[PsychoVision]

How would you go about making roads when someone's land is blocking the direction you need to build your road in?

In America, the government could just take the land they needed.

[SecretSquirrel]

You make it worth it for the person whose land you need to give you permission or you change the course of the road.

Is the concept of non-coercion so hard to understand?

[El Gilroy]

Roads? Not in my anarchy!

...just build around it.

[Cookie Monster]

How can roads exist in Anarchism. Assuming these roads are build, who is going to maintain the roads?

[El Gilroy]

Well, maybe small roads between frequently travelled-to locations.

[Huntster]

How can roads exist in Anarchism.

It's the easiest and best way from A to B.

Whether you like it or not.

(Anarchism works both ways.)

Assuming these roads are build, who is going to maintain the roads?

Nobody. They'll be a fucking mess. A mudhole. Like most Alaskan trails.

Whether you like it or not.

[Cookie Monster]

It's the easiest and best way from A to B.

Whether you like it or not.

(Anarchism works both ways.)

So a road in its most basic form. So Anarchism means living like in rural Africa.

[ninurta]

How can roads exist in Anarchism. Assuming these roads are build, who is going to maintain the roads?

Same people who maintain dirt roads, or shall I say cars. Cars (or whatever form of transportation) will be driving over it. If there is pavement, then most likely it's those who want the roads who will maintain them or they will lose them with time.

[PsychoVision]

One would maintain a road they built by charging a toll for it's users. If they couldn't afford the toll, they would go off road.

But here's the problem: say your land was surrounded by land owned by other people. You couldn't go between two people's land because you would have to trespass on one land in order to get through, unless there was space between the two. Let's assume that the owner of the land cannot be talked into selling land to make a road.

[Rojo]

You make it worth it for the person whose land you need to give you permission or you change the course of the road.

Is the concept of non-coercion so hard to understand?

That is grossly contradictory. I think you mean non-economic coercion. But that's still not what you said and still fairly contradictory.

[Suska]

It seems pretty ludicrous to me to suggest that so long as some violent organizing gang isn't forcing people to take care of themselves they'll all just die. Anarchy doesn't preclude cooperation, far from it.

[Rojo]

It does not preclude it, nor does it mandate it.

[ninurta]

It does not preclude it, nor does it mandate it.

So? A state doesn't mean that there will be roads, nor does it always mandate it. Though they more often then not do, simply because roads are beneficial to those who use them, it would be no different in anarchy.

[DubiousDan]

How would you go about making roads when someone's land is blocking the direction you need to build your road in?

In America, the government could just take the land they needed.

Folks seem to be missing the concept of Anarchy. First of all, land as property, purely in itself, depends on a state to assign it. Real estate by definition derives it’s validity from the state. Anarchism recognizes property by possession through use. It is difficult to imagine the amount of land that a household would be using blocking a road in an Anarchistic social order. If it is communal property, then it would be up to the commune to assign priorities of use based on total consent by all affected members of the commune.
Secondly, what do we need a road for? If it is automobiles, I might point out that automobiles are a very recent development in Human existence. No Anarchism that I am aware of has ever needed a road. Footpaths, perhaps, but those are made simply by people walking on them.
Roads are only one of the necessary problems which an Anarchism would have to resolve in order for automobiles to exist. Even ox carts require a complex social order.

If that seems problematic, try to think of a real Anarchism which has used ox carts. Even the primitive Andean roads were the products of a highly evolved civilization.

Yes, I can envision an Anarchism with roads and even automobiles, but there are many more complex problems that must first be resolved before we even get to that point. The primary problem is defense against civilized states. Once you have any thing worth taking, Civilized social orders will take it by force. Before any highly developed Anarchistic social order can exist in the same world as civilized states, the problem of defense against aggression must first be resolved.