First, its not about how we would do things, its about how we do do things. Anarchism is now. So the practices we live now (at least, those who are any good at it), that's what it is. And those practices are the lived ethic of a joyous liberating calculated attack on authority as best decided by our contexts.
Your framing assumes some kind of future, with the "how would we", implying something like, "how would we" do this after the revolution. But there is no after the revolution for anarchists, and if groups like religious authoritarians existed even a minimal idea of a revolution would not have been achieved.
Any anarchist who thinks that 'revolution' is any shorter than a multigenerational project has no idea the depth that authority has penetrated our societies and our minds.

We have several forums about this here in raddle. f/Accountability, f/Abuse, f/Pedagogies, f/Violence. There are more.

There's too much to say, because in a general way, this is the core question of anarchy.

But I'll leave it here, pointing again to one of my favourite anarchist pieces about accountability - which will touch on your points of "the far right" and "captalists" and others - Against the Logic of The Guillotine. (which is also at the top of the list of best anarcho-reads of the last year, which people should feel welcome to add to if they have good suggestions)