I've always wondered about this. If anarchy then who is managing the redistribution of resources?
Proponents would say that participants are voluntarily doing so for themselves.
Discussion
But communism isn't just about redistribution of resources. It is about public (state) ownership of the means of production. That's not possible without government.
Not my place to defend it as I don't understand how it would truly work. But, a proponent would say you're defining "authoritarian communism", whereas their anarchist communism would have no ruler, and rather people would collectively own their production and resources.
I can understand this on a micro scale e.g. a single family household that shares everything. I can also understand it on basis of some magic hypothetical future where there is so much abundance that ownership of anything ceases to yield any benefits.
But yes, otherwise confusing