Would you mind elaborating on this? I'm afraid I don't know what you mean.

Not the commenter, but I came across this term in the book Fields of Blood by Karen Armstrong. Essentially society requires violence to function. In the beginning, someone had to coerce farmers to produce a surplus, with this surplus the first states and militaries were built. As societies evolved, the violence became less overt and more implied, embedded within the structures of the state. At some point, in order to have a society and not anarchy, you have to have people telling other people what to do, and these people can't take no for an answer. All you can do is reshuffle it so it's less and less onerous over time.

It's a thread that runs throughout the book, in order to explain religion and nationalism and war were deeply entwined all throughout recorded history and well into prehistory for as long as we've had the mental capacity to think about matters larger than we are.

Society and anarchy are not mutually exclusive.

Depends on how you define the terms.

The most common definitions of political anarchy (if you will, as opposed to simplistic "anarchy = chaos" definitions) indicate that it's a form of society. Typical tenets include free association and mutual aid, which are inherently social concepts.

Can you give me any real-world examples of an anarchic society?

Violence was always structural. That doesn't explain an increase in suicides.

Perhaps now that the rising tide that floats all boats that America had going from the 40s-80s (or something like that) has peaked, suicide rates are just going back to normal.

It's pretty rare throughout history that your kids will almost surely be better off than you were. We enjoyed a brief spurt of that here in the US. It's probably over. Welcome back to the old normal.

Is war as old as gravity?