[AWoodside]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seems to me that these kinds of actions would constitute the formation of a new state anyhow.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, exactly. Sorry I wasn't clearer.

[ QUOTE ]
aren't you just saying that any achievement of anarchy is impossible because of the regenerative power of the state?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. That, and you cannot destroy a state without creating a cohesive organization to do it, which would constitute a state.

I believe the human animal is extremely adaptable, and probably an anarchist or anarcho-capitalist system might well be viable once it exists. I just see no plausible way of reaching that point. We can't get there from here. The state won't waste away, as old communists believed.

Who knows, we might see evolution toward much more decentralization, and maybe the decline of the nation state. But that would be longterm change caused by underlying social dynamics. I see no plausible way for a revolutionary movement to impose an AC blueprint.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cohesive organization = involuntary, violent, coercion??

I do agree with you that ACism will be the result of a change in underlying social dynamics, and achieving it in one fell swoop through revolution is very unlikely. I don't think too many ACist advocate this strategy anyway.