet definitions change and evolve rapidly, I encounter this issue in the field of gender where definition discussion is quite heated at times. You can call an apple a turnip if you wish and I can call a radish a pear. The reality of bitter and sweet do not change.

“Statist stat⋅ist = 1. A statesman; a politician; one skilled in government. [Obs.] Statists indeed, And lovers of their country. --Milton.” -http://dictionary. reference com/browse/Statist

It seems a remarkable coincidence that a dictionary would so markedly contradict both the definition for anarchy and the one for Statist. Making this sentence a flip flop, “… if the anarchist claims the right to destroy other people, then he is in fact not an anarchist, but a Statist.” This shows that anarchist have taken the same liberties in defamation of their “enemy” the Statist. That they imagine to have been done with their beloved anarchy. There is of course a great deal of room for paranoia on either side of that fence. And I would not put it past either group to grasp for or retain power. It is somewhat blind to assume there are no snakes in the anarchy camp, when it is in fact the perfect abode for someone to brood who could not get away with some corruption under the careful watch of Statist. And it is also true of course that some who chose to understand the true dynamics of a Statist system take every opportunity to use it for their own selfish independent and dare I say it anarchistic goals. Things are clearly not as blue and orange as most would have us believe.

I must say I take offence to a small degree to the blaming of “Chaoticist” for defamation of the anarchist, in part because it seems the only definitions of this group are intellectual scientific theorists of the recent present only a handful and myself of course. I note that indeed the true evil you mention but do not seem to recognize as directly at fault is the media. Statists really don’t have time to run about every minute bad mouthing bad-mouthers. The media supports itself through revenues derived by selling stories they think people i.e. “we” wish to hear. They of course receive nudges from Statists but anyone who is in power would nudge opinion, it is known as “self-preservation.”

And when I say I am a Chaoticist, I am not of the scientific theorist variety, nor am I of the obsessively sociopath “Nihilist” variety which is what I think was actually meant since Chaoticist does not appear to be as commonly a recognized word. In fact it seems that in this group, like most, there is a great deal of spectrum. Perhaps it might be in both my interest as a Chaoticist and in the interest of anarchist to educate the media and general public as to the actual term nihilist. I would put myself about halfway between a nihilist and theorists, on the Chaoticist scale. I am active but unlike a nihilist I am not short sighted, a modicum of enlightened social interests can go a great way to meeting ones independent whims.

The summary is interesting, pitting Anarchy as the underdog against the evils of abstract “chaos”, and Statist. If I was a betting person, who I am not because I don’t back losers, I would have to assume that anarchist really don’t stand a chance.

I mean it makes me feel sorry for the anarchist facing so many others who will kill them without hesitation. It kind of surprises me though that anarchist exists at all; I mean really if Statists were so evil and out to get them. The fact is that Statists protect themselves and Anarchists; they even protect the sociopath-Chaoticist otherwise known as Nihilist, up to the point the Nihilist take action. And then it is not the Anarchist that gets rid of the Nihilist. In fact it is the very same Statists allegedly responsible for most of the evil according to the Anarchists as they say who rids the world of this problem. While the Anarchist does nothing but complain and doesn’t lift a finger to help anyone. I had not thought of this before, thank you.

1.total rejection of established laws and institutions. 2. anarchy, terrorism, or other revolutionary activity -An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence. ni'hil·ist, ni⋅hil⋅ism -http //dictionary reference com/browse/nihilist

And as I think recently ex President Bush would say “Evil-doers”

I doubt you can prove that most colonies directed from their sovereigns in foreign countries were ever anarchy. Since the definition of anarchy as you established is not a chaos, and according with the dictionary neither a place of law. I am quite certain in fact that most colonies were far more organized and followed their foreign government’s laws as well as implementing their own laws through established local systems and magistrates who were direct representatives of the foreign rulers. If you want to find a case for lawlessness you will have to look much farther west. And you can only see true lawlessness and lack of government in one place and time in this country and that is the period between the white slaughter of native peoples and the establishment of states in the west.

Local tribes of Native Americans I believe would take great offence to the suggestion there was no law in the eastern seaboard. They in fact had tribal law as well and in many places still do, where laws and governments exist whether tribal or otherwise there is by definition no anarchy, to say otherwise is really wishful thinking. It is somewhat vain and ignorant to assume this land was without laws simply because the peoples here before us may not have called them “laws” per se. They certainly had forms of government and laws that governed their societies different yes but no less valid.

I am trying for the record to remove as many “you” statements as I can so please forgive me if some have slipped through, the “you” is plural in any case and NOT a personal statement directed at you the author.

Since almost every woman, man and child in Colonial America was a god fearing and law abiding citizen this doesn’t leave much room for anarchy. The only anarchist in the original thirteen colonies at best were fur traders and trappers who existed for a short time working between the laws and systems of the kings and the tribal laws of the lands they plundered for pelts and hides. Besides providing a significant amount of revenue to assist the further development of the existing albeit weak local systems these alleged anarchist did little more of significance besides spreading disease to native peoples and also introducing them to excessive alcohol. It is no wonder that they would be footnotes in history, although their “private enterprise” did perhaps more for westward expansion initially than anything else. Some would say that even these were not anarchist but capitalists.

I know that townships in Maine existed chronologically abutting Native American law over the same territory, there is little to no evidence to suggest that any large number of people ever existed under anarchy on the East Coast. Don’t forget that regions governed by church law are in fact still under law, not anarchy. I have ancestral ties to townships in Maine so I know, and in many ways Maine was one of the more “wilderness” regions and it still is.

I also must contend that a room full of three to ten persons hardly qualifies as a group of significance. So even if you could find a record of such a grouping of trappers, merchants and fur traders in one spot for any length of time calling them a civilization of anarchy is rather ridiculous. Certainly they did gather in outposts for mutual protection like packs of wolves after infringing on Native American lands. A pack of wolves still has laws however, they may not be written in ink but if you don’t believe me take it up with the Alpha. Coincidentally an Alpha both dominates and protects his pack more like the Statists do, so that also doesn’t leave much left for alleged anarchists.

The colonists were not following natural law that is one of the issues that chaffed the native peoples; for the most part the colonists followed church laws and their local laws to provide the revenues expected by their sovereigns in foreign countries. And like the good Statist the colonists were, they tried at every chance to either drive out or impose their law on Native peoples. So if you wish to call the colonists anarchists and deny their documented behavior toward native peoples I must say let me get out from between you and my Native American friends, and may the goddess have mercy on your scalps. J*grin*

Dejour union or “Law union” yes a collection of state governments with laws, not a collection of anarchies that in fact exist only in romantic fantasies in the minds of less read audience members of the Jerry Springer fan club. One need only review letters written in the periods between the aristocratic families controlling the ebb and flow of their less literate brethren to know the truth. That in fact law and its importance to them was paramount, they needed more consideration of laws to protect citizens of their local government and allow for increasing interaction between one government’s laws and the next.

The people’s formalization of government really was not at all that but rather a replacement from monarchy to republic, the fact is that every civilized colonial region had laws in place and a system of both judicial and enforcement. To say states, provinces, colonies, commonwealths did not have government simply over a lapse at the continental level is irresponsible. One of the biggest motivating factors after mutual protection towards nationalism to instill reason was the very fact that “Anarchy” was causing mayhem at the borders of states where laws could be ignored by simply crossing. In Fact Anarchy even in these microscopic strips between states necessitated further and ever more powerful levels of law. As a Chaoticist I am somewhat irked at anarchist for this move, as it is their very acts of disregarding law that cultivated growth of the Statists.  Anarchists cannot even blame Chaoticist for this, since it was the anarchists abiding by the laws of whichever suited their purpose long enough to disregard laws over the border, primarily in area of commerce. Chaoticist in general are less prone to engage in commerce, since business demands a stability that is somewhat chaffing yet business does not necessarily need laws at such a puny level, so if there were an anarchist at all this would have been their niche.

It is humorous to hear someone blaming the “people” for giving up their rights to the same people, the government is the largest employer, and as such one of the largest tax payers, despite what hulu and some paranoid people may say the “Statists” are us, not aliens. Laws can and are changed; the Statists have ensured we have a system to protect our right to change it. And thankfully they have also made it so a tiny minority cannot dictate outrageous terms throwing the lives of many more people into despair and destitution. From your case for anarchy I can only conclude that they would sit by and let nihilist commit hate crimes on every minority, bombing abortion clinics, slaughtering the LGBT community as well as any religious group without majority of control in a region. And that says nothing for the biker gangs and the youth drug gangs, neo-Nazis and black panthers, without the alleged “evil” Statists to stop them.

I am very thankful for your efforts in this, as it made things more clear to me at least, yes the Statist maintain a status quo which provides a bloody forum for Nihilist and others to slaughter other innocent minorities. I think the claim that the central government is at fault for most of it is a bit paranoid however. Even in the case of the massive slaughtering of Native Americans, it is not all the people of the government who were at fault. Special interests of wealthy land owners others and unfortunately they had Grant among others in their pockets for quite some time. However more has been accomplished in advancement by the Statists for all people in this country than ever could by any other group.

Yes growth is slow and painful, trust me I know, when you know many people who are on the threshold of suicide simply for the freedom of moving about as gender congruent entities that most of us take for granted. And realizing for example “transgender” were not even perceived as existing as they do until nearly the last three decades by most of our population. I think I personally would have to pick up arms and defend them against a group of anarchist who are more likely to wander off and watch a football game while a white/black supremacist beats the life out of the innocent who looked different from them.

As I have said I don’t blame anarchist for doing anything, which would be like saying potheads cause riots, just silly. It is the anarchy inherent compulsion to do nothing that is more the issue. If Anarchist were running this “group of people”, because for starters we wouldn’t be the United States at all, civil rights progress would only have happened if at all in tiny pockets. Having a “group” of people being anarchist is all fine but the reality is people have the capacity for a great many things. Great good and great evil, they can easily lapse into laziness and greed. It has always been easiest to take from your neighbor when you neglected to grow your own. It is not anarchists who are at fault for anything, they may even believe they “are their brother’s keeper” but unfortunately some of the great obstacles to freedom have been far too powerful for a mere collection of easygoing home-brewers. We might even all be speaking Japanese or German by now. I respect the anarchist a little more thanks to your writing, I really do, though I am sure some of them are probly a bit frothy over my alternative perspective, but hey its ok cause the Statists let us say this stuff.

The problem lies in who takes the reins and how naive people are, unfortunately there are a great majority of people in every country and always have throughout history who rather sit on the couch with some fish n chips than be bothered to do the daily toil of seeing to a societies needs. And that simultaneously there are other people who are aggressive and hungry for power and no matter what system you have there always will be. Human beings simply don’t walk about like clones with the same levels of social concern or conscience, to even imply they are is naïve at best.

No one wanted to handle the hum drum business of the day in Russia and like most clubs and organizations they all sloughed the work onto the Party Secretary’s lap…Joseph Stalin started doing the stuff no one else wanted to be bothered with. I would to be ecstatic to be Party Secretary in Anarchy; of course there wouldn’t be chaos and strife… at first. Just give us some time without a strong central authority and someone will always fix that little silliness, one way or another.

If any anarchists are really steamed now I suppose I could claim the Statists made me say it, yawl might even go for that. If I have learned anything it is that Anarchists are simply the Statist’s red headed step child and just as docile.

Peace and *hugs*

Sibli

Ps: I Sibli am not only a Chaoticist, but also the president of Choatics everywhere, and in accordance with Subsection 2-AB45982-ZPO of the treaty between the Over mind of hulu and Scientology as brokered by Tom Cruise I hereby declare myself Neo-Axel-Meticulous-Pollinator of circumstantial navigable industrial Pan-Human facilitative confirmation and explanative cognitive contraception and should the office of high priestess to the Maya Corn Goddess open up before 2012 I should like to tender my application.

I also support friends in need.