>>11
I don't disagree with your 'equation'. One thing i don't get though is why you suppose there would be such a high 'K'.
Anyway, I'm not a revolutionary. I don't think that a revolution could successfully change the system to an anarchist one. And I'm saying this because I believe in parallel systems.
I did some reading last night and I found something rather interesting (which I'm planning to look more into soon): Post -anarchism. (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-anarchism ). The part I found interesting was Newman's criticism of traditional anarchism: "Newman criticizes classical anarchists, such as Michael Bakunin and Peter Kropotkin, for assuming an objective "human nature" and a natural order; he argues that from this approach, humans progress and are well-off by nature, with only the Establishment as a limitation that forces behavior otherwise."
Although still far from a complete political theory, I find it spot on on looking for a system with no set structure where the structure of each community is only what the community will choose (if I'm getting it right because I still haven't read the original sources)