Possible, sure. But you need something to motivate people to organize into complex relationships in order to produce advanced goods and services. Socialism in an extreme form is essentially communism – most socialist countries fall far short of that mark, in that they tend to provide a system of social capitalism. Workers are taxed heavily for social support programs, but there are still wide discrepancies between what people earn for their labour based on occupation. And their personal wealth, can be spent at their discretion.

Anarchism, to my recollection at least, was only tried as a form of government in Spain, around the time of the world wars. In essence, the structure of that govt was largely kinda like a labour-union run government. So like the road/maintenance workers had a rep in govt, because they’d generally follow his lead – and actions tended to need to be done via consensus as you couldn’t ‘coerce’ labourers to work for higher compensation etc. In order to have a say in how things went, you essentially had to be one of the working people – while that approach arguably gets rid of the land-owner class, it also gets rid of things like senior votes, unemployed votes and disabled person votes. That govt was also very short lived, as they couldn’t agree to get anything done to defend their country, as Germany strolled in to capture their steel mfg etc. I think Anarchism works in a small scale community, but it’s not something that works at scale – same thing with the more extreme forms of socialism.