Hmm weird. A group of anarcho-fascists? There is no such thing. That's like asking for Atheist Christians or something, so the entire conversation is void.
No its not, that doesnt make any sense. And yes
there is such thing.
Those slavers are not taking away any
persons rights or freedoms, why are they not anarchists? After all, there is no direct contradiction with anarchy, is there?
But thats besides the point, the thought experement works
regardless of whether the slavers are anarchists or not, because that is not the point of the thought experement. The experement asks what you would do if you were in the anarchist group opposed to the slavery?
By existing peacefully within society today can I call myself anarchic? We simply do what we can, and absolutes will always at some point be incompatible with a situation faced in reality.
I suppose part of my argument is against the concept of a political ideal itself. While I believe generally in a social-democracy, I don't like to call myself a "social democrat" directly (to avoid someone thinking I believe in concepts that I may or may not actually believe in) and instead advocate elements of politics I think are best (most, but not all, of which are generally from the concept of a social democracy).
Conversely, I would rather not any ruler be given power over me, precisely because they are a person, and will not always act in good faith.
Fair enough, I do understand what you mean. Personally though I think allowing people to elect someone and grant them power allows them to
generally stop the abuse of powers others may try to exert over me. I prefer to reject rulership based on a per-case bases rather than overall,
hopefully leading to rulers that have a positive effect.