Communism is another idea of social organisation where the community as a whole owns all the property, rather than each individual themselves. The problem here is that this community is likely run by a group of representatives, so it is essentially the government owning and controlling the allocation of resources.
This is historically how it has been expressed in places like the Soviet Union and Maoist China. As a result, Azadism views this as a complete erosion of human freedom, since everything would have to go through the state in order to be approved. Azadism instead gives each individual their own personal freedom over their property. If people want to organise themselves in a Communist fashion, then even under Azadism they are free to do so as long as admission into and departure from these communities are unrestricted. In other words, as long as all participating are doing so voluntarily, then communes and individual non-state entities are free to exist under Azadism.
Karl Marx's original ideas however are at odds with many of the principles on which Azadism stands on, hence why similar to Socialism, it should not be implemented at a national level. A future post may go into the exact differences, as well as the '10 planks' he outlined in his manifesto.
Update: Posts critiquing Marx’s 10 Planks:
Also recommend Jordan Peterson's excellent critique of the Communist Manifesto here: