I'm all for greater autonomy and social mobility, but my trusty dictionary contains the following definitions:
Anarchy n. total lack of organized control, resulting in disorder or lawlessness; this disorder.
Anarchist n. person who believes that government is undesirable and should be abolished.
Those are dictionary definitions, not my own interpretation. In my opinion, neither of those two mindsets offer a viable solution for a peaceful or "free" society. There always needs to be a degree of governance, and well-qualified individuals who have been appointed to make decisions on behalf of the masses.
I'm sure when the UK riots were underway, those who were having their shop windows smashed or their homes burned weren't thinking "Oh good, the anarchists are here! Now we can have greater freedom from rules, and the general populace (rather than the ruling class) can have a say in how our society is run!"
I'm not saying I'm against what "anonymous" purports to stand for, but I think the constant depictions of rioting and acts of violence against authority figures in their video could easily be misinterpreted as a "call to arms".