Has there ever been a country that has been ruled under anarchy? What eventually happened?
IIRC, by definition you can’t rule under anarchy.
I had a college buddy from Pakistan who told me that parts of Pakistan are basically anarchies. Everyone carries guns around. There are no courts. No taxes. No driver licenses. (And I suppose you don’t need a permit for your Kalishnikov.) And no SEC to register with to sell those internet shares 
Somalia.
Well, back in high school, I wrote a short paper entitled “Anarchy: Let’s give it a try!”.
Needless to say, the teacher was not impressed. Of course, at the time, I was a tad confused, and didn’t quite know the politics and human psychology that I know now.
I’m all for responsible anarchy, which would be a very polite society. Sadly, the human animal is not ready for unlimited freedom and absolute resonsiblity, and a heirarchal (blew that one, right?) system follows close behind him, wherever he goes.
In time, mayhaps it can happen, but for now, no, no place has operated as an anarchy, at least not for long. Anywhere you’ve got a strongman in charge like Somalia, it is a dictatorship (or lots of little ones, like Somalia) and not a true anarchy.
Anarchy does not necessarily mean violent… violence for it’s own sake is Nihilism… which is something else entirely.
Situations in which individuals carry around guns and ‘don’t take no shit from no one’, etc., are usually not anarchies as much as we might romantically wish they were; they are usually bully-archies in which most average people are controlled and preyed upon by the ones best equipped to do so. Furthermore, the bully types rarely exist as lone wolf isolated bullies but instead organize followers, aka henchmen.
Anarchy as a viable political/social system has never been seriously tried. See the other thread on anarchy farther down the board (I think it is titled “Any anarchists?”)
(I’m too lazy to chase down the URL)