Anarcho-Tyranny is inherently impossible, like a square circle. Anarchy per definition is the abscence of the state and thereby of tyranny.

What most people mean when they say "anarchy" is actually "anomy", which is the abscence of rules.

There can be rules without rulers, so anarchy =/= anomy.

Using inaccurate wordings like that point to inconsistencies in someones worldview, or to malintent. Notice that Fuentes is not condemning the concept of the state inherently.

Maybe well meant, but definitely a distraction.