I have “talk[sic] to some anarchist”.
That’s the the problem.
Most anarchists, as I said, who I’ve talked to, are fantasists with no practical ideas about how to reach the society they talk about, and no ability to address the obvious problems along the way, and further, an absolute and immovable ideological opposition to all hierarchies, including “due” hierarchies. You keep telling me to “read some theory”, but these are people who have, and who still can’t actually explain how to get from A to B, can’t address issues with human nature (instead glossing over it with assumptions that people will somehow change, even though history shows humans have lived in anarchist-style societies before, and were/are exactly the same), and have an absolute opposite to hierarchy.
There’s a double-problem even above everything else with the ideological opposition to hierarchies, because even with anarchists who accept that there is such a thing as a “necessary” hierarchy (indeed, virtually any technically skilled job/role requires some kind of hierarchy), there’s a huge question over what actually is “necessary”.
This isn’t theoretical. I have more than one close friend who works at an organisation that involves multiple anarchists and operates at least partially on anarchist principles. And they have huge problems because of the anarchists and the opposition to hierarchy. Many anarchists, and I’m talking about committed anarchists with master’s degrees and so on, theoretically smart people, are so ideologically opposed to hierarchies, that they will literally ignore someone’s expertise in a field, because if they didn’t, if they followed that person’s advice and information consistently, they feel it would create a de facto hierarchy, and that’s worse than making extremely bad and ignorant decisions.
This behaviour, this ideology, is, de facto, anti-science, anti-medicine, and so on. Because they won’t listen to the people who know things - they give equal weight to people who know nothing. They won’t allow those informed people to educate people. For example - one friend I have is the only person at their organisation who understands their IT systems - no-one else even wants to know - that friend is a deep expert and also has a ton of project management experience and so on. Do they listen to this person? No. Why? Because my friend is wrong or something? No. They know my friend knows more than they do. But in their meetings and so on, people are given a certain amount of time to talk, regardless of their expertise or total and utter lack thereof, and their opinions weighted equally, no matter how ignorant they are. So my friend gets 5 minutes to try and explain complex technical issues to a non-technical audience, and then several people who have no idea what they’re talking about get 5-minute turns to go on about how they either don’t care, or don’t understand, or want to change to some other system because they heard about it and sounded cool and so on. So they actively prevent themselves from being given proper advice, and this is all in the stated name of preventing hierarchies. Ironically there are of course hierarchies they don’t acknowledge there, but they’re hierarchies of fear - i.e. who is scared of crossing who - or alliances, rather than honestly acknowledging some people know better.
And that’s just one example. Yes, in some forms of anarchism that wouldn’t be the case - but we’re not talking some dumb punk who has misunderstood anarchy as being the ideological extremist in the lead here. We’re talking about a woman who has studied it for decades.
You’re basically saying “Not all anarchists!” like people say “Not all men!” and yeah, I’m sure plenty of anarchists aren’t that ideologically extreme, aren’t that committed to opposition to hierarchy - but they’re not the problem (though it’s easy for opposition to hierarchy to be misguided into opposition to experts and the like), and they’re not the kind of anarchists typically associated with punk as a movement.
Relevant to right now, I’d point out that, among the anarchists I know IRL, there’s an extremely strong strand of COVID-denial - I bet you can’t say you haven’t seen the same. Lot of them saying stuff like this is basically a sham to allow the government to be more fascist and so on (hilariously the UK government, has, if anything, being atypically un-fascist over COVID). Lot of them calling doctors and so on liars. It’s not universal by any means, but it’s very prevalent. I don’t know any equally-educated group where it’s as common.