When the Soviet Union supported the creation of a puppet Communist State in Afghanistan in 1978, Afghanistan rapidly devolved into a situation of civil discord, especially as the United States supported the Islamic Fundamentalist Mujahedin. When the Soviet Union decided to withdraw military support to the Communist government in Kabul, the Communist government collapsed. The Islamic Fundamentalist Mujahedin, however, did not have enough political know-how to cobble together a government, making Afghanistan effectively a failed state with numerous regional warlords. Another Islamic Fundamentalist group called the Taliban was able to unify much of Afghanistan under their rule and end the failed-state status. After a decade, the United States allied with the tribal warlords evicted by the Taliban, now styled as the Northern Alliance and restored a national government with attenuated local control as opposed to the Taliban-style authoritarian system. In the places where the Afghan government powers do not extend well, it is as if the people were living in anarchy.

I'm not sure any country today is experiencing total anarchy, because they probably wouldn't be countries. Some that are in extreme turmoil could be afghanistan, Libya, and the sudan.

The more modern usage is "Failed State", meaning that there is no functioning central government. This usually results in a state of anarchy being prevalent.

Somalia is a good example of a country currently in anarchy. Yemen and the Democratic Republic of Congo are pretty darned close.

KabobTown is an anarchy though

DEMOCRACY

The keyboard symbol is...

Ⓐ

Just copy & paste

This is the First Intermediate Period. It came to an end when the country was at least reunified under pharaoh Nebhepetre Mentuhotep in 2040 B.C.

Anarchy originated from china. I know this because I studied this government.

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.

Somalia, though there's an extremely loosely held together government now.

Anarchy

There have been many answers to this question, and they differ by philosopher. A good starting point might be to read Locke or Hobbes on the 'State of Nature,' or in Hobbes' case, the 'State of Warre'. This will necessarily lead to more current explorations, but in terms of political science, this is essentially the original argument.

無政府 (mu sei fu) in Japanese means anarchy; Prefix 'mu' adds a meaning of '-less' , '-lessness' or 'lack of' to a word, which in this case is 'seifu' meaning 'government'.

Ruled by no one.

(Mob)

the definition forsymbols . you could know the symbols by clapping or stomping

The Bahamas U.s.a and Australia live under republic.

NO. The entire point of an anarchy is to operate without any government or any governmental principles. If an anarchy has a constitution, this would indicate how a government would be established, in direct contradiction to anarchy.

The correct spelling is 'anarchy'.

Because it was the joining of several nation states, and those nation states had similar laws and political and economic structure. At the current time, the only Tyranny to fight or pay heed to was the European Imperialistic Regime over the new world, so founding their own country was the biggest act of rebellion they could make against the Crown.

To not have a socially enforced political system would've weakened the newly joined nation states to such a point that European armies could quickly and rather easily devastate and overtake them.

That is why the joining of these nation states is referred to and coequally revered as "The Declaration of Independence" from the Crown and Imperialism of Europe.

No. It is a dictatorship.

Unlimited

In terms of the definition, a state in anarchy is a state in which there is no recognized government ruling over the people and people self-organize and defend. There is currently no region of the world in anarchy. The closest the world has to anarchy is the current situations in Somalia, Bir Tawil, and Antarctica.

Somalia comes close because the national government cannot extend its power to the entire territory, which has innumerable local warlords. However, the presence of these warlords serves to be a form of recognized government, which is why Somalia is more properly classified as a failed state (a state where the national government cannot compete with local warlords to the extent that the local warlords control more than the national government).

Bir Tawil comes close because both Egypt and Sudan reject the territory as not belonging to either of them and the territory is the only land on the six inhabited continents to have terra nullius status. However, as Bir Tawil has no settled population, it fails the requirement of having people in the territory to be an anarchy.

Antarctica has no permanent population and has its government arrangements taken care of by international treaties, so while there is no government over the people who are currently living in Antarctica, they are responsible to the signatory countries of the Antarctica countries. This means that there is a recognized authority.

Peisistratus