Yes, they are not the worst as long as they are not bound to a system that actively creates wealth inequality

A system, with money that can be used to persuade people into changing laws for the benefit of those who already have the resource, will make it difficult for such laws to be created and even when they are created, they are always being eroded for the sake of the interest of said rich people.

Yeah, if we ignore the constant and unstopping consolidation of wealth that will sooner or later end in a world where few own almost everything....wait a minute.

Damn, where do you find these people

Also, anarchists were the ones who created word "libertarian", sadly, the right wing took it from us :<

P.S. no hate, girlie

>"social democracy but all businesses should be worker co ops."

Girl, that's just socialism.

You can have organised structure under anarchism. It's just not going to be hierarchical or, at the very least, it will have a very weak hierarchy

But I think we should support each other where we can. Such fights were often a reason the movements lost to fascists e.g. Spanish civil war. 2/2

I guess that makes sense. In the end, they believe that we all should be ruled by a bunch of smart people that do not fall to corruption of power (such people do not exist or at the very least do not actively seek power)