The notion of left and right in politics is rather unhelpful since this promotes fundamentally unhelpful dichotomous thinking. Left and right is typically about variously defending and opposing economic structural oppression, social structural oppression and statist structural oppression. Why not rather oppose structural oppression generally irrespective of it being economic, social or statist?
The notion of anarchism is distinctly untheorized yet it is certainly a good idea to begin with. Most pre-colonial human cultures had no state and no government and so why did the Frankfurt school and its intellectual descendants so heavily focus on Marxist theory at the near exclusion of what is better described as progressive libertarianism?
Abolishing the state altogether may not be entirely possible in a mass society and it may be argued that a self-governing tribe as practically speaking independent from the outside world is simply a state in and of itself. Rather need we commence deconstructing the very notion of statehood from a mechanism of power and control to one vast accelerator as intended to facilitate for citizens to realize themselves and their ethical visions indeed whether for community, society and/or ethical business.
Anarchism is etymologically something of a misnomer in giving a false impression as to what Anarchism ought be. Indeed, the focus should be on what Anarchism ought be rather than what it currently is as a certain activist protest movement. What then ought Anarchism be? First, Anarchism is the notion of opposing structural oppression generally irrespective of whether being economic, social or statist. Second should anarchism not content itself with mere opposition to structural but need rather focus on social engineering. This means performing quality innovation in enhancement, deconstruction and creating anew. It means understanding that while advancement in theory provides important insight is it otherwise simply a tool to attain good practice.
Anarchists as most persons believing in universalist ideologies tend to believe that the ideology all provides all the solutions and that staying within that ready discursive frame offers a panacea when in fact it rather offers a narrow-minded, indeed misleading panopticon in ignoring the khôra outside of it.
Anarchism in a sense is actually opposed to ideology and that is very healthy indeed which is not to deny that various traditions of thought however named and described offer important insights although often in need of deconstruction indeed.
Anarchism as political movement suffer constant persecution by thoroughly criminal police intelligence agencies even in liberal democracies and so Anarchism is typically composed of various activist groups which really do not last long due to constant police intelligence harassment in seeking to coerce them into rather becoming enslaved police intelligence operatives.
What is therefore needed is Anarchism as an Applied Science, meaning that we need scientifically explore the possibilities and potential of Anarchism as statecraft and community building. The question therefore is not whether Anarchism currently is possible but rather in what form it ought be realized?
Applied Anarchist Science will therefore need be one of opposition to unhelpful stereotypes of paradigm, genre, narrative, methodology, discourse, frame, technical requirements etc. The purpose of Anarchist Applied Science needs therefore be bring creative anarchy to science and subsequently to human society at large.
What is therefore needed is a continual Anarchist reinvention of science, including technological science which especially needs become the focus of Anarchist scientific research, study, scrutiny, deconstruction and importantly innovation itself in the tradition of Donna J. Haraway.
As an applied science needs science become devoted to conceptual, social and technological innovation in ways distinctly ethically, aesthetically and politically transformative indeed.