I apologize you couldn't find the answer to your question from my comment, and thus thought I was dodging it. I tried to explain it in the way that I see it. In my eyes I answered your question clearly, but I will try to be even clearer on my second try.
(hopefully this doesn't come off as patronizing)

I would also like to know what were the pedantics that you identified in my comment. If it was the final statement then that was my attempt to bring humor into the argument and wasn't in any way meant seriously. Perhaps I should have used /j

To get to your question (and hopefully answer it more clearly). An anarchist society forms when anarchists come together to create a society. If someone with guns came to destroy that society the anarchists would defend themselves. If one of the anarchists turns their gun against their comrades the others would respond in kind. If they don't the person takes power and the system stops being anarchistic.

Or to put it even more simply: In an anarchist society everyone is policing and protecting everyone else.

[–] GiveMemes@jlai.lu 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The lack of organizational structure for such militias formed by the anarchists and lack of authority mean though that a conspiracy to destroy the anarchist society will always be infinitely many steps ahead of the response of said society.

Furthermore, what stops the ~30% of people (whether nazi Germany or DJT, that's usually the percentage of votes recieved for right wing radicals) that will almost definitely not be interested in keeping the anarchist society functioning from attaining weapons and having their way? Even ignoring the historic context, tribalism seems baked into the human existence, how is that nullified?

Further, people will always be fearful, so it's great to say "their fellow anarchists would take up arms" but how many are truly willing to do that? Revolutions would be much more common if they were.

That's why I think there's significant cultural/educational changes needed before such a society (or something similar) could be attained.

I think it works great on a local level in small communities, but we have a globalized world, for better or worse, and have greatly outgrown the small communities in which such a philosophy would be most effective imo.