This should probably be moved to the Politics forum more than anything else, but there's several pages of posts here that I can't do that with.
But to strip it down to it's very core:
No. It would not be far far far far right, because as I said above, we don't really have left-wing parties in the United States, and so almost every bit of familiarity we have with any sort of libertarian politics is with what are generally extreme right views.
In a very, very general sense, anarcho-syndicalism posits that the state as it exists now serves only one purpose -- the protection of private property, to the privilege of the very, very few. This focuses particularly on capital goods, aka "the means of production" for goods and services. The other two kinds of producer goods are land and labor. The latter is especially important in anarcho-syndicalism because it essentially and fundamentally connects economic activity with political activity and as much direct action on behalf of labor (aka, workers) wherever possible.
The classic example of this is the worker's union. Anarcho-syndicalism is very, very, very pro-union and sees the ideal economic state as one where a series of union-managed workplaces send delegates up the chain in increasingly high-level structures until you reach the federation level. Here's a handy-dandy chart I stole from Wikipedia.
Long story short, it posits that the people closest to an issue are the ones that know it best and should have the greatest say over how it's managed and how resources are allocated.
I should note that anarcho-syndicalism is extremely focused on labor to the exclusion of almost all else, though, so if you're interested in broader anarchic movements, you might want to consider green syndicalism (syndicalism + environmentalism) and anarcho-socialism, which quite closely related but includes other concerns like individual freedoms.
