i don't know.. i think of anarchy, (and aristocracy, and democracy,) and all those term as how people organize and have government.
iraq, has a government style, where the strongest, most vicious person is the leader.. i know sadam was unapposed, but i suspect, from a commom man iraqi point of view, he is the only choice.. look at him, he stands up to the US and the UN and the rest of the world, he really is the biggest baddest dude around.
in small iraqi villages, the village leader too, is a strong man. (and 1000 year ago, fighting skill were pretty dam important when it came to deciding an an english king!)
is sadam a regent? is the government a regentcy? he might not call himself king.. but what ever he is its the as kings of old.
now chaos-- i don't think of this as political system (or even a lack of a political system. chaos is a mathmatical term.
there have been politacal upheaval, as peoples grow and change (and the nature progression of small groups that are communal to larger groups that have kings is well documented.) during times of change, there is anarchy.. there is no one organized way for society to behave. this is not the same as chaos.
the study of chaos seems to be similar to how people organize.. only is is in reverse. in mathmatics, it is held that the core is ordered, and as you move further form the center, to the outer edges, it there that things get more and more chaotic.. but this level of math is one that i only have vague knowledge of, and even less complete understanding.
The Abuse Of Anarchy
