arguing against pro-state revolutions - and seriously, has there ever been one that is not statist and "political"? - is not the same as insisting that only anarchistic revolutions are possible. many anti-state communists, and maybe even anti-state capitalists, surely desire revolution of some sort; and neither of them are anarchist. i am really unclear on what your point is.
i find it interesting that no matter how much folks here try to answer your questions and engage you to try to understand what you are really asking/talking about, your responses seem preformed, rigid and ideological.
obviously, many here do not fit into your preconceived notions of anarchy (much less your political spectrum/dichotomy). although you have alluded to being interested in differing ideas, you seem incapable of engaging with them; you merely dismiss those you disagree with, often with definitive statements. if you are not interested in answers that don't align with your preconceived notions, why ask the questions?