For some anyway, LewRockwell points it out.
Writes Bruce Bartlett: “I note The Economist’s definition of anarchy: ‘Anarchy means the complete absence of law or government. It may be harmonious or chaotic.’
“While it is good to see the magazine concede that anarchy may be harmonious, it errs in saying that it necessarily means an absence of law. It is the absence of government only. Law can continue to function.”

Good ole Lew. I don’t always agree with him because he panders to the right-wing libs too much, but he is generally a smart and principled man.
And hardly anyone in the Progressive blogsphere j\knows agout him…