Merizoc wrote:Maqo wrote:
Seriously, can you quit it with that 99.8% number? It means nothing, at all.
Even with the absurdity of the metric, it's counting creatures that aren't even human.
But more to the point, the majority of humans that have ever lived have lived under a state. The first states began to establish ~3000 BC, by which time we had (by most calculations) barely reached 5 billion humans to have EVER lived. The cumulative world population is now ~110 billion.
I can't say exactly when the majority of the living began to live within a state, but populations within a state grew at much faster rates than those without - perhaps for the simple reason that the state exists to manage large populations effectively.
It is much more revealing that 95%+ of humans that have ever lived have lived under a state.
But you were claiming that anarchism can only last for a few years, a patently false statement, not that anarchism only works on smaller groups.
? Perhaps you misunderstood me. My claim is that the Free Territory of Ukraine (which according to Wikipedia lasted 1918-1921) (and Catalonia, and the korean one) was unstable - similar to the infamous first Tacoma Narrows bridge which was 'successful' for 6 months before collapsing, implying that most people wouldn't actually call a bridge that literally shook itself apart a big success. That was all.
And then I got the ridiculous response that homo neanderthalensis lived in anarchy, which is irrelevant, and I disputed.
I think the truth is a combination of the two - anarchism can last indefinitely with small groups of people with simple lives (eg, primitivists) but it gets more unstable the more people there are - hence the historical phenomena that the state naturally arose in civilisations the world over generally coinciding with their development of sedentary agriculture.