Thanks for this article, I too have the same gripes about the usury and predatory domination of the government/economy that characterizes humanity’s condition. I think being able to reach decisions on a daily basis with fellow humans without mini wars breaking out amongst family/friends/neighbors makes us think “well why can’t we just keep doing it like this on all levels of society?” I do think that the continued amassing of humans is what makes the ability to keep things that civil more and more tenuous.

In an anarchist society, from what I gathered from the article, it’s based more on a true popular vote to make decisions. As the population of the community increases, is it practical to call for a 100% participation vote on every step of the way? I feel like at some point, representatives or governing bodies will be appointed, and now we have people who have been given a measure of power. Ideally, they strictly do the will of the people though. But what is their incentive for shouldering a heavier responsibility than those who aren’t in that position, more pay/distinct privileges? A class starts to form.

In any case, given that things will be held to a true popular vote, when heavy decisions are given in favor of the majority, the minority are going to have to deal with it. Will they be able to? I hope so. Will some folks be frustrated enough with not getting their way and start doing what they want anyway? Will someone rise up to fight the cause of the minority, perhaps “campaign” for a representative position? Will folks somehow find a commonality in their views, clumping up as a separate identity distinct from the rest?

I would waaay prefer folks to be decent enough to make the anarchist way work, because there’s no doubt that these governments are self serving and abusive. But I have a hard time seeing how good-natured humans will continue to be as the numbers of a community rise, especially since the abusive governments we have today all originate with these same good natured humans.