: If it's such a good question then answer it. First, if you need to search the entire world and find Pygmies as your positive true example of collectivist thought, I suggest you are missing a few points.: 1. Is there no downside to the Pygmie culture?
To one who views the freedom of the commoners as an issue of annoyance, no. The Pygmies are ignorant and primitive. They have little in the way of distractions. Easy to deal with, they make the perfect pets. Which is, in fact, the whole point of communism in the first place.
: 2. Are you apprised of all the facts in the matter of Pygmie culture?
That isn't particularly important. It certainly wasn't to Rousseau. The point is not the lifestyle of the Pygmies, but rather the elegant metaphor they make. See? If you had nothing, you'd be better off. Doesn't the socialist system leave nothing for the commoners? Well then.
: 3. Is there no upside to capitalism when compared to Pygmie culture?
Unfortunately, there is. Thus, the necessity for 'armed struggle'.
: 4. Can the Pygmie culture be sustainable if projected to cover the entire planet?
Very easily. That's the point. (Incidentally, there is a means by which such a 'culture' might be had fairly quickly worldwide. It is called "Global Thermonuclear War". A major plague might be helpful as well, modern medical science nonwithstanding. I believe some of the ecological groups actually advocate something similar)
: 5. Do you support any particular practical plan to impose Pygmie values upon me?
I believe this attempt is a peaceful one. The hope is that, armed struggle being prohibitively expensive, guile and trickery might win you over. This is what is known as the 'prop' part of 'agit-prop'.
: Secondly, answer my question. What happens when an anarchist steps out of line. Do you really assume that collectivist systems solve crime problems?
Simple. If the anarchist is amongst the rank-and-file, he is dealt with harshly, in a way concurrent with his crime against the people. If it is one of the Anarchistic Elite, however, the act is done in accordance with the needs of the people. What counter-revolutioary hoodlum might be questioning it? (These were the documented responses from the anarchist-statist 'movements' of revolutionary Catalonia and the Ukraine)
To be fair, Nikail does salt his thoughts with a far greater attention to the facts than most. And, although I don't think that a low crime rate is the best selling point for a social system (I've heard that Vlad the Impaler ran a fairly tight ship in Hungary, back in the day), I won't discount what he has to say out of hand. Coming from a committed reactionary such as myself, that is quite an achievement on his part.
