GenZedong

Anarchists fundamentally accept this (even if they don't admit it sometimes because they are liberals cosplaying as anarchists/leftists). Their argument is that communist (in their mind, Stalinist) states replace capitalist oppression.

They even argue for their anarchist society enforcing revolutionary change through citizens organizing to stop reactive elements or set down rules on how the local community will operate, ie a form of civil oppression.

Their idea is still bollocks, since they think that replacing "communist state oppression" with "anarchist civil society oppression" is morally different. The only real difference is that one of these oppressions is organized and capable of defending the revolution and achieving communism, while the other isn't.

This framing is leading me towards a much more succinct and simultaneously deep critique of anarchism which is approximately that it replaces class struggle some other struggle.

Anarchists have plenty of criticisms for the oppressive hierarchies in civil society -- it's really in conversations with communists where they focus heavily on the state, since that's where anarchists and communists have their main point of disagreement.

Libertarians are the weirdos who need this observation.