For those o-fen-d-ed by my comments, I have my reasons why I look down on Anarchists. Thing is, I was in my 20's and could have been a prime person to engage in the WTO riots. But then, smashing and looting corporate stores just has never rung as right to me.
The WTO left a pretty sour taste in me. So has my experience with every so-called anarchist I have met (and I have met quite a few). They were not into the lifestyle for warm fuzzies and to have a better life. Every single one of them was into it to get something for nothing - and to not have to hold a real job - and to be off the radar of the gov't. Had they all been off in teh foothills, living off the land, I might have a better view. Instead, they lived in cities and large towns, existing on the shadows - and often using things put in place by local gov'ts to help the homeless and below poverty levels, such as food, shelter and other services.
The reality is, while many will live happily together, for the better of society, without law and leaders, society cannot exist. There will always be those who seek to corrupt and destroy. And to take advantage of the weakest.
And might I add something to back on page 1: that drugs don't hurt anyone except for the one doing them. You really believe that BS? Seriously? Illegal drug use hurts many people - from children stunted by user parents (ignored, abused, abandoned, underfed, exposed to chemicals) to the drug cartels selling the drugs, that run countries illegally, killing anyone in their way (ooh, how does that anarchy work?). Legalizing it isn't much better either. Yeah, it cuts cartels out but it doesn't repair lost lives and families destroyed.
I am entitled to my views as much as you are. Unless of course, you are setting the rules, under a dictatorship, in a power struggle. Like so many countries have seen when gov'ts fall.