History Main / AnarchyIsChaos

[[Film/xXx]]: The antagonists are former Russian secret agents turned anarchist terrorists called Anarchy 99, ([[ShapedLikeItself due to leaving their government's service in 1999 and advocating anarchy]]) who want to incite war between different countries by a FalseFlagOperation, creating chaos.

[=xXx=]: The antagonists are former Russian secret agents turned anarchist terrorists called Anarchy 99, ([[ShapedLikeItself due to leaving their government's service in 1999 and advocating anarchy]]) who want to incite war between different countries by a FalseFlagOperation, creating chaos.

XXX: The antagonists are former Russian secret agents turned anarchist terrorists called Anarchy 99, ([[ShapedLikeItself due to leaving their government's service in 1999 and advocating anarchy]]) who want to incite war between different countries by a FalseFlagOperation, creating chaos.

Film/XXX: The antagonists are former Russian secret agents turned anarchist terrorists called Anarchy 99, ([[ShapedLikeItself due to leaving their government's service in 1999 and advocating anarchy]]) who want to incite war between different countries by a FalseFlagOperation, creating chaos.

Film/xXx: The antagonists are former Russian secret agents turned anarchist terrorists called Anarchy 99, ([[ShapedLikeItself due to leaving their government's service in 1999 and advocating anarchy]]) who want to incite war between different countries by a FalseFlagOperation, creating chaos.

In the USA, “Anarchist” tends to call up images of {{Nietzsche wannabe}}s, [[DirtyCommies leftist radicals]] (though Anarchism and Marxist Communism have been ''miles'' away from each other since Marx and Bakunin were rivals in the First International) and BombThrowingAnarchists, while “Libertarian” tends to call up images of [[DeepSouth redneck]] [[CrazySurvivalist Crazy Survivalists]], {{Right Wing Militia Fanatic}}s and SocialDarwinist [[CorruptCorporateExecutive Corrupt Corporate Executives]]. Worldwide, “Libertarian” and similar terms gravitate to the same meanings as “Anarchist” does stateside, though of the socialist variety.

In the USA, “Anarchist” tends to call up images of {{Nietzsche wannabe}}s, [[DirtyCommies leftist radicals]] (though Anarchism and Marxist Communism have been ''miles'' away from each other since Marx and Bakunin were rivals in the First International) and BombThrowingAnarchists, while “Libertarian” tends to call up images of [[DeepSouth redneck]] [[CrazySurvivalist Crazy Survivalists]], [[RightWingMilitiaFanatic]]s and SocialDarwinist [[CorruptCorporateExecutive Corrupt Corporate Executives]]. Worldwide, “Libertarian” and similar terms gravitate to the same meanings as “Anarchist” does stateside, though of the socialist variety.

->'''V:''' [[SubvertedTrope No. This is only the land of take-what-you-want. Anarchy means 'without leaders', not 'without order'.]] With anarchy comes an age of ordnung, of true order, which is to say voluntary order... this age of ordnung will begin when the mad and incoherent cycle of verwirrung that these bulletins reveal has run its course... [[DoubleSubversion This is not anarchy, Evey. This is chaos.]]

This trope, admittedly, has been bolstered by the idea that society's existence is contingent on that of top-down leadership, but also because of the “propaganda by the deed” violence some anarchists about a century ago perpetrated against the robber barons of the gilded age and various heads of state -- and innocent bystanders and other random individuals (one notorious bombing was of a French cafe on the grounds the people there were bourgeois). While not diminishing the terrorism that occurred, anarchists reject the notion of their belief meaning or necessarily resulting in violence. Anarchists advocate opposition to oppressors and their instruments, but in nearly all cases seek to peacefully produce a democratic and voluntary bottom-up order in their stead. There are in fact whole branches of anarchism, such as anarcho-pacifism and Christian anarchism, to whom [[ActualPacifist violence is utterly unacceptable]].

Of course, there have been Anarchists throughout history who appear to have played this trope chillingly straight. Max Stirner stood for Egoist Anarchism – the belief that everyone should be allowed to do whatever they want, period. However, like most Egoists, Stirner believed voluntary cooperation and ''avoiding'' chaos was in the self-interest of every human being, and thus a (sane) egoist would not want chaos. A French variation was Illegalism; that committing crimes was the only true expression of anarchy. And don't get started on the Russian Nihilists and Anarchists of the 19th century, many of whom were pacifists but more than a few of whom were willing to commit terrorism and murder in the name of combating repressive institutions, such as to bring down the absolute monarchy of Russia and other things seen as parts of the Bourgeois control. These ideologies reached their climax in the 1881 assassination of the Tsar, which got most of the perpetrators hanged and helped to undermine the Russian anarchist movement generally. Use of political violence to make change reached an ugly, bloody conclusion in the 1917 October Revolution of the Bolsheviks, the repression of all opposition (including the anarchist black army) during the subsequent civil war, and Stalin's purges in the 30s and 40s.

In the USA, “Anarchist” tends to call up images of {{Nietzsche wannabe}}s, [[DirtyCommies leftist radicals]] (though Anarchism and Communism have been ''miles'' away from each other since Marx and Bakunin were around) and BombThrowingAnarchists, while “Libertarian” tends to call up images of [[DeepSouth redneck]] [[CrazySurvivalist Crazy Survivalists]], [[RightWingMilitiaFanatic Right Wing Militia Fanatics]] and SocialDarwinist [[CorruptCorporateExecutive Corrupt Corporate Executives]]. Worldwide, “Libertarian” and similar terms gravitate to the same meanings as “Anarchist” does stateside.

Predictably, anarchists have been the historical target of brutal persecution from both capitalist and socialist authoritarians, due to their belief that both are wrong in their domineering ways. Note, however, that there are both capitalists and socialists who use the term “anarchist” for themselves, who revile each other just as much as any other factions of such do.

This trope is rare/more likely to be averted in Spanish works since a substantial minority of the population formed a highly regarded anarchist state during the SpanishCivilWar. Some of them are still living and anarchist organizations are slightly more mainstream than in most countries. They ''are'' still a political minority, though.

In the USA, “Anarchist” tends to call up images of {{Nietzsche wannabe}}s, [[DirtyCommies leftist radicals]] and BombThrowingAnarchists, while “Libertarian” tends to call up images of [[DeepSouth redneck]] [[CrazySurvivalist Crazy Survivalists]], [[RightWingMilitiaFanatic Right Wing Militia Fanatics]] and SocialDarwinist [[CorruptCorporateExecutive Corrupt Corporate Executives]]. Worldwide, “Libertarian” and similar terms gravitate to the same meanings as “Anarchist” does stateside.

->'''V:''' No. This is only the land of take-what-you-want. Anarchy means 'without leaders', not 'without order'. With anarchy comes an age of ordnung, of true order, which is to say voluntary order... this age of ordnung will begin when the mad and incoherent cycle of verwirrung that these bulletins reveal has run its course... This is not anarchy, Evey. This is chaos.

->'''V:''' No. This is only the land of take-what-you-want. Anarchy means 'without leaders', not 'without order'. With anarchy comes an age of ordnung, of true order, which is to say voluntary order... this age of ordnung will begin when the mad and incoherent cycle of verwirrung that these bulletins reveal has run its course… [[NoExceptYes This is not anarchy, Evey. This is chaos.]]

--> Bavarian #1: "What this country needs, is an anarchy!"
--> Bavarian #2: "[[CompletelyMissingThePoint Yeah, with a strong anarch!]]"

This trope is rare/more likely to be averted in Spanish works since a substantial minority of the population formed a highly regarded (by whom?) anarchist state during the SpanishCivilWar. Some of them are still living and anarchist organizations are slightly more mainstream than in most countries. They ''are'' still a political minority, though.

This trope, admittedly, has been bolstered by the idea that society's existence is contingent on that of top-down leadership, but also because of the “propaganda by the deed” violence some anarchists about a century ago perpetrated against the robber barons of the gilded age -- and innocent bystanders and other random individuals (one notorious bombing was of a French cafe on the grounds the people there were bourgeois). While not diminishing the terrorism that occurred, anarchists reject the notion of their belief meaning or necessarily resulting in violence. Anarchists advocate opposition to oppressors and their instruments, but in nearly all cases seek to peacefully produce a democratic and voluntary bottom-up order in their stead. There are in fact whole branches of anarchism, such as anarcho-pacifism and Christian anarchism, to whom [[ActualPacifist violence is utterly unacceptable]].

This trope is rare/more likely to be averted in Spanish works since a substantial minority of the population formed a highly regarded anarchist state during the SpanishCivilWar. Some of them are still living and anarchist organizations are slightly more mainstream than in most countries. They ''are'' still a political minority, though.

Of course, there have been Anarchists throughout history who appear to have played this trope chillingly straight. Max Stirner stood for Egoist Anarchism – the belief that everyone should be allowed to do whatever they want, period. However, like most Egoists, Stirner believed voluntary cooperation and ''avoiding'' chaos was in the self-interest of every human being, and thus a (sane) egoist would not want chaos. A French variation was Illegalism; that committing crimes was the only true expression of anarchy. And don't get started on the Russian Nihilists and Anarchists of the 19th century, many of whom were pacifists but more than a few of whom were willing to commit terrorism and murder in the name of combating repressive institutions, such as to bring down the absolute Russian monarchy and other things seen as parts of the Bourgeois control. These ideologies reached their climax in the 1881 assassination of the Tsar, which got most of the perpetrators hanged and helped to undermine the Russian anarchist movement generally. Use of political violence to make change reached an ugly, bloody conclusion in the 1917 October Revolution of the Bolsheviks, the repression of all opposition (including the anarchist black army) the subsequent civil war, Lenin and later Stalin's purges in the 1920s and 30s.

->'''V:''' No. This is only the land of take-what-you-want. Anarchy means 'without leaders', not 'without order'. With anarchy comes an age of ordnung, of true order, which is to say voluntary order... this age of ordnung will begin when the mad and incoherent cycle of verwirrung that these bulletins reveal has run its course… This is not anarchy, Evey. This is chaos.

In the USA, “Anarchist” tends to call up images of {{Nietzsche wannabe}}s, [[DirtyCommies leftist radicals]] and BombThrowingAnarchists, while “Libertarian” tends to call up images of [[DeepSouth redneck]] [[CrazySurvivalist Crazy Survivalists]], [[RightWingMilitiaFanatic Right Wing Militia Fanatics]] and {{Darwinist}} [[CorruptCorporateExecutive Corrupt Corporate Executives]]. Worldwide, “Libertarian” and similar terms gravitate to the same meanings as “Anarchist” does stateside.

This trope, admittedly, has been bolstered by the idea that society's existence is contingent on that of top-down leadership, but also because of the “propaganda by the deed” violence some anarchists about a century ago perpetrated against the robber barons of the gilded age -- and innocent bystanders and other random individuals (one notorious bombing was of a French cafe on the grounds the people there were bourgeois.) While not diminishing the terrorism that occurred, anarchists reject the notion of their belief meaning or necessarily resulting in violence. Anarchists advocate opposition to oppressors and their instruments, but in nearly all cases seek to peacefully produce a democratic and voluntary bottom-up order in their stead. There are in fact whole branches of anarchism, such as anarcho-pacifism and Christian anarchism, to whom [[ActualPacifist violence is utterly unacceptable]].

->'''V:''' No. This is only the land of take-what-you-want. Anarchy means 'without leaders', not 'without order'. With anarchy comes an age of ordnung, of true order, which is to say voluntary order... this age of ordnung will begin when the mad and incoherent cycle of verwirrung that these bulletins reveal has run its course... This is not anarchy, Evey. This is chaos.

A virtually ubiquitous trope, both in fiction and RealLife, is the misconception that anarchists have no beliefs, that [[TitleDrop anarchy is chaos.]] While anarchy and chaos are not mutually exclusive (chaos may be anarchic, although it is often defined by warlordism, but anarchy is not necessarily chaotic) such an un-mindset is properly called [[NietzscheWannabe nihilism, the belief in nothing]]. However, the actual definition of Anarchism is ''the belief that rulership should not exist'' (as indicated in its Greek roots, an- [no] -arkhos [ruler]). There is much division on the extent and nature of rulership, and what it means. Regardless of this division, ''in fiction'', Anarchists (of any subgroup) are often accused of favoring a Hobbesian-style war of all against all.

This trope, admittedly, has been bolstered by the idea that society's existence is somehow contingent on that of top-down leadership, but also because of the "propaganda by the deed" violence some anarchists about a century ago perpetrated against the robber barons of the gilded age -- and innocent bystanders and other random individuals. (One notorious bombing was of a French cafe on the grounds the people there were bourgeois). While not diminishing the terrorism that occurred, anarchists reject the notion of their belief meaning or necessarily resulting in violence. Anarchists advocate opposition to oppressors and their instruments, but in nearly all cases seek to peacefully produce a democratic and voluntary bottom-up order in their stead. There are in fact whole branches of anarchism, such as anarcho-pacifism and Christian anarchism, to whom [[ActualPacifist violence is utterly unacceptable]].

Of course, there have been Anarchists throughout history who appear to have played this trope chillingly straight. Max Stirner stood for Egoist Anarchism- the belief that everyone should be allowed to do whatever they want, period. However, like most Egoists, Stirner believed voluntary cooperation and ''avoiding'' chaos was in the self-interest of every human being, and thus a (sane) egoist would not want chaos. A French variation was Illegalism; that committing crimes was the only true expression of anarchy. And don't get started on the Russian Nihilists and Anarchists of the 19th century, many of whom were pacifists but more than a few of whom were willing to commit terrorism and murder in the name of combating repressive institutions, such as to bring down the absolute Russian monarchy and other things seen as parts of the Bourgeois control. These ideologies reached their climax in the 1881 assassination of the Tsar, which got most of the perpetrators hanged and helped to undermine the Russian anarchist movement generally. Use of political violence to make change reached an ugly, bloody conclusion in the 1917 October Revolution of the Bolsheviks, the repression of all opposition (including the anarchists) the subsequent civil war, Lenin and later Stalin's purges in the 1920s and 30s.

In the USA, "Anarchist" tends to call up images of {{Nietzsche wannabe}}s, [[DirtyCommies leftist radicals]] and [[BombThrowingAnarchists bomb-throwing assassins]], while "Libertarian" tends to call up images of [[DeepSouth redneck]] [[CrazySurvivalist survivalists]], [[RightWingMilitiaFanatic far-right militias]] and {{Darwinist}} [[CorruptCorporateExecutive CEOs and businessmen]]. Worldwide, "Libertarian" and similar terms gravitate to the same meanings as "Anarchist" does stateside.

Predictably, anarchists have historically been the target of brutal persecution from both capitalist and Marxist authoritarians, due to their belief that both are wrong in their domineering ways. Note, however, that there are both capitalists and socialists who use the term "anarchist" for themselves, who revile each other just as much as any other factions of such do.

It should be noted that this trope is rare/more likely to be averted in Spanish works since a minority of the population did support and lived in anarchy for a time during the SpanishCivilWar. Some of them are still living and anarchist organizations are slightly more mainstream than in most country. They ''are'' still a political minority, though.

A virtually ubiquitous trope, both in fiction and RealLife, is the misconception that anarchists have no beliefs, that [[TitleDrop anarchy is chaos.]] While anarchy and chaos are not mutually exclusive (chaos may be anarchic, although it is often defined by warlordism, but anarchy is not necessarily chaotic) such an un-mindset is properly called [[NietzscheWannabe nihilism, the belief in nothing]]. However, the actual definition of Anarchism is ''the belief that rulership should not exist'' (as indicated in its Greek roots, an- [no] -arkhos [ruler]).

The issue of Capitalism is a divisive one for Anarchists, although this is partly due to terminology. Most anarchist literature, and most anarchists, define "Capitalism" in the Marxist sense of the term (i.e. capital is owned by party X, and party X pays ''wages'' to parties A, B and C to operate said capital). However, the term "Capitalism" is also commonly defined by non-anarchists (and by most self-proclaimed "Capitalists") as "free market economics" (i.e. when all economic activity must take place within the realm of consent and contract and thus ''outside'' the realm of the State). Most anarchists consider the two meanings to be separate concepts, with "Capitalism" being used in the Marxist sense and "Free Market" being used to refer to the second definition. For the remainder of this article, "Capitalism" and "Free Market" will be used in the Anarchist senses of the term. Therefore, someone can be both anti-Capitalist and pro-Market (i.e. arguing for a society of self-employed people interacting and exchanging on a purely voluntary basis, the Mutualists and Individualist Anarchists share this position). On the other hand, someone can be pro-Capitalist and anti-Market (arguably, Mussolini-style State Corporatism fits this).

Regardless of this division, ''in fiction'', Anarchists (of any subgroup) are often accused of favoring a Hobbesian-style war of all against all.

A brief description of the different (broad) anarchist schools of thought:

* '''Anarcho-Communism''': The most popular movement, which calls for abolition of private property, corporations, and the state. Think "Imagine" by John Lennon. People produce whatever they want to for a common pool of resources, and everyone takes what they need from it following a consensus made in a direct democratic vote. It's assumed that what you'll get will be correlative to your cooperation, unless you are a too young/old to work, or you need special care. This system was in place in some parts of Spain during the SpanishCivilWar and, believe it or not, it worked, until Franco's fascist regime took over. This is also known as Libertarian Communism.
** '''Collectivist Anarchism''': Like Anarcho-Communism, but products are distributed according to work performed rather than need, through direct democracy.
* '''Mutualism''': Original anarchist movement started by Pierre Joseph Proudhon, author of ''What is Property?'' which contains the famous "property is theft" conclusion-he was also the first to call himself anarchist. Before that it was an insult; hey, come to think of it...This was the first Free-Market Anarchist movement, but unlike today's Free-Market Anarchists, it argues for the Labor Theory of Economic Value. Mutualist Anarchists believe that when labor or its product is sold, in exchange, it ought to receive goods or services embodying the amount of labor necessary to produce an article of exactly similar and equal utility. They accept money and private property as long as it's actually being used by the owner. Mutualism, owing to its embrace of the Labor Theory of Economic Value, supports democratic cooperatives of workers who own the means of production, instead of traditional capitalist bosses.
* '''Individualist Anarchism''': A movement (very similar to Mutualism) of US origin focusing more on a society of independent craftsmen owning their own tools and thus free of employer domination. Like Mutualism it held to the Labor Theory of Economic Value. Individualist Anarchists supported worker cooperatives if they wished, but with the provision each part of it be held separately, thus a worker could leave and support themselves if necessary. The rise of capitalism and the anarcho-communist reaction eclipsed the Individualist Anarchists, though some exist. This was what most people knew as Free Market Anarchism, along with the Mutualists, until:
* '''Anarcho-Capitalism''': Anarcho-Capitalists (the modern Free-Market Anarchists) are essentially Individualist Anarchists but instead of advocating the Labor Theory of Economic Value, they advocate the Subjective Theory of Economic Value (which has been accepted by nearly all economists since Walras, Menger and Jevons). As such, they do not see Capitalism as inherently exploitative; rather they see an employment contract as no different to any other form of contractual relationship. Anarcho-Capitalists also reject the view that "big business" and "big government" are enemies of each other; rather they see the former as a force that benefits from having [[ScrewTheRulesIHaveConnections 'friends in high places']] and the latter as more than willing to bestow privileges and special favors upon the former.
** '''Agorism''': Agorism is a movement related to Anarcho-Capitalism, but not quite. Agorists hold as a revolutionary goal the development of freely-competing, market producers of law and security through non-aggressive black market activity, which will eventually drive the state out of existence. [[http://agorism.info In fact]], this is precisely what sets Agorism apart from other forms of anarchism.
* '''Ecological Anarchism''': Similar to Anarcho-Communism, but with a higher emphasis on [[GreenAesop respecting nature]]. The more radical forms of this, like Anarcho-Primitivism, believe that civilization is [[http://www.tiamatpublications.com/docs/Freedom_and_Civilization.pdf inherently oppressive]], and wish to abolish industrial technology, agriculture, writing etc., returning to a primitive (hence the name) existence as hunter-gatherers.
** The little problem that the planet Earth could feed just about 5 million humans when they were at the hunter-gatherer stage is rarely if ever mentioned. What are they planning to do with the other 7 billions?
* '''Egoist Anarchism''': The reason why the BombThrowingAnarchists trope exists. Basically, they believe that anything that an individual can do, should be done. Also known as [[NietzscheWannabe Nihilist Anarchism]] and [[FightClub Project Mayhem.]] [[http://libcom.org/library/right-be-greedy-theses-practical-necessity-demanding-everything Here]] is a classic text by Situationist International, advancing a collectivist form of egoism.

In addition to this, there are other different anarchist movements which don't focus on the organization of an actual anarchist society, but rather on the means to bring it.

* '''Anarcho-Syndicalism''': Focuses on the power of non-statist organizations like workers' associations and unions to limit the government. Related most often to Anarcho-Communism and Mutualism. This was the way it was done in [[SpanishCivilWar Anarchist Catalonia.]]
* '''Philosophical Anarchism''': The belief that state control and violence are related closely, so an anarchy is the most pacifist-friendly kind of society. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was one of these. Also known as Anarcho-Pacifism. Definitely {{badass pacifist}}s and complete [[InvertedTrope inversion of]] BombThrowingAnarchists.
* '''Christian Anarchism''': Related to the above, this is the belief that [[JesusWasWayCool the teachings of Christ are compatible with, or even require, a non-hierarchical stateless society.]] They also argue that [[AncientRome early Christian Communes]] were basically anarcho-communist in nature.
* '''Anarcho-Feminism''': Movement for women (especially led by anarcho-communist Emma Goldman) popular in the early twentieth century, that proclaims that governments are inherently male-dominated, and that anarchist societies will be more egalitarian in nature.
* '''Queer Anarchism''': Same as above, but replace "women" with "sexual minorities" and "male" with "heterosexuals".
* '''Post-Left Anarchism''': A movement within anarchism that [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin rejects left-right political distinctions]].
* '''Agorism''', as mentioned above, is more of a theory of revolution than an ethical system.
----

The issue of Capitalism is a divisive one for Anarchists, although this is partly due to terminology. Most anarchist literature, and most anarchists, define "Capitalism" in the Marxist sense of the term (i.e. capital is owned by party X, and party X pays ''wages'' to parties A, B and C to operate said capital). However, the term "Capitalism" is also commonly defined by non-anarchists (and by most self-proclaimed "Capitalists") as "free market economics" (i.e. when all economic activity must take place within the realm of consent and contract and thus ''outside'' the realm of the State). Most anarchists consider the two meanings to be seperate concepts, with "Capitalism" being used in the Marxist sense and "Free Market" being used to refer to the second definition. For the remainder of this article, "Capitalism" and "Free Market" will be used in the Anarchist senses of the term. Therefore, someone can be both anti-Capitalist and pro-Market (i.e. arguing for a society of self-employed people interacting and exchanging on a purely voluntary basis, the Mutualists and Individualist Anarchists share this position). On the other hand, someone can be pro-Capitalist and anti-Market (arguably, Mussolini-style State Corporatism fits this).

Of course, there have been Anarchists throughout history who appear to have played this trope chillingly straight. Max Stirner stood for Egoist Anarchism- the belief that everyone should be allowed to do whatever they want, period. However, like most Egoists, Stirner believed voluntary cooperation and ''avoiding'' chaos was in the self-interest of every human being, and thus a (sane) egoist would not want chaos. A French variation was Illegalism; that commiting crimes was the only true expression of anarchy. And don't get started on the Russian Nihilists and Anarchists of the 19th century, many of whom were pacifists but more than a few of whom were willing to commit terrorism and murder in the name of combating repressive institutions, such as to bring down the absolute Russian monarchy and other things seen as parts of the Bourgeois control. These ideologies reached their climax in the 1881 assassination of the Tsar, which got most of the perpetrators hanged and helped to undermine the Russian anarchist movement generally. Use of political violence to make change reached an ugly, bloody conclusion in the 1917 October Revolution of the Bolsheviks, the repression of all opposition (including the anarchists) the subsequent civil war, Lenin and later Stalin's purges in the 1920s and 30s.

* '''Ecological Anarchism''': Similar to Anarcho-Communism, but with a higher emphasis on [[GreenAesop respecting nature]]. The more radical forms of this, like Anarcho-Primitivism, believe that civilization is [[http://www.tiamatpublications.com/docs/Freedom_and_Civilization.pdf inherently oppressive]], and wish to abolish industrial technology, agriculture, writing etc., returning to a primitve (hence the name) existence as hunter-gatherers.

->'''Evey''': ''"All this riot and uproar, V... is this Anarchy? Is this the Land of Do-As-You-Please?"''
->'''V''': ''"No. This is only the land of take-what-you-want. Anarchy means 'without leaders', not 'without order'. With anarchy comes an age of ordnung, of true order, which is to say voluntary order... this age of ordnung will begin when the mad and incoherent cycle of verwirrung that these bulletins reveal has run its course... This is not anarchy, Evey. This is chaos."''
--> -- ''{{V For Vendetta}}''

----

<<|DidNotDoTheResearch|>>
<<|PoliticsTropes|>>

* '''Queer Anarchism''': Same as above, but replace "women" with "homosexuals" and "male" with "heterosexuals".

->'''V''': ''"No. This is only the land of take-what-you-want. Anarchy means "without leaders", not "without order". With anarchy comes an age of ordnung, of true order, which is to say voluntary order... this age of ordnung will begin when the mad and incoherent cycle of verwirrung that these bulletins reveal has run its course... This is not anarchy, Evey. This is chaos."''

** '''Anarcho-Syndicalism''': Again, like Anarcho-Communism, but with a much more trade union feel about it. Made famous by groups such as the IWW and their "Wobbly Shop" system of workplace democracy