Have you seen Michael Malice's The Anarchist Handbook collecting assorted essays from various schools of anarchism? It's a pretty diverse collection. On a broader view, I do see merit in Bakunin, Proudhon, De Cleyre, Goldman, etc. but I recoil instinctively from anyone who claims to be an anarchist today but wants to impose their political and economic preferences.
Using statist means cannot achieve anarchist ends as far as I can tell, and no community built on a foundation other than voluntary consent can stand. The market of voluntary exchanges and interactions does not preclude voluntary communes, syndicalist co-ops, mutual aid societies, and other systems of interaction.
The typical left anarchist I encounter online has a strawman idea of markets as a corporate hellhole while turning a blind eye to all arguments pointing out the corruption political power injects even as they claim Stalinism or Maoism can't be used to discredit communism because it was a political hierarchy.