[public_defender]

I can't tell if you understand or not, but your "first definition" is a grammatically correct pejorative. The second is a reference to a political philosophy.

What's happening in this comment thread is that people are "confusing" a mastodon instance dedicated to the political philosophy with a group dedicated to being in a state of disorder. It's neither productive to the discussion nor witty.

[chongli]

It’s only come to be a pejorative in recent times. Originally it was the only definition. This goes back at least as far as Aristotle’s political theory in which he categorized systems by the number of rulers (one, few, or many) and whether or not the rulers were “correct” (working toward the greater good) or “deviant” (working toward selfish aims). Aristotle did not recognize rule by “none” or “all” within his schema.

As for the modern pejorative connotation, it’s grounded in a critique: how do anarchist societies cope with motivated and determined rule-breakers without devolving into chaos?

[public_defender]

So you understand the difference between the two definitions and you are falsely equating them in your first comment on purpose? In order to derail the conversation? That's disappointing.