redrix, please dont cherry pick a bunch of definitions of anarchy from other sources and then hold me accountable to them.
I've already said that the term has become confused with chaos, and you respond showing confusing and claiming victory.
Here are your two definitions:
"a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority" - This isn't a defintion of the term at all. It's an assumption about the consequences of the term and as such does not belong in your discussion. You can't just say "Anarchy means disorder so there" - thats the EXACT confusion I was referring to.
"absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal." - Without nitpicking, this is more or less fine and exactly what I'm talking about. The absence of a 'state' = anarchy.
Whether there is order or disorder in an anarchic society is a question beyond the mere definition.
>>> This is a pretentious statement. And I agree your post sounds like nonsense.
All I'm saying is that this is, to most people, a very foreign and outlandish idea that 99% of people have never given any serious thought. So I'm not surprised at all when it is not taken seriously. That said, when you haven't seriously considered something or reviewed the case with an open mind, it would suggest you may not have given it enough thought to come to such a firm conclusion.