Collectivism and communism fall under the democratization camp. In an intro to anarchism, I didn't think it was the appropriate place to go into great detail on specifics like collectivism vs. communism vs. mutualism vs. libertarian municipalism, etc. If you look at the names I listed under the "democratization camp," they're mostly communists. I did touch briefly on syndicalism and collectivizing industry though. I was trying to briefly outline general trends rather than get into great detail. The communist anarchists advocate direct democracy and confederation. I was concerned with democratization vs. privatization as ways of achieving anarchy. Within the democratization camp, there are several different economic perspectives. To cover them all in detail would have been beyond the scope of this essay. My real focus was "how do you replace the necessary functions of the State, like preventing crimes or holding criminals accountable?" Communism only has a very indirect relation to that question. For the most part, the democratic anarchists (whether communist, collectivist, or otherwise) are in agreement about democracy and confederation.

I got a similar comment from a Facebook friend. But I remain satisfied with the post as it is. And I don't want to get into the topic of communism without going into detail on the question of property itself. That will be the topic of my next post, where I intend to analyze Proudhon's critique of property (perhaps with a little Engels thrown in) and then go into possible alternative arrangements (e.g. usufructuary property, State-ownership, Georgism, municipal socialism, collectivism, full communism, distributism/mutualism, etc.). Trust me, communism is on my list of topics to talk about, but this post didn't seem like the right place.