On Thu, 10 Jun 1999, Martin William Smith wrote:

> Chomsky said in "Interview with Read and Black Revolution (1995)":
>
> "That is what I have always understood to be the essence of anarchism:
> the conviction that the burden of proof has to be placed on authority,
> and that it should be dismantled if that burden cannot be met."
>
> Doesn't this mean that a a coercive government structure is justified,
> and required, for the purpose of enforcing the burden of proof
> requirement and the dismantling of structures that can't meet it?

Your question seems to imply that government is required to perform any
kind of action whatsover, that a totalitarian state is the natural mode of
life for humans.

Can people do things without government?  Can people act individually or
collectively without government?

Take this argument:

A scientific theory should have predictive power.  If a theory fails to
make accurate predictions, it should be discarded or revised until it
makes accurate predictions.

This argument does not imply that a National Authority on Science is
necessary to discard or revise theories.  It implies there are people,
acting alone or as part of organizations, who will do things by their own
choice.  The  argument recommends what they should do in regard to their
scientific theories--namely, that they should discard theories that lack
predictive  power in favor of theories that have it.

Similarly, Chomsky argues what people ought to do in regard to authority.
His argument could apply to a slave and his master, a worker and his
employer, or any other kind of relationship in which authority exists.  It
applies to individuals and groups alike.  In no way does it imply a
government is necessary, for the simple reason that ordinary people are
capable of acting and thinking for themselves.