Except that's not at all what Bismark did. He created welfare programs and other programs to help workers
, but so that workers would be less concerned with their welfare and more concerned with and productive in their jobs. He was not, for example, in favor of taking over Germany's industrialized sectors
, and was instead trying to promote such sectors of the economy through support programs for the workers, who were at the time leaving Germany to go to America because it had higher pay, but no social security. By offering social security
, he hoped to keep German workers within Germany.
i.e. fascist socialist and precursor to Hitler.
Actually communists and anarchists do not fall along the same principles precisely. In particular relevance to the above statement, while the goal of both communists and anarchists is to create a society without government, anarchists believe in private ownership, while communism puts emphasis on communal ownership.
Not precisely no. Anarchists want to go straight for the anarchy, while communists want to detour via the Politburo. Either way, power is the inevitable corrupter there being nothing to restrain it.
Likewise, anarchists value the individual more than the state or community, while communism puts heavy emphasis on the community over the individual.
Yes, many libertarians equate themselves with anarchy, even though 98% of libertarians acknowledge the need for a permanent government. But pure freedom, like pure democracy, doesn't work.
There are also societal experiments that tested out anarchists principles and they managed to last for several years before being brought down by outside influences.
Yes, on a small scale it and communism (e.g. Israeli Kibbutzim) can work, but they still need a defense against outside force.
Even then you'll find a crude informal government in play, as you find in isolated family groups.