there is no such thing as a anarcho-socialist
It's not a contradiction in terms, they can voluntarily engage in that end can they not? Same for communists, they can be state controlled or completely voluntary, it's not inherent of left vs right least of all how you used it "vote democratic". Implying that voting otherwise is better, a better more anarchic policy.
The essence is that there is no "left vs right" and equivocation isn't an argument, it's a fallacy, so then it betrays what you used the term for, or how people vote, as if anarchy could be voted is a moot point, because anarchy isn't policy. To argue that government is proven by broken skulls in a museum and call anarchy tribal government resolves that you are a braindead zombie who hasn't bothered to look into what's escaping his mouth.