Some people have responded to this thread by saying that if this is true then anarchists advocate a dictatorship of the proletariat in Marx's technical sense of the self-rule of the working class. This is correct. Now re-think everything you thought you knew about anarchism. https://twitter.com/anarchopac/status/1274417940062969859

The anarchist objection to the dictatorship of the proletariat as advocated by really existing Marxist parties was that it would result in the rule of a party leadership over the working class. This means they critiqued it for not being the actual self-rule of workers.

Anarchists advocated federations of workplace/community assemblies + militias because they thought they would enable the self-rule of the working class. In other words they rejected a centralised top down model of the dictatorship of the proletariat in favour of a horizontal one.

Given this the debate between anarchists and Marxists can be re-framed as a debate about how to establish/organise the self-rule of the working classes in order to actually achieve this goal. Historically Marxists were in favour of seizing the existing state and transforming it.

As Engels wrote to Bernstein in 1884 (MECW 47, p74)

Anarchists, in comparison, were in favour of totally abolishing the existing state in favour of institutions of self-management (workplace/community assemblies) which the working class had developed independently during the preceding period of class struggle eg trade unions.

This position would later be adopted by council communists who were Marxists that sought to abolish the existing state in favour of a totally new workers state (as they defined the term) constituted through workers councils created and self-managed by the workers themselves.