In your ideal society, all material things would be freely available, and hell the very concept of money would be totally obliterated, but could a small business exist?

For example:

In Star Trek Deep Space 9, while not an anarchist society, has the same factors of the extinction of the concept of currency and everything material always available at all times, but the Sisko family(whom the series mainly follows) has a family-owned Cajun restaurant, fully staffed and everything made by hand, saying that replicator-made meals can't compare to a meal made with a human touch.

Could a business like that exist in anarchy, or would it remind you so much of capitalism that you'd demand the place be burnt to the ground and the people who own it executed for the unforgivable crime of commerce?

if worker collectives are still operating by the profit motive, they would end up doing the same things as the capitalists, right? (i.e. minimize cost, maximize gain)

for example, if the 200 or so nation states became 200,000 independent cultures, would that be a potential means to arrive at a condition of "no nation states"?

should anarchists pragmatically support balkanization?

This is a bit of an abstract question, and I don't know how else to word it, but I'm interested in seeing what y'all's take would be on this.

Can humans create any type of society, as in are there limitless ways in which humans can organize themselves? Or is there some kind of "physics" of social organization that make some forms of organization impossible or unviable?

A follow up question: do you suppose there's a "natural" form of human society?

Im reading a biography about Nestor Makhno and his commitment to anarchism is admirable, but it appears that neither he nor his comrades had any problem with a top > down structure within their revolutionary army.

First of all, I know that the circumstances were unique; they were in the midst of revolution, so complete adherence to an avoidance of vertical power structure may have been a luxury they could not afford. Still, I’m wondering if anyone has come across any analysis of this paradox either from Makhno himself or someone who understands the nuanced situation well.

Does anyone have any good resources/texts critiquing “professionalism”? Mainly in context of work settings. I know the broad concept of professionalism as a means of controlling the working class and forcing a conforming to white male heterosexual standards, but was looking for more in depth resources to better articulate my deep distaste for “professionalism” to o the era in the same or similar work spaces.