Being "lead" isn't the same as being bossed around. As long as the leader doesn't claim some authority over the other members, it can still be "anarchist" leadership.

When I was in college, our floor's resident anarchist ran for (and won) a seat on student council. We found it rather entertaining.

This argument is fallacious.

Would you expect conservatives in 1970s britain to avoid using gas, electricity, trains, the telephone and so on, because they were publicly owned?

Do you expect socialists in modern america not to ever use commercial businesses?

Avoid using? No. Avoid running for office on a "I'd like to run the nationalized train system once I get elected" platform? Yes.

Surely the anarchist would have dismantled the power structure and put some kind of heterarchical system in its place, assuming he had the power to do so. If he was just planning to sit in his special chair and laugh it up, then yes, that is ridiculous.

If one is promoting a system radically different to the status quo, one inevitably has to compromise to some extent to make progress, unless you're planning a violent coup or something.

Wow, did he even try to justify it? Maybe he's destroying the system from the inside? http://abstrusegoose.com/456 :)