Most anarchists i talk to agree that anarchism is an impossible utopia. The best we can do is influence the capitalist society as much as we can, and live our own lives in an anarchist manner.
The more i think about it, the more wrong this seems. An anarchist society would only contain anarchist citizens, and wouldn't necessarily need to be a whole country. The whole idea of borders needs to be redefined a bit.
Why would it be so impossible for anarchists to get together, seize a good bit of land, turn it into a self-sustaining anarchist society and protect it from the state? I might be dreaming naive dreams, but i see examples of this everywhere, a good one being Christiania, a free-town in Copenhagen, where i live, which was seized by squatters in the 80's and successfully defended without guns in almost all cases from thousands of militarized police attacks. The only issue that Christiania has is that it is too small to be self-sustaining. Capitalist concepts such as currency is a necessary part of the lives of citizens in Christiania, because they work outside of the free-town, and buy most of their goods from the outside.
I must be missing something here, an enlightened explanation of the pessimism of anarchists would be very much appreciated.