A friend asks me: "as an anarchist, would you say that what's goin on in Seattle is Anarchy?".

So, a few considerations:
1) "Anarchy" is a just word, so I always find a bit tired to fight over the "right" use it's obvious that what's going on there is not what *we* ancaps ...

... (but even traditional "anarchomonarchists" like Tolkien, who I think gave one of the best definitions for the term) mean with that word. Of course we claim that our model is a better candidate for the word, since it's well defined, consistent, coherent, and it fits the ...

... etymology very well, while the communist variant of the use is the opposite in all these regards. But of course people uses "anarchy" to mean that as well, since centuries.

2) One part that makes the Seattle situations not "anarchist" in our use of the word, is that ...

... right now property rights are not systematically defended/respected there. A trivial example would be: if you went around there with a MAGA hat you would get immediately overpowered and you would have to submit to some very informal and chaotic form of violent governance. ...

... But there a lot of more systematic examples, including semi-formal leaders, organized henchmen & even border patrols guarding walls.

3) Another part the makes that situation not "anarchist" in our use of the word, is that the federal and local governments may even have ...

... decided, for now, not to enforce any legislation against looting, robbing, assaulting, battering, defacing statues, etc (they rarely enforce this kind of legislation anyway, since it's dangerous for cops to do it), but it's likely they would STILL enforce legislation that ...

... is core to them: if you tried, for example, to move there to run some big, rich business completely tax free, I'm pretty sure they would eventually get all Wako over you, murdering women and children to set a precedent, as they usually do (true story).

4) Even assuming ...

that what's going on there *is* actually "Anarchy", one (even not ancap) could argue that it isn't a *good* example of anarchy: since it's also chaos, while the proponents of anarchism (both us & retarded anarchocommunists) usually claim that anarchy must *not* necessarily ...

... imply chaos (nor the other way around, actually: for example Venezuela right now is a clear example of pervasive & authoritarian statism but also of chaos).

So, in conclusion: get better strawmen next time, statists. Maybe get back to "Somalia" or "Why do you hate roooads?!"

P.S. since I mentioned this: