The other day I went out with a old friend who I haven't seen for awhile and after kind of catching up we began doing what we always do best ... debating.  Within our conversation we began debating the plausibility of an anarchistic society (also see anarchism,)  So what does everyone think?  Can a society based upon anarchistic principles exist?  

Personally I believe that answer is no.  On paper I think anarchism works very well, much like Communism; however, when put into practice the theory will be confounded by human beings.  Studies in social psychology have shown us that the presence of others has an effect on individual thinking and action (see for examples: Asch's conformity studies, Latane and Darley [1968], Darley and Latane [1968]).  There are a number of factors that lead us to alter our thoughts and actions in the presence of others (e.g. the ambiguity of a situation, diffusion of responsibility etc.) just as there are various factors that can lead to differences in opinion between individuals (e.g. prior experience, perception, etc.).  With so many factors influencing our actions and thoughts conflict will too easily arise between individuals (and the groups that naturally form between individuals).  Without a central authority figure (or group of figures) to officiate, differences between these individuals and groups will grow to a point where civil unrest occurs and that society, based upon voluntary cooperation and free association will break down into various small societies at war, where these society have individuals or small groups leading them to fight for their own rights.

The above is only one reason that I believe an ararchistic society could not work.  I think that our tendency to automatically follow a leader (not even the person best suited for the job), and evolutionary theory would both offer up a more detailed explanation but frankly I am tired of typing.  I am quite interested in why you believe or why you do not believe anarchy could work so let me know.