We have a choice, which is:
A world where everyone can attempt to do whatever they desire.
Anarchy, where people voluntary eschew any notion of dominating one another.
The former is the only one with inherent scope for force. The latter however, is the one that many would find more restrictive. Anarchy is a paradox. We either build a world governed by might, or a world governed by the imperative of social cohesion.
In order for Anarchy to be implemented people must comprehend that equality of freedom is only possible whereby we each voluntarily eschew any notion of oppressing one another.
This is not a particularly hard concept to grasp, and only those who are pathologically selfish or ideologically blinkered seem flummoxed by it. Any reasonably intelligent person should be capable of reaching such a conclusion in fairly short order, without the necessity of reading Bakunin. As for those who can’t or won’t, sooner or later their options will become limited, since such mindsets are entirely reliant on social tolerance. As more and more people individually choose to reject selfishness, it becomes exponentially harder to maintain a selfish disposition.
Would we prefer if other people didn’t force things upon us? In exchange for them not doing so, would we be prepared to extend others that same courtesy? Anarchy is not absolute freedom, but rather optimal freedom. Absolute freedom can only be obtained by an absolute tyrant. Optimal freedom can only be obtained in by the total absence of tyranny. Anarchy and tyranny are in effect opposites of one another.
The free market propertarian ideology is a form of tyranny because it mitigates equality of freedom. In laissez-faire capitalism, economic power arises from capital. The more economic power one wields, the more property one can acquire, and property in turn imbues rulership, since the property owner possesses the exclusive right to set the rules which govern their property. This is is political power: the power to take decisions. More property equates to more power. In order for everyone to be equally free, they must each possess the same degree of political power. Anarchism is predicated on self-rulership, which is absolute equality of political power. Therefore anarchy is at odds with any environment which creates scope for individuals to disproportionately amass political power. Laissez-faire capitalism is therefore tyranny, because the property owners rule by virtue of wielding political power proportional to their holdings.
Rulership is political power period. Both physical power and economic power can be used to acquire political power. Anarchism seeks to dismantle the means by which such actions are enabled.
The society we presently inhabit developed through the circular feedback process of social conditioning. The same entirely natural process will govern the implementation of anarchy. Leading by example gradually feedbacks into social conditioning in a snowball effect. As more people come to reject domination there will be less domination evident in our social conditioning. There is no magic bullet. Someone can type out a thesis on whatever form of society he or she would prefer to see implemented, but that shall remain nothing more than wishful thinking. Change can only be effected by influencing the process of social conditioning.
What counts as domination and selfishness falls to the conscience of the individual. We exist in a society of individuals, we don’t need to agree on anything, what counts is the sum total, the net effect, this is what’s fed back into our social conditioning.