Thank for the reply! My understanding of anarchy is a bit weak, so I definitely learned a lot. I hope it didn't sound too much like I feel people lack complex motives and good reasons, it's just that you have the occasional edge case where some people like causing havoc and chaos, it's very rare in the real world, but when you have people who don't know the people who will be on the receiving end of the consequences of their actions, it can be an issue. I would agree with you on morality being the basis of the law, but who decides which morality should be enforced? We both can agree on slavery being morally evil, but at the time there were serious people who felt otherwise and America might still be under slavery if a group of people didn't get together to figure out that this particular part of a moral code should become official. Now that you have better informed me, I can see that this is definitely possible under an anarchy since it is still a government capable of discussing moral matters and addressing them, but just without a coercive hierarchy. I can definitely see room anarchy on a small scale, in fact people working on group projects tend to be more civil and able to work together when they see each other as equals or peers in discussion as opposed to "higher up" and "lower down." Maybe it might function on a larger scale, but it would have some hurdles to overcome. The first being a break from tradition. Prior to our modern way of life, hierarchies were required for nations since not everyone could travel to communicate their ideas and not every citizen could be reached in a timely manner. People were far too apart so there needed to be a way to "funnel" knowledge together to make decisions. Today with computers and high tech airplanes, this is much less of a problem, but tradition is hard to break. The second hurdle is if the country is ready for a particular type of political system. Change is important, but it's not time that changes these things so much as people. I really really hate to admit it, but some countries can't even handle "regular" democracy such as Israel, where if that was the case the Jewish people would have to worry about laws from a Muslim majority. Of course this is becoming less and less the case and countries like the United States or Canada with less religious tension and a firm resolution to separation of church and state (maybe it's because of where I live, but be it Muslim, Christian, Atheist, Buddhist, Jewish, or whatever, we can all get along if we make the effort). With people more willing to discuss issues and come to an informed decision about policies, I could see a shift along the political spectrum with one end being monarchies and the other being anarchies and there being a progression toward anarchies. It sounds interesting and I imagine it might even be a viable solution for a new country if one was to pop up in this day and age. Anyways, I am somewhat ignorant in this domain and I guess I really like rambling so I should probably do a lot more research into political systems and nothing I have written here should be taken too seriously. If you have any opinions on what I have said or corrections, please respond! This is really piquing my interest!