So I can actually prove Anarchism wrong.

[Dr_Liszt]

Using the Ixil triangle as an example.

The Ixil triangle is a region in Guatemala composed mainly by villages belonging to the Ixil ethnicity, I think there were three main towns and each town had it's little surrounding villages.So it was like a regional triangle. Pre-civil war, the indigenous people lived completely isolated from the government to the point where their customs were almost entirely Mayan. The way they built their villages, the way they farmed, everything was still very virgin and untouched by colonization.

Anarchism tells us that because of state repression, people don't prosper. But what about the people living at the Ixil villages where they were doing their own thing? Why didn't they prosper when there was no one there to oppress them? What about the natives at the Amazons? What about those people?

Also, because they were living isolated from the government and their customs conflicted with government plans on the land, they were the prime targets of the civil war and were victims of genocide.

(I know this is argument is completely ignorant, but I don't care since there is no new threads around here. I want to hear your thoughts.)

[Blade Azaezel]

When you're a tiny, prehistoric tribe living amongst a modern civilization, you aren't going to thrive, regardless of what government is or isn't in power

[Dr_Liszt]

I DON'T CARE!

Also, why are you up so early?

[Unvoiced_Apollo]

I DON'T CARE!

Also, why are you up so early?

I'm pretty sure it's close to afternoon there.