Yes. Without government, another form of government develops.

Keep in mind government does not mean governance

PURELY in theory, I support completely free market with the 'government' consisting of only a (benevolent) police force enforcing criminal law. Beyond that, you get completely free market economics and essentially survival of the fittest. It'd never work, and it's a horribly cruel system, but in my head I like to think it'd be a good idea.

That was terribly written, but you get the idea.

What I truly mean to say is to what extent is anarchy possible and how can we strive to achieve a point where we do not need government and we can govern our selves.

how often has it worked in the past?

Has it been tried in the past should be the question...

"a point where we do not need government and we can govern our selves"

that would be government....
There is no way to create a lasting state of Anarchy, if no real government was in place then some "criminal group" or union would take control and dictate rules over those who did not join them

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_anarchist_communities

We can govern ourselves as in every single person govern himself not others

Well i'm saying WORLD LEADERS DROP EVERYTHING AND WALK AWAY
Obviously this is beyond today in an era where we still have the ability to destroy the world 50 times over with nuclear weapons

As I've said before, if I ever found myself in an anarchic society, I would take it over.

Why?

Because I'm 100% convinced that if I didn't, someone else would. And, as a general rule, I trust myself to make good decisions more than others.

abgemacht, you would not be alone in attempting to do so. Эvalanche: That's the problem with true anarchy. If you could guarantee that everyone would seek fair, peaceful resolutions to their problems, sure, anarchy would be ideal. Unfortunately there's a little thing called selfishness. There will always be people who will want more and to be in charge, and they will take what they can by force.

One person would use diplomacy to gain allies and followers, this person would build a tribe with a basic structure. This tribe would then seek to protect its structure, so it would create rules that will be enforced. What do you know, we are back where we started this whole mess.

Utopian anarchy would be nice, but that is what it is. Utopian, unattainable peaceful dream.

Anarcho-Capitalistic ideals COULD work, but it would be a nightmare to live in (see Jeniffer Government).

Selfishness is a regard for ones own interest above all else and is we all are selfish everyone is helping everyone. The point at which a person begins to seek power over other is not in his own interest

"PURELY in theory, I support completely free market with the 'government' consisting of only a (benevolent) police force enforcing criminal law. Beyond that, you get completely free market economics and essentially survival of the fittest. It'd never work, and it's a horribly cruel system, but in my head I like to think it'd be a good idea."
Thats the thing, your above system would work. It may be a horrible cruel system, but it would be a extremely fair system that would work really well if the police force is large enough to be able to put down any revolt carried by the people of the lower class.

Anarchy would be an interesting form of government. I have read enough post-apocalyptic stories to know that anarchy would be very cool and would place a strong emphasis on survival of the fittest, in theory speeding up the evolution of mankind and making us better off.

However in practice a new government would form rather quickly and that is why a true anarchic government has never happened, and probably never will.

"Because I'm 100% convinced that if I didn't, someone else would. And, as a general rule, I trust myself to make good decisions more than others"
same here

"Эvalanche: That's the problem with true anarchy. If you could guarantee that everyone would seek fair, peaceful resolutions to their problems, sure, anarchy would be ideal. Unfortunately there's a little thing called selfishness. There will always be people who will want more and to be in charge, and they will take what they can by force."
Human nature is the one reason why anarchy wont work.

"One person would use diplomacy to gain allies and followers, this person would build a tribe with a basic structure. This tribe would then seek to protect its structure, so it would create rules that will be enforced. What do you know, we are back where we started this whole mess.

Utopian anarchy would be nice, but that is what it is. Utopian, unattainable peaceful dream.

Anarcho-Capitalistic ideals COULD work, but it would be a nightmare to live in (see Jeniffer Government)."
Only a nightmare for the lower class...

"Selfishness is a regard for ones own interest above all else and is we all are selfish everyone is helping everyone. The point at which a person begins to seek power over other is not in his own interest"
Why not?

@Fasces and thatwasawkward

Would you like to be a part of my new government?

If you look at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_anarchist_communities page, most of the anarchy's last less then 3 years, and almost all of them were during times of civil war.

I looked at that and the fact that they classify warring factions during civil war anarchy shows that what I classify as anarchy has never been tried

"Would you like to be a part of my new government?"
What position would I get.

My dream job is being the puppet master of some dictator (who is just a figurehead pretending to call all the shots, but its actually me who is doing so)

"I looked at that and the fact that they classify warring factions during civil war anarchy shows that what I classify as anarchy has never been tried"
I wonder why... The fact is any form of anarchy would fall apart in 2 years and small tribes would spring up when people come together to unit under similar ideals including the interest of protection and future well being.

The leaders of these tribes would then go on to attack nearby tribes with the intention of assimilating them. Eventually one of these tribes would rule the entire country, the laws adopted by that tribe would be enforced throughout and you would find a country thats governments aren't that much different from the ones today.

Ahem that's what most of the world is actually like accept it's not dictators in developed countries is elected representatives

unite not unit. typo

"Ahem that's what most of the world is actually like accept it's not dictators in developed countries is elected representatives"
Which comment was this directed at?