Erm... yes it does.
Anarchism does not equal chaos, it is not the absence of a system at all. It is merely doing away with one aspect of the system: the concept of wielding power over another.
That doesn't mean giving the ability to use power to everybody, it means giving it to NOBODY, and having systems and mechanisms to ensure that nobody CAN exercise power over anybody.
Anarchism isn't an absence of laws and rights, or even of law and rights enforcement, it's merely a system for passing laws, establishing rights and enforcing those without any individual wielding power over another.
You still have courts, you still have appeals. You still have punishment for crimes.
It's not by any means the absence of social order, it is merely the absence of government and authority.
In an anarchist state, for example, you could still have a police service but instead of answering to politicians - they would report directly to the electorate that appointed them.
In such a system the kind of thing that just happened in Fergusson would, theoretically, be impossible since the people who are now protesting in the street would be capable of - themselves, arranging to have the entire local police force fired and replaced.
Many anarchist systems DO have elected officials who speak on behalf of small communities in larger regional forums (which can in turn send delegates to larger national forums etc. etc.) but unlike in a republic they hold no power, and have no decision making position on those forums - they are there solely to represent the views ALREADY VOTED ON in the communities they represent and can be instantaneously recalled at any time if their community felt they even slightly misrepresented them.
These ideas, however, predate modern communications technology -such representatives really wouldn't serve any purpose at all today.
Most people don't realize this but history is full of successful anarchist societies that did not turn out as you predict. The biggest was the Roman republic. Yes Rome was not a republic as YOU know the concept, the Republic of Rome was, in fact, an anarchist society. Why ? Because they practised direct democracy - which is literally the sole requirement to be an anarchism.
That is also why there are as many visions of anarchist societies as there are and have ever been anarchists - because so little is set in stone, everything else is up for debate, up for adjustment - meant ot be scientifically investigated and changed whenever a better idea comes along.