Well. Proudhon, unlike Jacques Derrida, Saul Newman and Michel Foucault was not really connected to a University or something like that. Proudhon was of poor peasant origin and he was mostly a self-educated intellectual and activist.
You say "I guess I'm confused since much of what counts as anarchism is derived FROM academics. And some of them were even french!"
It is clear to me you know very little about the lives of the major thinkers of anarchism. Lets have a brief look at their lives besides the already touched upon Proudhon. Mikhail Bakunin renounced his noble origins and decided to travel around Europe to propagandize about anarchism and participating in every insurrection that erupted. In his travels and many times in jail he produced his writings which were published in the anarchist press, hardly such things will be accepted or acceptable in academic journals. Max Stirner actually failed to gain acceptance to study a Doctorate (Phd) degree in the University of Berlin and had to teach classes at a girl´s school. He died in financial ruin. Errico Malatesta also has a similar lifestyle to that of Bakunin and even less academic credentials. Peter Kropotkin could be said to be an academic since he became in a point a very well respected geographer in Russia. Nevertheless he renounced this life, exiled himself from Russia and lived mainly in Switzerland and England writing for the anarchist press. Emma Goldman also was mostly self taught in his literary and philosophical readings. She didn´t hold a university degree from what i know although she was a well established and popular public speaker. Her publication, "Mother Earth" was not really a "scholarly publication" but an anarchist specific one which nevertheless diverse eclectic issues dealt with.
As far as Post-anarchism, it happens that it is not really that much associated with Hakim Bey, who is not currently connected to university academia as far as i know and who is more or less an independent writer without academic positions. Post-anarchism is mostly associated with the academics Saul Newman and Todd May who work in Universities and from that one can expect with nice academic salaries. I have never heard of them being anytime close to any actual street protest. On the other hand the current most well known anarchist academic besides Noam Chomsky (i know some anarchists think he is not an anarchist), David Graeber, Graeber is actually a very visible personality within Ocuppy Wall St. and he has many writings on actual anarchist activism and strategy unlike Newman and Todd May who mostly deal with the similarities between anarchist theorists and french "post-structuralist" academics such as Michel Foucualt, Gilles Deleuze and Derrida.
So that is what i mean by "carrerism" and "academicism".
Now lets deal with the "AJODA crowd". Bob Black from what i know does hold a PHD degree but the main texts he is known for were read mainly by an anarchist and related audience and you wont really find him mentioned in academic journals and the like. Wolfi Landstreicher is so un-carrerist and un-academic that he writes with a pseudonym which he, on top, decides to change every decade more or less. In the eighties and nineties he went by the pen name "Feral Faun", in the 2000s "Wolfi Landstreicher" and now he apparently writes under the name of "Apio Ludd". John Zerzan is well known to live from babysitting and help from friends.
The issue seems to me is very clear. Not that i declare myself anti-"post-anarchism". I have read some Saul Newman texts and found one or two interesting things on them. It is just that they reflect well their origins and so i didn´t really say they are "bad". i just said they are academicistic and manny times full of complex academic philosophical jargon which i could understand some anarchist not really caring to go find out what they mean.