It seems the rabbit hole goes deeper; although these two aim for similar goals, that is, for the removal of the state, they're yet different; anarchists, as I have learned, seek for the removal of all hierarchies, whereas Libertarians stop at there being no (or a tiny) state, implying business would still have leaders; it would seem, then, anarchists take the idea one step further, where businesses do not necessarily have bosses, or bosses of bosses, but people as complete equals; some even claim there cannot be money, which I find difficult to wrap my mind around, for money does not necessarily equate capitalism.
Is Libertarianism only a stepping stone to anarchy, or are they two completely different ideologies with only a similar goal? Does leadership imply hierarchy? Are hierarchies implicitly involuntary? Can business thrive without hierarchy? And what would be the common reaction, having a world of pure anarchy, to people who believe hierarchies are preferable to complete equality?
There is some confusion here. Are you saying that Social Libertarianism is separate from Libertarian socialism? The latter is non-hierarchical, as is anarchism. My understanding has always been that it loosely encompasses most/all forms of anarchism.