I keep seeing posts in the political tags saying how they do not understand how it is possible without force, and then going on to promote their (false) version of "anarchy."
I'm here to clear this up.

Despite what you may think, no force is required, as yes communism/collectivism can be done out of your own free will and rationally so.
You see, you do not need to participate in the society we will create. You can live on your land, that you use, and call it your private property. It's just you may not get trade routes, trading partners, or resources from us, as the society may, as the competition, refuse to help you.
You can also go off and live in the open-territories where nobody has claim, wherever there's open land in the boundaries of the anarchist territories, and attempt to live out there, and even build a community.
You can also go off to the presumed numerous capitalist-controlled areas, where the people decided to try capitalism again, and work your way up there.

The thing is, if you violate the NAP we will most likely retaliate as a community against you. This is not force to make you submit to collectivism, but rather us not bowing down to your rule. We are anarchists, not state-less capitalists.
So in other words, you cannot simply claim land you are not using or restrict the free movement of individuals, outside capitalist-controlled zones, as those areas are not your property, but the communities.

You may be saying "Well that's unfair, you will just blockade me and keep me in isolation(!)" that is up to the community. That's capitalism though, and that's the world you want. The world "anarcho"-capitalism would bring; huge monopolies and essentially mini-states to crush and suffocate anyone who doesn't submit, and well I won't go into it, but slavery.
You're the small guy, that's all, and we're the big guy. That's not violence. That's capitalism.

But hey, what about the violence you will use to achieve it?

Violence to smash to state =/= Violence in Collectivism
If the community comes together and decides to be capitalist, it can be capitalist and the collectivists can either flee and sell the land, or they can operate as one entity therein, just as you can in ours.

However the thing is, when the government falls, rich people (often) have violated the NAP in this new system, and thus their property may be seized or destroyed, as it was thieved from the workers, at least in the collectivist controlled areas.
This is not violence however, but a returning of property in which was stolen, much like a slave owner being lynched and his property being ruled by the slaves. The difference is instead of him dying he'd be kicked out of the community (most likely) or sentenced to what the community deemed fit, which may simply be starting off at the bottom and having no luxuries or nice things till he contributes real value.

Being realistic, we both need violence to overthrow the state and the corporates anyhow, and for whatever reason you are not willing to do the work.
Because of this, when we are successful it will be grim reality as our foot-soldiers will far outnumber yours, and your communities will be dwarfed by ours as a result.

Wait, so how is it voluntary?

You're either part of it or you aren't. It's that simple. If you don't want in, you can piss off and face our mega-capitalist power thanks to no market controls and a larger share/sphere than you'll ever have.

---

This post is a response to @profitgenerator and his post "Is left wing libertarianism viable" amongst others.

In a later post I will likely be addressing how it functions, the structure of it, and more, as well as potentially responding to complains here or in other posts that I see (such as the above) against Anarcho-Communism.