![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 65 | Archive 66 | Archive 67 | Archive 68 |
@ Cinadon36 You said that the third source is outdated (1994), but two sources provided to say ancap is not real anarchism are from 1992 and 1993 respectively. I also don't see how datedness would be an issue, since nothing about what ancap is has changed since then. Not sure how the second source is tertiary or unreliable, since it is a text written by a author explaining Anarchism that is known for writing books about politics. The first source is written by Michael Huemer, who is a professor of philosophy, which sounds like a scholar to me. Since some of them are authors and not scholars, maybe I should have same that some scholars and authors believe this, but that's a minor fix. If you have any objections to my reasoning, feel free to reply. If you think I need more sources, I'll see if I can find more. X-Editor ( talk) 07:39, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
More generally, different types of anarchism will offer different economic theories. Those with stronger individualistic component will tend to rely not merely upon market or allied exchange arrangements, but upon capitalistic organization; thus anarcho-capitalisms, logical end-points when libertarianism and economic rationalism are really driven to state minimalization. These types of anarchism, whose small home base is the USA, propose several, often ingenious uses of private and market means to substitute for social and state functions (Friedman, 1973; Rothbard, 1977).Tewdar 14:34, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
ANARCHISTS reject any form of economic control or management. However, while anarcho-communists endorse common ownership and small-scale self-management, anarcho-capitalists advocate an entirely unregulated market economy.Tewdar 08:09, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Anarchists of all kinds have a preference for an economy in which free individuals manage their own affairs without the need for state ownership or regulation. However, this has allowed them to endorse a number of quite different economic systems, ranging from ‘anarcho-communism’ to ‘anarcho-capitalism’.Tewdar 08:10, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Anarchism, for instance, can be seen as either ultra-lef t -wing or ultra-right-wing, since it encompasses both anarcho-communist and anarcho-capitalist tendenciesTewdar 08:18, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
tertiarysource entirely
about anarchismthat isn't from
dictionariesor
handbooksthat literally word-for-word says
an-cap is a form of Anarchism. But I don't think this is a very reasonable set of criteria. Tewdar 14:09, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Anarcho-capitalism: A form of anarchism that seeks to replace government with a system of unregulated market competition.- lol 😂👍 Tewdar 14:11, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
@ Cinadon36: What policy or rule on WP says that we cannot use tertiary sources? In fact, WP:TERTIARY says the exact opposite. "anthology of earlier writings" How is that a problem? The meaning of Anarcho-capitalism hasn't changed since it was first coined and explained and you've failed to provide evidence that the meaning of anarchism has changed to disfavour anarcho-capitalism as a form of anarchism. "an-cap being a form of anarchism is a fringe opinion." That may be true, but that doesn't mean we cannot note that a minority think anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism. In fact, my edit to the article very clearly said that only "some" agree with this position and I did not change the sentence that said that "most" scholars disagree in my edit. I did not make the "fringe theory appear more notable or more widely accepted than it is." per WP:FRINGE. X-Editor ( talk) 21:42, 21 September 2022 (UTC) @ Tewdar:, If you have any more sources that indicate anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism, please provide those sources here. X-Editor ( talk) 21:42, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
...most scholars reject anarcho-capitalismobviously carries the implication that some exist who do not. I don't think there's enough who disagree to justify more than that or to include an extensive back-and-forth, especially given that most of the examples here so far are basically just passing mentions rather than full-throated disagreement. I also think that this comes up often enough that we might want to consider an RFC. (I was surprised we hadn't already had one.) -- Aquillion ( talk) 22:04, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Reliable tertiary sources can help provide broad summaries of topics that involve many primary and secondary sources and may help evaluate due weight, especially when primary or secondary sources contradict each other- Hope that helps. Also, please point to the policy, guideline, or essay that claims tertiary sources
weight much less than secondary ones.Tewdar 08:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
In this talk page archives and others, it has been repeatedly established that "anarchism" is scoped here to refer to the libertarian socialist tradition, per its history, per the sources. Yes, if you modify the definition enough, many other traditions could also be called anarchism, but that's not how the major sources in the field define it. That much is not under debate, but if you would prefer a formal, neutrally worded RfC, we can do that as well.
As for edit warring over the latest addition, LewRockwell.com has been repeatedly established as an unreliable source at WP:RSN and if Rothbard's critique needs any more explication in this article, it should be easy to furnish a reliable, secondary source that shows the noteworthiness of the claim. The problems of the "Criticism" section serving as an unfocused catch-all have also been repeatedly established on this talk page. czar 15:23, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
The second citation in the second paragraph of Anarchism#Gender,_sexuality,_and_free_love misunderstands the source it cites from completely and is VERY problematic. The current version says:
I quote Lucy 2020, pp. 177-178:
This passage says that Tucker used anarchist arguments to undermine protection of women from sexual violence by opposing age of consent laws, and that this will benefit predatory men, NOT that the age of consent laws will benefit predatory men.
I suggest changing this to:
-- Thas ( talk) 16:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Having Most instead of Some is some of the most blatant propaganda I have ever seen on this website 2607:FEA8:2CDC:96D0:79FF:BFB5:B693:4283 ( talk) 14:44, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
I noticed Hoponpop69 merged the articles on anarchism without adjectives and expropriative anarchism into this article. [2] I have to object to the manner in which this merge was done, as they have just shoved the text from these two articles into the "Branches" section, without thought for how that fits with the rest of the text. This has resulted in the citations in the article losing their consistency, as most of the citations in the merged text are not Sfn formatted and many aren't even particularly reliable. It has also completely thrown off the weight of the section, giving the same amount of weight to these two tendencies as the entire sphere of classical and post-classical anarchisms.
I've reverted these changes (both the mergers and the deletions), [3] as I don't think they were constructive to this article and have in fact made the article worse. I'm not sure why there wasn't so much as a talk page message left, let alone an actual merge discussion, that preceded this move. This could have been done with greater care and more prior consensus building. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 09:17, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Grnrchst:, I am sorry I have reverted your last edit [4] but I feel that Nietzsche's influence on anarchism is well studied and should be mentioned at the article. In the article, we should strive to tell the various histories that shaped the idea and political movement of Anarchism. Nietzsche criticized hierarchical institutions and celebrated freedom and autonomy. Anyways, I am open to discussion. Cheers, Cinadon 36 22:27, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
an editor has made an edit that is not actually supported by the sources they provided, their sources do have a problem of neutrality in themselves, and the editor has made an accusation of gatekeeping.
clearly, this edit should have been discussed before it was made, given the maturity of the article and its "good article" rating.
i'll be flagging this for review as well.
commie ( talk) 21:37, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
I'd consider him to be a marginal case: Gerard Casey (philosopher) - he certainly meets the self-description clause of WP:FRINGE but I'm not sure how well received his poli-sci work has been by the academic community. Simonm223 ( talk) 12:55, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
"Humans have lived in societies without formal hierarchies long before the establishment of states"
This statement is untrue. There has never been a non-hierarchical society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.38.189.222 ( talk) 17:33, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
The topic fails to address the anarchist movement of the far right that is created after WWII and Nazi defeat. Libertarian, fascist, anarchist are now wide spread in both the US and Europe. 69.54.142.165 ( talk) 17:25, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your recent edit, I am sorry I had to remove the sentence you added today
Generally, anarchist groups state that they represent a vision of a future "society [that] runs without coercive authority from government, religion, education and industry". [1]
References
The reasons I did it are as follows: A) I am uncertain about the reliability of the source. Furthermore, it's not a primary or secondary source discussing the topic but rather a tertiary source on world history. Additionally, I am unfamiliar with the reputation of the publishing house, Parragon. B) The particular sentence duplicates information that has already been covered elsewhere in the article.
I am open to discussion though, so let me know what your objections might be! Cinadon 36 22:07, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
The text below the final image in the article is "Les chataigniers a Osny (1888) by anarchist painter Camille Pissarro is a notable example of blending anarchism and the arts". However I suspect the image is of an Apple Harvest--especially given the filename: Apple_Harvest_by_Camille_Pissarro.jpg.
The best confirmation I could find about the title of the current image was a page from a past exhibition at the Guggenheim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgwalker ( talk • contribs) 19:56, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Instead of the current image, I suspect that the correct image (already hosted on Wikimedia) can be found at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pissarro,_Camille,_Les_chataigniers_a_Osny_(The_Chestnut_Trees_at_Osny),_1873.jpg
There would then be an issue with the dates. It appears the date in the text (1888) does not match that of the artwork (1873).
-- Mgwalker ( talk) 19:48, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Citation needed for: “Before the creation of towns and cities, established authority did not exist.” Archeological discoveries from all over the world, especially of nomadic tribes, prove otherwise. 24.86.184.21 ( talk) 06:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I suggest revising the intro sentence to replace "skeptical of all justifications for authority" by "skeptical of justifications for hierarchical authority associated with the nation state" to correct a widely held misconception and to be in line with the quoted source (which states just that "it is not government as such that they find objectionable, but the hierarchical forms of government associated with the nation state").
Specifically, anarchy does not seek to have no government or ruler, it seeks to not have a ruling class with potentially different interests to those over which it rules. This reading is specifically supported by the quoted source at the end of the intro sentence [1].— Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.178.202.229 ( talk) 19:54, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
I put a citation needed tag on the above claim. From layperson study of anthropology, I don't believe this is generally true. I believe even the earliest hunter-gather societies had anywhere from simple to complex hierarchies that often involved seniority, chiefs, councils, etc. From my recent study of the Shawnees at the time they were driven off the land by the British and U.S., they certainly had a fairly complex hierarchy.-- David Tornheim ( talk) 05:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
After further research, I discovered this sentence morphed from "The timeline of anarchism stretches back to prehistory when people lived in anarchistic societies long before the establishment of formal states, kingdoms or empires." History_of_anarchism#Prehistoric_and_ancient_era says: "Many scholars of anarchism, including anthropologists Harold Barclay and David Graeber, claim that some form of anarchy dates back to prehistory." But that's the view of scholars of anarchism--not necessarily the view of all scholars of anthropology. I don't know if it is even true that "many" scholars of anarchism say this, or just the two that are cited. -- David Tornheim ( talk) 06:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
I see that PBZE noticed the problem in 23-Novemeber-2021. The statement was originally added 12-Feb-2020 by Cinadon36. There was also another version that existed in May 2021 that said, "...when humans arguably lived in anarchic societies..." (emphasis added). -- David Tornheim ( talk) 07:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
A source is not needed in the lede (See WP:LEDE). Someone might dispute the claim made further below, in the main body of the article. Lede has to summarize the main body. I have reverted the tag [9], until a consensus is reached. Cinadon 36 17:21, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
If it summarizes the body, it's probably referring to: "Before the creation of towns and cities, established authority did not exist." This refers to a source with the following quote: "For tens of thousands of years, human beings lived in societies without any formal political institutions or constituted authority. About 6,000 years ago, around the time of the so-called dawn of civilization, the first societies with formal structures of hierarchy, command, control and obedience began to develop." I guess the key word is "formal"? But then I'm not sure the current sentence gives the right impression. That is, while hierarchies existed, they just weren't "formal", because formalizing things requires states? Ornilnas ( talk) 06:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Here a noun is defined as an adjective. How best to make it a noun? "Rulerlessness"? "the state of having no ruler"? —Tamfang ( talk) 01:55, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 65 | Archive 66 | Archive 67 | Archive 68 |
@ Cinadon36 You said that the third source is outdated (1994), but two sources provided to say ancap is not real anarchism are from 1992 and 1993 respectively. I also don't see how datedness would be an issue, since nothing about what ancap is has changed since then. Not sure how the second source is tertiary or unreliable, since it is a text written by a author explaining Anarchism that is known for writing books about politics. The first source is written by Michael Huemer, who is a professor of philosophy, which sounds like a scholar to me. Since some of them are authors and not scholars, maybe I should have same that some scholars and authors believe this, but that's a minor fix. If you have any objections to my reasoning, feel free to reply. If you think I need more sources, I'll see if I can find more. X-Editor ( talk) 07:39, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
More generally, different types of anarchism will offer different economic theories. Those with stronger individualistic component will tend to rely not merely upon market or allied exchange arrangements, but upon capitalistic organization; thus anarcho-capitalisms, logical end-points when libertarianism and economic rationalism are really driven to state minimalization. These types of anarchism, whose small home base is the USA, propose several, often ingenious uses of private and market means to substitute for social and state functions (Friedman, 1973; Rothbard, 1977).Tewdar 14:34, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
ANARCHISTS reject any form of economic control or management. However, while anarcho-communists endorse common ownership and small-scale self-management, anarcho-capitalists advocate an entirely unregulated market economy.Tewdar 08:09, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Anarchists of all kinds have a preference for an economy in which free individuals manage their own affairs without the need for state ownership or regulation. However, this has allowed them to endorse a number of quite different economic systems, ranging from ‘anarcho-communism’ to ‘anarcho-capitalism’.Tewdar 08:10, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Anarchism, for instance, can be seen as either ultra-lef t -wing or ultra-right-wing, since it encompasses both anarcho-communist and anarcho-capitalist tendenciesTewdar 08:18, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
tertiarysource entirely
about anarchismthat isn't from
dictionariesor
handbooksthat literally word-for-word says
an-cap is a form of Anarchism. But I don't think this is a very reasonable set of criteria. Tewdar 14:09, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Anarcho-capitalism: A form of anarchism that seeks to replace government with a system of unregulated market competition.- lol 😂👍 Tewdar 14:11, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
@ Cinadon36: What policy or rule on WP says that we cannot use tertiary sources? In fact, WP:TERTIARY says the exact opposite. "anthology of earlier writings" How is that a problem? The meaning of Anarcho-capitalism hasn't changed since it was first coined and explained and you've failed to provide evidence that the meaning of anarchism has changed to disfavour anarcho-capitalism as a form of anarchism. "an-cap being a form of anarchism is a fringe opinion." That may be true, but that doesn't mean we cannot note that a minority think anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism. In fact, my edit to the article very clearly said that only "some" agree with this position and I did not change the sentence that said that "most" scholars disagree in my edit. I did not make the "fringe theory appear more notable or more widely accepted than it is." per WP:FRINGE. X-Editor ( talk) 21:42, 21 September 2022 (UTC) @ Tewdar:, If you have any more sources that indicate anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism, please provide those sources here. X-Editor ( talk) 21:42, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
...most scholars reject anarcho-capitalismobviously carries the implication that some exist who do not. I don't think there's enough who disagree to justify more than that or to include an extensive back-and-forth, especially given that most of the examples here so far are basically just passing mentions rather than full-throated disagreement. I also think that this comes up often enough that we might want to consider an RFC. (I was surprised we hadn't already had one.) -- Aquillion ( talk) 22:04, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Reliable tertiary sources can help provide broad summaries of topics that involve many primary and secondary sources and may help evaluate due weight, especially when primary or secondary sources contradict each other- Hope that helps. Also, please point to the policy, guideline, or essay that claims tertiary sources
weight much less than secondary ones.Tewdar 08:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
In this talk page archives and others, it has been repeatedly established that "anarchism" is scoped here to refer to the libertarian socialist tradition, per its history, per the sources. Yes, if you modify the definition enough, many other traditions could also be called anarchism, but that's not how the major sources in the field define it. That much is not under debate, but if you would prefer a formal, neutrally worded RfC, we can do that as well.
As for edit warring over the latest addition, LewRockwell.com has been repeatedly established as an unreliable source at WP:RSN and if Rothbard's critique needs any more explication in this article, it should be easy to furnish a reliable, secondary source that shows the noteworthiness of the claim. The problems of the "Criticism" section serving as an unfocused catch-all have also been repeatedly established on this talk page. czar 15:23, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
The second citation in the second paragraph of Anarchism#Gender,_sexuality,_and_free_love misunderstands the source it cites from completely and is VERY problematic. The current version says:
I quote Lucy 2020, pp. 177-178:
This passage says that Tucker used anarchist arguments to undermine protection of women from sexual violence by opposing age of consent laws, and that this will benefit predatory men, NOT that the age of consent laws will benefit predatory men.
I suggest changing this to:
-- Thas ( talk) 16:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Having Most instead of Some is some of the most blatant propaganda I have ever seen on this website 2607:FEA8:2CDC:96D0:79FF:BFB5:B693:4283 ( talk) 14:44, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
I noticed Hoponpop69 merged the articles on anarchism without adjectives and expropriative anarchism into this article. [2] I have to object to the manner in which this merge was done, as they have just shoved the text from these two articles into the "Branches" section, without thought for how that fits with the rest of the text. This has resulted in the citations in the article losing their consistency, as most of the citations in the merged text are not Sfn formatted and many aren't even particularly reliable. It has also completely thrown off the weight of the section, giving the same amount of weight to these two tendencies as the entire sphere of classical and post-classical anarchisms.
I've reverted these changes (both the mergers and the deletions), [3] as I don't think they were constructive to this article and have in fact made the article worse. I'm not sure why there wasn't so much as a talk page message left, let alone an actual merge discussion, that preceded this move. This could have been done with greater care and more prior consensus building. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 09:17, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Grnrchst:, I am sorry I have reverted your last edit [4] but I feel that Nietzsche's influence on anarchism is well studied and should be mentioned at the article. In the article, we should strive to tell the various histories that shaped the idea and political movement of Anarchism. Nietzsche criticized hierarchical institutions and celebrated freedom and autonomy. Anyways, I am open to discussion. Cheers, Cinadon 36 22:27, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
an editor has made an edit that is not actually supported by the sources they provided, their sources do have a problem of neutrality in themselves, and the editor has made an accusation of gatekeeping.
clearly, this edit should have been discussed before it was made, given the maturity of the article and its "good article" rating.
i'll be flagging this for review as well.
commie ( talk) 21:37, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
I'd consider him to be a marginal case: Gerard Casey (philosopher) - he certainly meets the self-description clause of WP:FRINGE but I'm not sure how well received his poli-sci work has been by the academic community. Simonm223 ( talk) 12:55, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
"Humans have lived in societies without formal hierarchies long before the establishment of states"
This statement is untrue. There has never been a non-hierarchical society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.38.189.222 ( talk) 17:33, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
The topic fails to address the anarchist movement of the far right that is created after WWII and Nazi defeat. Libertarian, fascist, anarchist are now wide spread in both the US and Europe. 69.54.142.165 ( talk) 17:25, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your recent edit, I am sorry I had to remove the sentence you added today
Generally, anarchist groups state that they represent a vision of a future "society [that] runs without coercive authority from government, religion, education and industry". [1]
References
The reasons I did it are as follows: A) I am uncertain about the reliability of the source. Furthermore, it's not a primary or secondary source discussing the topic but rather a tertiary source on world history. Additionally, I am unfamiliar with the reputation of the publishing house, Parragon. B) The particular sentence duplicates information that has already been covered elsewhere in the article.
I am open to discussion though, so let me know what your objections might be! Cinadon 36 22:07, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
The text below the final image in the article is "Les chataigniers a Osny (1888) by anarchist painter Camille Pissarro is a notable example of blending anarchism and the arts". However I suspect the image is of an Apple Harvest--especially given the filename: Apple_Harvest_by_Camille_Pissarro.jpg.
The best confirmation I could find about the title of the current image was a page from a past exhibition at the Guggenheim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgwalker ( talk • contribs) 19:56, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Instead of the current image, I suspect that the correct image (already hosted on Wikimedia) can be found at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pissarro,_Camille,_Les_chataigniers_a_Osny_(The_Chestnut_Trees_at_Osny),_1873.jpg
There would then be an issue with the dates. It appears the date in the text (1888) does not match that of the artwork (1873).
-- Mgwalker ( talk) 19:48, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Citation needed for: “Before the creation of towns and cities, established authority did not exist.” Archeological discoveries from all over the world, especially of nomadic tribes, prove otherwise. 24.86.184.21 ( talk) 06:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I suggest revising the intro sentence to replace "skeptical of all justifications for authority" by "skeptical of justifications for hierarchical authority associated with the nation state" to correct a widely held misconception and to be in line with the quoted source (which states just that "it is not government as such that they find objectionable, but the hierarchical forms of government associated with the nation state").
Specifically, anarchy does not seek to have no government or ruler, it seeks to not have a ruling class with potentially different interests to those over which it rules. This reading is specifically supported by the quoted source at the end of the intro sentence [1].— Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.178.202.229 ( talk) 19:54, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
I put a citation needed tag on the above claim. From layperson study of anthropology, I don't believe this is generally true. I believe even the earliest hunter-gather societies had anywhere from simple to complex hierarchies that often involved seniority, chiefs, councils, etc. From my recent study of the Shawnees at the time they were driven off the land by the British and U.S., they certainly had a fairly complex hierarchy.-- David Tornheim ( talk) 05:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
After further research, I discovered this sentence morphed from "The timeline of anarchism stretches back to prehistory when people lived in anarchistic societies long before the establishment of formal states, kingdoms or empires." History_of_anarchism#Prehistoric_and_ancient_era says: "Many scholars of anarchism, including anthropologists Harold Barclay and David Graeber, claim that some form of anarchy dates back to prehistory." But that's the view of scholars of anarchism--not necessarily the view of all scholars of anthropology. I don't know if it is even true that "many" scholars of anarchism say this, or just the two that are cited. -- David Tornheim ( talk) 06:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
I see that PBZE noticed the problem in 23-Novemeber-2021. The statement was originally added 12-Feb-2020 by Cinadon36. There was also another version that existed in May 2021 that said, "...when humans arguably lived in anarchic societies..." (emphasis added). -- David Tornheim ( talk) 07:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
A source is not needed in the lede (See WP:LEDE). Someone might dispute the claim made further below, in the main body of the article. Lede has to summarize the main body. I have reverted the tag [9], until a consensus is reached. Cinadon 36 17:21, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
If it summarizes the body, it's probably referring to: "Before the creation of towns and cities, established authority did not exist." This refers to a source with the following quote: "For tens of thousands of years, human beings lived in societies without any formal political institutions or constituted authority. About 6,000 years ago, around the time of the so-called dawn of civilization, the first societies with formal structures of hierarchy, command, control and obedience began to develop." I guess the key word is "formal"? But then I'm not sure the current sentence gives the right impression. That is, while hierarchies existed, they just weren't "formal", because formalizing things requires states? Ornilnas ( talk) 06:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Here a noun is defined as an adjective. How best to make it a noun? "Rulerlessness"? "the state of having no ruler"? —Tamfang ( talk) 01:55, 25 February 2024 (UTC)