Inside each general classification of people (Muslims, Christians, Jews, Convervatives, Liberals) there are small groups of extremists and larger groups non-extremists. There are many types of anarchists. Anarcho-communists, anarcho-capitalists, voluntarists,... The people that garner the headlines are the anarcho-communists and other leftists that generate the negative image with their exploits, bomb throwing, and their complete disrespect for private property rights. Just as the radical Muslims generate the headlines. Most of the billion Muslims are average folks. Most of the many anarchists that I know are the "good" anarchists who fall under this definition. 1 : a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups This is where many religious conservatives groups would like to see the government go to, reduce the government dependency in favor of the voluntary charities and church organizations. Most of these people are in the closet due to the negative image the media gives to anarchism. I don't blame them. I wouldn't want to be associated with the extremists either. I expect many people would accept anarchism if it was feasible. If everyone was good, charitable, non-envious of their neighbor's property then there would be no need for government. We aren't there. We probably will never be there. We can't get rid of government, but its role should be small, well-defined, and limited. Governments role ought to be the protection of our rights from those that try to infringe on our rights/liberties/freedoms.