[sliverstorm]

it seems very obvious that that is exactly what will happen if people are left without constraints. Those who can get some power will get more, and there's nothing to stop them

Then clearly after we abolish government, we just need to establish some kind of power structure to limit this effect. Perhaps to keep things fair, we can put this power structure subject to votes by the people.

There. Solved. Anarchy!

[Millennium]

But the moment you've done that, you've established a de-facto government, thus violating the definition of anarchy. This happens with a lot of utopian schemes, actually: the logistics of maintaining them require them to mutate into something decidedly other than the original intent. Eventually, in the case of anarchy, the de-facto government inevitably finds a way to cement its power in a more de-jure fashion, and from there corruption proceeds as normal.

[sliverstorm]

See: Poe's Law :)

[aaronem]

Have you ever investigated the origins and etymology of the word "utopia"? Most these days seem happy to sling the word around without knowing where it came from and what it means; should you be among that number, I recommend the subject to your attention, as you may well find interest in the result of such investigation.