>>512208165
>Most people would rather take part in a community that shares their values and sensibilities about standards of behavior and social responsibility
Community, yes. Absolutely. But rarely do you find communities that completely isolate themselves, or that are happy to do so.
You can look at actual anarchist experiments and see what happens, anon. Look at Mahkno's free territory; it was communes and small democratic communities, but they engaged in commercial trade with one another. They did not all put up walls around themselves and say "no, we are a cloud forest, none shall enter, we will provide everything we need right here". They collaborated, but in a lower-trust way than they did with their immediate neighbors.
A real free society is going to have varying levels of trust and interpersonal connection, and it will accordingly have gradients of interaction. This is how humans interact. You are a communist with your closest connections and you engage in mutual exchange with strangers. What distinguishes people on the individualist-collectivist spectrum of anarchism is basically just
>how many people do I consider my closest connections?
My immediate family? My close friends? My neighbors? Other people in my community I've never met? Other people in my religion/race/group I identify with?
The only thing that's universally true is that the answer is never "nobody at all" and the answer is never "everyone on the planet". Where we draw the line is up to us as individuals and it will also change with time.
