What are your two favorite ice flavours ?
Let's imagine that it's vanilla and chocolate (oh ! very unconventional).
Let's say that you would never be able to live without these two flavors.
Which flavour do you prefere ? ;-)
Better. You are contaminated with two deadly diseases.
Treatments exist to save you. But you can only afford one :
Which cure do you prefere ?
Seriously, I could still define myself as an anarchist communist (or a communist anarchist) because I really think, I hardly believe that a state without capitalism is either reactionnary either impossible (USSR was analysed by various radical tendencies as a state capitalism). And I'm also conviced with the idea that capitalism without state is either war, chaos, the reinforcement of all oppressions, either impossible.
to quote Bakounin, even I would replace the term "socialism" by "communism" :
"We are convinced that freedom without Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality."
Or to say it with the words of Carlo Cafiero :
"Our revolutionary ideal is very simple, as may be seen: it consists, like that of all our forerunners, of these two terms, Liberty and Equality. Only there is one little difference. Learning from the tricks which the reactionaries of all times have played with liberty and equality, we have decided to put next to these two terms the expression of their precise value. These two precious coins have been forged so often that we now want to know all about them and to measure their precise value.
We therefore place next to these two terms, liberty and equality, two equivalents whose clear meaning cannot allow of any ambiguity, and we say: ‘We want Liberty, that is to say Anarchy, and Equality, that is to say Communism.’ "
But more than this, defining yourself as an anarcho-communist or not, I'm totally conviced that you can't abolish the bourgeoisie without abolishing the state as the modern state was created by and for the bourgeoisie, and it needs a state to defend its interests, its wealth and its power. So the state protect the bourgeoisie. Infact, I said that capitalism without state would be war and chaos, but I should have precise that it's already the case. In fact, a bourgeoisie (or any other dominant class) without a state would fight of all its forces to recreate one or would just be defeated in the social war / class war. That situation happened many times in recent or older history.