Right? I've thought this so many times. Anarchist are also like "Of course it works, we just never had real anarchy though!" 
Just like the commies. 

 Couldn’t have said it better 

 You were talking to communists using anarchy as a cudgel against the state. Anarchy is a relationship not an organization or state structure. Anarchy is the state of the world. Governments are warlords using human rights as a cover. People playing the state's game are LARPing. 

 Show me on the body of this text where any anarchistic has ever hurt you. 

 You literally don't know what you're talking about. Anarchy is the status quo. The governments are just the biggest warlords that masquerade as human rights organizations.  

 So if you have a think called governments that keep infringing on your anarchist default do you really have anarchism? Or is the infringement of the anarchist default the actual status quo? 

 Thing* 

 You have anarchy at all points (No rulers in a true sense). It is only if you ideologically submit to a ruler that you exit anarchy and become a subject to whatever game you subscribe. Federalism, democracy, monarchy, or communism. Those are all games you can choose to play. But life itself has no ruler. Do you see? 

 So all you need is everyone in the world to reject all the major states simultaneously to get to your dream world. Sounds reasonable. 

 No, I don't need to do anything. Think like this: gravity is the way of the world. Everyone participating else has a wing suit and are flapping their arms furiously to keep themselves 100feet in the air. I tell them I just stand on the ground. I am telling you, you don't need the wing suits. You suggest if we all get rid the wing suits we would all die. It's easier to live on this planet by walking on the ground but everyone just keeps flapping. 

 If there is a spontaneously emergent social, economic and legal order that respects the natural rights to life, liberty and property of individuals and abides by the natural law as derived from logic and reason, that society is ready for anarchy.

We can certainly work towards it, sure. I’m all for it. But without the above, you will have the emergence of a coercive State even if you abolish the current one. 

 Absolutely 

 Anarchism is the only ideology that accounts for human nature by rejecting violent power exercised by inherently depraved human beings. 

 And what stops “inherently” depraved human beings from forming a mob and exercising violent power in an anarchist system? 

 Thermodynamics. Violence is more expensive than peaceful cooperation. Free-trade is just a polite reminder that you are destroying yourself by using the state to steal. 

 I respectfully disagree. I'm not a specialist in this subject but I don't consider living without a ruler fails to account for human nature, perhaps establish a community/society based on anarchy principles could not be done in large scale but for individuals and small communities it may be viable. 

 Large scale individual sovereignty is a contradiction in terms. You can only how small communities or individuals in anything. It is me?literally a mental illusion that a country exists in anything more than a mental exercise. You have nothing in common with anybody in your country besides a shared delusion. A Marylander has nothing in common with an Ohioan beside what we all share as humans.  

 Whether you could consider yourself an anarchist or not hinges on how you answer the question: "Is it OK to initiate violence to achieve one's aims?" I say "no" but we live in a world where the initiation of violence or threat thereof permeates everything. To achieve victory we must protect ourselves and starve those who would aggress against us. Hodl your bitcoin securely. Defend your self, your friends, your community. Bitcoin starves the State. 

 Agreed. And framing it as "an ideology that doesn't account for human nature" is flawed IMO. Its like somebody says, "I should be able to do what I want if I'm not hurting anybody." With the response being, "You're not accounting for human nature." It doesn't make sense unless the person responding to you wants to tell you what to do.  

 The human nature you aren’t accounting for is the part where other humans will not leave you alone. It doesn’t mean you aren’t capable of being sovereign due to some inherent flaw. Unfortunately for us libertarians, there are so few of us. We’re vastly outnumbered. 

 Technology creates sovereignty against the mob. This statement is akin to saying "But you don't realize how powerful the federal reserve is. They can print money and make people do what they want."
A bitcoiner can see the flaw in this logic. All you need is an alternative and you make power structures irrelevant. Anti-Gun laws and Gun protection laws are irrelevant when people have 3D printers and CNC machines. You don't need to ask people to leave you alone, you make them. The first step however, is convincing yourself that you aren't bound to them or their rules. 

 Can you name a technology that has created a shield against the mob? 

 3d printer, radios, bitcoin, homemade explosives, auto-seers, home gardening, wells, and so many other things that keep you alive without their help, consideration, or otherwise. 

 I get what youre saying I just don't think this is a flaw in the ideology of anarchism itself. The ideology just states its wrong to initiate aggression. The fact that other people still will do that just makes them aggressors in the view of those ascribing to the ideology. How to deal with the aggressors is a more complicated question.  

 This is why I said it’s a meme ideology. It’s like communism. Great in theory. Horrible in practice. 

 Communism is not even great in theory. Its flawed as an ideology as its built on an incorrect theory of value and suffers from the economic calculatiom problem. An anarchist society may be difficult to achieve but its not ignoring human nature. Its basically just a moral framework IMO.  

 It’s a moral framework for autistic people. Nuero typical people don’t understand the non aggression principle and never will. 

 thanks for bringing this to light for me. I was very confused about why bitcoiners seemed to believe that voting is a moral failure, but I guess it makes sense if they come from an anarchist background, and while we can agree that bitcoin solves the biggest problem of our time, just because anarchists understood bitcoin earlier doesn’t mean that anarchy is the solution to our current political situation (and actually, as you mentioned, it cannot exist in the real world at any meaningful scale) 

 Human nature trends towards cooperation, which would allow for a purely anarchist system to thrive. If the opposite were true, we wouldn't exist anymore.

Granted, it's not the de facto default state of the human race, but we can (and are) getting there. 

 I heard this phrase also said about libertarians on a podcast recently. It's true in theory these ideas make sense. But in practice we forget that humans can be dumb, panicking, animals sometimes.  

 Neither does it account for the created order of the cosmos. 
Governance is a part of the dominion mandate. Human governance is marred by sin but nothing about the dominion mandate or the intent of governance changed after the fall.  

 Which ideology is not memetic? Ideas are viruses whose time comes and goes.

I agree that anarchism (questioning belonging (democracy) and representation (republic)) is NOT a voting block. It’s a set of ideas that lead people toward more conscious awareness.

But, relatively speaking, every idea is also an ideology because we are never fully awake to its ramifications. 

 Christian anarchism is totally doable. 
Watch me. it starts with the children. A public school student can't be an anarchist like a city kid can't survive in the forest. but it doesn't mean  humans can't survive in the forest. It just means the brainwashed ones can't.