First, if the collection of things described by Agosta became “hegemonic” in the sense of being the world’s largest collection of political philosophies, what would it look like. We already have a test model that is Christianity, which is the world’s largest collection of religions with multiple major traditions, many more minor traditions, many many more splinters, sects, cults, offshoots, apostates, etc. And Christianity still has to share space in the world with Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. Anarchism would be the same way with as many types of anarchist communities, tendencies, etc as there are religions, music/youth subcultures, types of restaurants, Facebook friend groups, etc. Every kind of anarcho-hyphen imaginable would develop (anarcho-Baathism, anarcho-zoophiles, etc). And anarchists would still have to share space with liberals, conservatives, socialists, communists, fascists, religionists, etc.

Second, what might the intermediary stages look like? We already have a clue based on trends research. Lifestyle migration (for example, Bishop’s “Big Sort”), “sanctuary” enclaves for all kinds of things otherwise under attack by states (pro/anti-abortion, gun nuts, drug users, illegals, Moscow Idaho, CHAZ, the “women only” village in African, many other examples), the creation of startup societies (micronations, free cities, eco-villages, communes, SEZs, intentional communities), and formal secession by smaller units from larger units (Brexit style exitarianism, for instance), or something like the trucker strike at present, or a general labor strike of the kind envisioned by syndicalists, or massive civil disobedience campaigns like Gandhi). This is the way forward for anarchists based on empirical evidence.

What I have outlined here transcends all the differences between anarchists: an-coms/an-caps, an-prims/an-transhumanists, pacifists/insurrectionists, Tolstoyans/Bakuninists, NAs/Antifa, etc.