= new reply since forum marked as read
Oddly, in checking the definition of anarchism, I don't find madmen throwing Molotov cocktails at each and every turn. I do see those who wish to live free from dominating systems and corrupt rulers, developing a horizontal democracy in place of stacked systems.
---
Anarchy (from the ancient Greek ἀ????ί?, anarchia, from ἀ? an, "not" +? ἀ??ό? arkhos, "ruler", meaning "absence of a leader", "without rulers"
, has more than one definition. In the United States, the term "anarchy" typically is used to refer to a society without a publicly enforced government or violently enforced political authority.[1][2] When used in this sense, anarchy may[3] or may not[4] be intended to imply political disorder or lawlessness within a society.
Outside of the US, and by most individuals that self-identify as anarchists, it implies a system of governance, mostly theoretical at a nation state level although there are a few successful historical examples,[5] that goes to lengths to avoid the use of coercion, violence, force and authority, while still producing a productive and desirable society.[6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy
---
Geez, a little different from what they're attempting to use to scare us into submission and obedience. 9/11! TERRA!
Which of course is why the FBI are now raiding activists' homes in search of "anarchist literature". The machine needs to justify its domination and continued power grab (DHS, TSA, NDAA, NDRP, HR347, etc.) by creating an Other, an enemy here at home. Now we're not just fighting Them over There, we're fighting Them right Here! AIIIE! Chupocabra!
This demonization and utter fear-mongering and escalating police state only goes to show the system IS corrupt and must be tamed into again serving the public.
