There is a common misconception that anarchy means allowing for chaos. I contend that there is a difference between the two, and being an anarchist does not mean you are against having any sort of rules, hierarchy, or order in general. Anarchy at its core is simply the ability to make decisions, and rule over your own life without the threat of violence against you.
Whenever I discuss what anarchism with my friends or colleagues, a common comparison that is brought up is chaos states such as Somalia, the CHAZ/CHOP in Seattle or Portland during 2020. More or less what is said is “you support anarchy, yet look at what happens when it is implemented in Somalia. Look at the CHAZ/CHOP. Within one week, a warlord took it over and was enacting violence against random people”. I think this is a massive oversimplification as to what anarchism means, which the majority of people equate as “no rules”.
I, and many other anarchists, such as Michael Malice (Who actually informed me of the following quote), believe that “Anarchism is not a place; Anarchism is a relationship”. The reality of the human condition is that we exist in an anarchic state (state as in condition of being, rather than governance), and that we have convinced ourselves that there are rules, and that normative understanding and agreement to those rules are what normalize relations in society. However, those rules only came into being because people agreed to the common understanding of those rules, and for the overwhelming vast majority of people throughout the majority of history, those rules were not enforced violently, but rather socially. That is not to say that rules were never enforced violently, I’m just stating that it is not the common way that rules come into being. For the most part, the majority of rules that people follow willingly are the rules they were born into and inculcated to. An Orthodox Jew is far less likely to break Jewish law than someone who was not born into the Orthodox Jewish tradition.
As anarchism is the base of reality, and rules are a downstream norm that people are mostly raised into, how does chaos arise? This issue is due to the difference in perception and reality, the perception between individuals. Because it is almost impossible for two people to perfectly understand and agree on something perfectly, there will always be a difference, and at times, friction between two or more people in any situation. We use rules, ideals, and values as a ballast against friction caused by the differences in perception. However, sometimes those differences are the cause of issues.
Friction is the basis of all conflicts. Friction can be created, as stated above, in a difference of perception. However, it can also arise from an immediacy, or necessity for action, or as a reaction to an action without a fully comprehensible understanding of the situation. Frequently, conflict is due more often to ignorance, rather than malice. This is not to say that malicious forces or intentions do not exist. There are definitely those with ill intentions who strive to use what power they have, or can gain, in order to accomplish their goals. Chaos is the state of this friction, where two wills fight against each other for supremacy. Frequently, those with power or advantage rule over those who are weak. At other times, the forces are more or less equally matched, or the risk of injury during the conflict outweighs the potential benefits of engaging in conflict.
Anarchy is not chaos because, as stated previously, there can be agreements, and rules based interactions between two or more people that they can come to an agreement to. Chaos is the opposite of that. Chaos is simply the use of force to accomplish whatever goal is trying to be accomplished.