Biases in Conceiving Anarchism

Many people in anarchism argue assuming geographical assumptions. For example, people assume that it is impossible for individuals to have property that extend a long distance. This is false, individuals can have telephone poles and cable television cables that extand a long distance. It is their property.

Another assumption is that it is impossible for individuals to be located at two different places. People can live in one place and have a body part at a different place. For example, a human can be located at one place but his cell phone can be connected at another place.

Another assumption is that the universe is flat. People can have 3D space, such as the atmosphere. They can fly airplanes in the air.

Another assumption is that you cannot cross a fense of a house without the owner's consent. This is false. You can fly airplanes above the fense, and you are still crossing it. You can fly a helicoptor above the area surrounded by the fence.

Another assumption is that you cannot go "inside" the owner's property without another's consent. Yes you can, such as standing beneath a bridge, or digging a hole in the ground to build a underground subway that is under the owner's property.

Another assumption is that states must be residing in geography, not underground or is shaped like a thin fiber. This is false. The state can be shaped like a fiber, such as the government uses internet fibers to enforce laws.

Another assumption is that a state cannot reside in separate geographical places. This is false. A state can be connected virtually by using cell phones in military individuals in different places. Alaska is resided in a different location than the United States, but still the same state.

Another assumption is that states require stable geographic locations. This is false. States can be nomadic. States can move. States can behave like cars and airplanes.

Anothe assumption is that individuals are seperate. However, individuals can be connected by using shared internet-cables and shared roads.

These assumptions create non-sequitur arguments. Avoid assuming these assumptions when arguing.

If these assumptions are not believed, then people would more easily believe in anarchism. For example, PDAs would be equivalent to mini-states. PDAs and states are similar. As states do not require to be in stable geographic locations, it would behave like PDAs because PDAs can move and states can move.

There exist an anarchist relation between two states. However, the anarchist relation is not violent. PDAs can behave like states. There exist an anarchist relation between different PDA firms. An the PDA firms would not be violent to each other similar to states.

People also assume that PDAs must be controlled by one boss. This is false. PDAs can be similarily controlled collectively, and have an interneal checks-and-balances system similar to a state. It is likely that almost all PDAs would be collectively controlled, just like the state, in anarchy.

So PDAs are no different than mini-states if these assumptions are not assumed. If people do not assume these things, their logic would lead to anarchy.