Anarchism in Action is Bogus

Here is a commentary by Des McCarron that discusses what the author considers a successful anarchy in Spain in the 1930's.  Here is an excerpt from the article:

The individualists were left to their own devices though the collectives were under no obligation to give them any aid (in practice most did). However they were totally forbidden from employing workers and they lost automatic inheritance rights. Many individualists did eventually go over to the collectives and they were usually won over by example and not forced.

Clearly, the collectives had rules, which included rationing food to members. The members of the collectives were not really free from government. They were still being governed by the rules of the collectives. And the collectives even imposed rules on non-members! How else can it be explained that individuals not in the collectives were forbidden from employing workers and lost inheritance rights and? Shouldn't the so-called anarchy of the time have allowed them to do pay others for work done and to pass on their possessions to their children? Even the most oppressive societies in the world today generally allow their citizens to hire others and to pass on possessions to their children. 

It wasn't anarchy. It was organized. Some people made rules, others followed them. The anarchy label being applied to that is purely propaganda.