i don't really get "anarchism" and "communism", at least certainly not with how it's been conveyed to me.
the former, as a surface-level definition, seeks to abolish forms of government. i...don't mind government? i actually find government to be quite useful- i just want government to suck less, sometimes a lot less. i don't believe this is a mutual exclusivity problem. most sucky governments i'm aware of tend to suck due to flaws of capitalism, which i'd happily swap for an alternative. i think taxes are good, laws are good, and bodies which oversee these are good. what's bad is when the roles of the bodies are not kept in check, which i don't feel anarchy solves beyond saying "fck it, just get rid of it"
the latter...well i've actually never had it consistently explained to me. the overarching theme is that the community shares equal ownership of its resources, but this once again kinda does away with government in order to maintain power balance. the implementations of communism i've been pitched have all been quite inconsistent and, in my opinion, quite weak under scrutiny.
overall, i feel like neither of these political stances actually convey anything that holds up against basic criticism. as someone who wants to see some real, tangible change for the better, i find this a touch unsettling.