Absolute chaos is what we would define as anarchy; it is essentially the reverse of order. What makes an anarchy worse would be the shocking lack of a robust legal system because there can be no laws in a society built on complete chaos, but if you're talking about a government based on anarchy, it would be a system where there is no state identity and no real central government. Somalia, to some extent, serves as the most prevalent illustration of why a government founded on anarchy is a horrible concept. Although there is a central government, its power over its territory varies. Certain sections are under the influence of the militant group Al Shabab, and the Somaliland region is attempting to declare its independence from the federal government. The country is rife with a milder but no less deadly type of anarchy due to the absence of a strong central leadership.
Anarchic societies where every individual is equally empowered are unsustainable. The individuals quickly cluster into tribal units, and without some overriding authority, it’s impossible to stop that from happening. The tribal units (or gangs, if you prefer) are run by warlords who keep each other in check until one of them gains a decisive advantage over the others, and then you’ve got the beginnings of a state.
This drama has played out countless times in the course of human history, and is still playing out in the criminal underworld to the extent that it can. That extent is limited by the fact that now there is an overriding authority with enforceable power, the legitimate state.
Thank you,
Eddie
The famous leader which helped kick start European nationalism is A) Napoleon. Napoleon is renown for being a "French military and political leader who rose to prominence during the French Revolution and led several successful campaigns during the Revolutionary War."
<span>Great intellectual and artistic creativity</span>
The Canterbury Tales was a popular book of the period because it was written in easy-to-understand language.
<h3>What were the Canterbury tales?</h3>
This was a tale about a group of priests who competed in a tale telling contest as they travelled to the Canterbury city.
The tales were written in the vernacular language. This was way different from the way other stories were written at the time. They were written in other languages.
This was what made it popular.
Read more on the Canterbury tales here:
brainly.com/question/759387
<span>Ancient Egyptian women had nearly the same legal rights as men. They were able to acquire, own, and dispose of real and personal property in their own name. They could enter into contracts, initiate civil court cases, and be sued.</span>
