>>/39461/
>>/39462/
While not specifically anarchism, the idea of communities without states isn't new. So the anarchist label and political ethos is modern, but as a descriptor it could be valid.
Meanwhile communism is too specific of a term to apply, especially with the idea of the progression for modes of production, which places itself firmly in the future.
It just gets slapped unto anything that had a planned economy, or supported welfare, even if it predates modern industry. Similar to the Jesus example, I've heard the of the Tawantinsuyu being called communistic despite having been an openly hierarchical state.