> E.g. It’s NOT about “There was anarchy in the mall today as shoppers demolished the stores and injured eachother fighting over Black Friday deals.”
It always annoyed me how anarchy is conflated with chaos. Nowhere is implied that a lack of coercive hierarchy means to be allowed to smash everything and kill people.
I suppose this all comes back to the point that nobody is pragmatically advocating for absolute anarchy - it's simply a valuable concept to reference as we collaborate to build actual, functioning social systems. Or, at least, that's how I tend to think about it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Once hierarchies solve the issues they are born from, they cease to be necessary. Hence a government that permanently solves poverty and thus crime in the most common sense, eliminates the need for an authority to regulate interactions between individuals.
There will still be a non-zero amount of hierarchical order within social systems even if it doesn't come from the government.
I just wanted to elaborate (since I agree) on your point that Anarchy is "a valuable concept to reference as we collaborate to build actual, functioning social systems".
I won't exclude that Anarchy could eventually concretize though, who knows!
I tend to speak this way because I lean towards discussing near and mid-term futures as opposed to longer term ones in many conversations for a number of reasons.
I do this in part because I'm biased toward the now both subconsciously and out of pragmatism as a material being living in the present, but also largely because I find that other people I encounter tend to be even more that way and struggle to envision the longer-term possible that may require a number of intermediate steps.
Anyway, to our future, voluntarily!
> anarchy - a state in which there is widespread wrongdoing and disregard for rules and authority
If the political ideology doesn't want to be conflated with this it needs a new name.
It sucks but language is descriptive not prescriptive, and meanings change over time.