for beginners. the reason why many social anarchists “lapse” into state-socialis is not because they are off-tracked by their socialism. its simply because they would prefer state-socialism to capitalism. the simple truth is that many, if not the majority of them, believe that you can have partially “benign” states. the problem is not that they are not following the golden mean but are simply using sloppy reasoning. otherwise why would goldman even consider ussr. if she believed that all state-socialist schemes are fake, she wouldnt even give them a chance. far-left parties are almost-always their buddies and right-wingers are the ones that get firebombed.
the fact is that, in theory, both market anarchists and communists would rather see a total abolition of gov’t. their lapses into statist apologetic are a result of sloppy thinking. (imo all anarchists sometimes symphatise with statist elements, even carson)
another fact is that the socialists and marketeers have different ethical yardsticks and thus putting them in one gradual line is false. you must understand that orthodox anarchocomms have a different ethical worldview. they oppose profit and loss, hierarchy, competition, and commodity production. its not simply a mere preference for socialisticalness. they are surely anti-authoritarians but not genuine libertarians. imo tucker is a good example of a libertarian. their love of freedom is not based on the same solid foundations as ours. they are more close to the marxian view of freedom.
for a mutualist his system is as socialist as it can be. he doesnt half-step between communism and capitalism and come up with mutualism. a person who doesnt take his ideas to their most radical conclusions is really a hipocrate. a good example are the democratic party. they are half-assed socialists. they have the same yardsick, but out of intellectual fear chose a middle way.