Interesting that Le Guin sees Taoism as anarchy - I have and continue to study the Tao and have seen it as a personal philosophy rather than a community governess -
I do think we in time, as we mature, we realize our ethics and what we value as 'just' behavior was influenced by our education, experiences and religious affiliation. However, bottom line we think and feel and we each have our own moral compass therefore, our interior life is stateless.
I do not see the Tao suggesting an absence of a commonality, a common purpose or code of acceptable behavior that enables group living - most Taoist masters live isolated in caves and are not responsible to family or society - isolation is living a stateless existence - and yes, part of maturing from childhood dependence is developing our interior life as stateless but I do not see Taoism suggesting life is meaningless and a rejection of all religious and moral principles that go hand and glove describing anarchy.
Those who write about society as a mirror of our imbalanced behavior suggesting the alternative, balanced behavior is achievable only using mythology as its guide, I thought was a fantasy that gave a novel its wonder not a recipe for elevating peaceful anarchism much less suggesting that Taoism is a guide to peaceful anarchism.
Hmm why am I in reaction - I think it has to do with the story of a small group of Taoists, unusual in that most Taoist seek wisdom living as a reclue where as, this small band living in the Zhongnana Mountain range, as Taoists have for over Five thousand years were visited by a small group of 3 journalists and their film crew. Interviewing these hermits of all ages they could not supply answers to what they saw as answer-less questions. They were all awake before light, had eaten and finally with the day only started the Master repeatedly and softly said, they should make lunch - it became the mantra to all the questions until finally early-morning the group to the astonishment of the journalists started the process of making lunch.
Making lunch was a communal process that had been repeated day after day so that no direction or words were needed. Foods were gathered - dough was rolled out - pots of water were boiling - each had a job that they slowly, deliberately, and completely focused all their energy into doing the job - finally, even the Journalists pitched in - yes, that was the lesson - all that mattered in life was explained by making lunch, regardless of the time of day, with complete focus on doing well the task, gathering from nature what is needed for lunch and respecting as part of the community endeavor the agency of those who also prepare lunch - There was a leader - the Master, who repeated over and over that they prepare lunch and like in most families, the microcosm of society, the tasks were either chosen or assigned - we did not see the way the hermit group evolved -
However, not seeing that process it is easy to assume it was the outcome of peaceful anarchy - my take is it was the outcome of chaos - chaos is uncomfortable for most but is the prologue to growth where as, anarchy suggests the rejection of the known or unknown before growth and that is why I see stories elevating a community of balanced peaceful anarchists as fantasy - Rejecting the known or even the unknown can bring about direction where as, chaos, the unpredictable with all its uncertainties proceeds growth.
