honestly, i don't know if Somalia is still under an anarchy.
Somalia is the best example of this, in the world today.
Iraq maybe
I don't think the government system of Somalia is anarchy, but I think it is just a disasterous chaos...
yes, it most certainty is!
Somalia is the best example of this, in the world today.
Anarchy is not an implemented political system in any country. There are regions of recognized countries where the official governments cannot extend power leading to a general anarchy, such as Somalia, but these countries are not "intentionally" anarchic.
No. Anarchy is the absence or nonrecognition of a government. Countries may occasionally fall into anarchy, Somalia's a pretty good case these days, but they can't be said to be "run" by one.
A state without control: An absence of leadership. Chaos. In places that no one knows! CORRECTION: The above is the common stereotype. Being an anarchist myself, I can tell you that most of us are against chaos. We're actually anti-hierarchy, that is, we don't like being under a ruler or authority, however "elected by the people" they may be. A common thing said is that "authority puts up stoplights". Anarchists just believe that anyone should be able to put them up. The stereotype was made by punk rock bands, who said "no government=chaos=AWESOME". I hate those people.
There aren't any countries who are deliberately using anarchy. However there are a few whose governments are so weak that they can reasonably be said to exist in a state of anarchy. Somalia would be one example.
Anarchy is chaos and no country is ruled by chaos. It's an oxymoron. More generally, however, nations have fallen into states of anarchy - ex. Somalia in the past decade, Libya when the government broke down.
Somalia, though there's an extremely loosely held together government now.
Somalia, though there's an extremely loosely held together government now.