Anarchy is a logically impossible concept.

Anarchy as a word originally means without a government.

But you cannot define your position that way because it is both a physical and logical impossibility.

Someone in some way is going to be governing over someone no matter what circumstances you try to set up.

So every anarchist has a system of rules they want to impose on the world, which requires rule makers, and which requires those rules to be enforced. That’s a government.

So why can no anarchists agree on a coherent definition of what they want or why they want it?

Because there is no single principle of governance that binds them together other than the fact that they don’t like the current system.

They don’t want a world without government they just want to be the one who gets to decide what government we have.

They want to be the rule maker.

They want to impose their will on others via their rules.

And they don’t want to let others be able to do the same to them.

Anarchists are therefore, ironically, just dictatorial tyrants at heart.

“You must do what I want, even if you don’t want to, but I will not do what you want if I don’t want to.”

It is logically impossible for everyone to be free of being imposed upon by others.

The only way you can theoretically be free of imposition is if you are the all powerful ruler able to bend everyone to your will but be bent by no one.

But only one of you could logically be in that position. You can’t all be there.

So you are all really just vying to be the totalitarian dictator of the whole wotld – because anything less risks you being imposed upon.

A proposition way more tyrannical than any of the governments you seek to topple.