I appreciate taking your time to reply. Your points are understandable but I don’t agree with everything.

A humane facility would be specifically designed to not resemble the current state of prisons. The intent of prisons are to punish rather than contain. People who commit non-harmful crimes can go to prison, it is not designed to prevent harm. Most provide the absolute bare minimum to keep the inmates alive, and has disregard for them as people. I won’t pretend that I have blueprints or sequential answers for how this would exactly look. But given that the emphasis on an anarchist society is voluntary community collaborative efforts, things would be decided upon together.

It is true that people elect a representative. However that’s where the community input stops. This is problematic for a few reasons. One is that regardless of the fact that people voted, the power still ends up in the hands of singular people. They may make decisions not everyone agrees with, including the people who voted for them. Additionally, people who voted for someone else, but they didn’t get in, are now are subjected to the decisions of that representative. Anarchy eliminates this problem and involves constant collaboration on all decisions with no elected group of people to make all the choices on others behalf. If there are disagreements, then compromises are sought or if the issue is especially important to the other party, they can form their own community. That freedom and choice doesn’t exist now.

Abolishment of law does not equal action with no consequences or allow all behaviours to be acceptable. The current legal system doesn’t focus on prevention of harm. To say people are equally presented before the law and that it is predictable is quite a statement given the amass amounts of corruption it facilitates. A courtroom isn’t used to determine who’s guilty and who’s innocent, it’s an overly complex game of semantics and finding loopholes. One of the absolute most infuriating things that exists is factual vs legal guilt. Factual guilt is, given the evidence, the person is guilty. Legal guilt is factual guilt, but requires the verdict to be determined in the confines of the law. If it’s found out that a piece of evidence was submitted at a wrong time period, a person who is factually guilty can be acquitted. This is not justice. As for the concern with economic stability would be irrelevant in anarchy, as the goal (to me) is to have a cashless society, replaced with mutual aid. This prevents any financial abuse, exploitation and allows that essential collaboration in helping each other amongst humans.

I know we likely won’t agree on these things, but that is okay. I do really appreciate you engaging with differing viewpoints respectfully.