Does anarchy mean that I can't try to coerce people or only that they're free to walk away if I do?

Answer 1

Anarchy means you are welcome to try to coerce people, if that is what you choose to do. It also means those people are welcome to walk away without paying you any mind, or, should you be insistent in your attempts to coerce, to punch  you in the throat and then carry on their way.

It might be unpopular to try to openly coerce others into acting against their will, but that doesn't mean that people will suddenly all stop doing so, or that there will be some law prohibiting coercion. Rather, if we believe the anthropologists, coercion would be countered with shaming about such behavior through things like mild needling and teasing, sarcasm, etc.

To whit, coercion would likely be countered with coercion. Problem? No, not necessarily. The issue is one of power. Anarchy is a delicate balance of societal needs and individual wants, and of individual needs and societal wants. Ideally things would be settled by persuasion as opposed to coercion, but that is talking about ideals, which hold very little when dealing in real lives and desires.

Perhaps as a counter argument, I would ask, why attempt to coerce as opposed to persuade? There are times where both are appropriate, in my mind, but I would much rather create a new question than authoritatively circumscribe that exploration.

Comments

related:

http://anarchy101.org/2879/when-if-ever-coercion-an-appropriate-choice-for-an-anarchist

---

People are unhappy with the world yet the world offers no other options or solutions; and it does not intend to.  That is what is a great opportuntity to give people another choice.  No form of government cannot do this.  Anarchy can.

---

"any other form of government cannot do this."
anarchy is not a form of government.
also, your comment is not an answer to the question.


do you think that if every post has your name on it that you've won some prize?

---

Thanks, corrected.  
Do I win a prize?   Just kidding.  

My point was choice is a more effective means of change.  I think people would want a change if something better was presented.   That takes the task off trying to coerce them into giving them a better options.  Coercion seems wrong no matter what idea you are trying to spread.