hm. i think the reason the conceptual framework is so muddled is that, instead of starting with some axioms and building on them the way most ideologies do ("here is my idea of The Good, now let's figure out how to get there" -- the Good can be racial purity or liberation of the working class or minimization of human suffering or appeasing the pod-beings from Alpha Proxima so they stop beaming nightmares about man-carrot vampire hybrids into our brains from their transdimensional portal complex in retrograde orbit around jupiter, it doesn't matter, as long as the actions you choose to undertake are concordant with achieving that Good), anarchist thinking is mostly comprised of uncoordinated, frantic attempts to rationalize their beliefs, to convince themselves that the means they fixate upon (destroying all hierarchies and eliminating coercion as a social technology) are both sustainable and concordant with their individual values (and because anarchists have such wildly varying values, their apologetics can be wildly contradictory). it's more like religion than ideology that way. and i mean every every ideology has its apologists, but most have at least a handful of actual theorists as well.