VGPolyglot said:
But that doesn't mean that it doesn't work. If it really didn't, they would have just let them collapse as that as a propaganda tactic to show that anarchism doesn't work. However, considering that they invaded them they must have felt threatened. |
Why was there ever a need to show that anarchism doesn't work though? I think people with lust for power will simply perceive it as a weak system that can't mobilize and fanaticise it's citizens and just take what's up for grabs. As a german I'm very wary of idealistic systems that have so little means of self-preservation.
In my opinion both anarchy and communism can work in small communities and on short time scales, but I have no clue how they can effectively defend themselves against being toppled from in or outside (anarchy) or being quickly transformed into a system with an elite wielding absolute power with a tiny layer of communistic paint on it. The later is how pretty much every successful communism movement that I'm aware of turned out.
As we can see in this very topic even democracies (that work with a lower level of idealism) like in Turkey are vulnerable.
