For a self-proclaimed anarchist, you have a fairly flawed understanding of anarchy.
My understanding of Anarchy is that we need it NOW to overthrow the corrupt government, but it's not a stable system. It's nit a goal, nor an end, it's the Means to an end. Your understanding of my understanding is colored by your preconceive notions of Anrchism in general, and me in particular.
Going into the argument with the assumption that I'm wrong, and looking for the flaw in my thought processes to prove yourself right. Is a flaw in your thought process, how you over look what I'm actually saying, to look for perceived flaws.
For a start, this might be a reference to when teenagers attach themselves to the anti-establishment aspect of anarchy without really understanding the ideas behind it (ironically), but I'm not sure what that has to do with Satanism, never mind what Satanism might have to do with the ideology in general.
There is no ideology, in general. Anarchism isn't an ideology, it's "Government bad." End of story. Progressive anarchism begs the question: Then what? Okay, you've overthrown the government, then what? A socialist Anarchist then seizes the means of production, and mobilizes the work force with the Proletariat out of the way, because the lack of oligarchs to prevent this makes Socializing the state possible.
A "Wooh, Anarchy, yeah!" anarchist doen't think that far ahead. They use that anarchy to loot, rape, and vandalize. So, I compared them to Satanists, half expecting you to lecture me on The Left Hand Path, so I could point out the schism in the ChurcheS (3) of Satan, after Anton LaVey died, leaving a power gap to fight over. Anarchists, like Satanists and Atheists define themselves not by what they believe, but what they don't. Their entire argument is based on proving a negative.
You might be thinking of libertarianism.
Then again, I might not. I've given this decades of thought, planned my entire life around it, and am prepared to rebuild the system, with electrical power, once the Power Grid went off line. You've given it about enough thought as it too to come back with a snappy guess, and guessed wrong.
Here I think you're confusing anarchy with general chaos, which is arguably a temporary byproduct of most or all major changes in political systems, but not strictly a requirement. Anarchy is certainly not a requirement.
I'm not thinking about most changes in political systems. I'm thinking about THIS political system, how close it is to collapsing, AND what to do when it collapses. So, if you prefer I call it Progressive Survivalism? The only Anarchy part is seeing it on the horizon. I'm still a Progressive. I've just accepted the nation is tearing itself apart, so I can prepare to help put it back together again.
Now, I'll wait for your snap judgement about how I'm wrong, again, and all the flaws in the logic I haven't even posted yet, because of your ideological prejudice of what the word Anarchy means. It means nothing, honestly, it's a negative. A political Anarchist is like Being a Nihilist. What does Nihilism mean? (The absense of true meaning in the universe, especially in opposition to the Existential meaning of Being.) It's like trying to understand Zen.
And yet, here you are, telling me what you think I believe that means, as if I don't know. I don't support Anarchy, I see it as the only means to a new beginning, because those in power (On both sides) are too busy fighting over who's to blame for it being so fucked up to fix it politically. Also, I'm a Technician, so my part to play isn't forming a new Government. It's getting the lights to work off the grid, so we can build it without the fatal flaw of centralized energy.