
I’ve been working on reading through it but I’ve been kinda busy lately and it’s not the easiest read. It comes into conflict with a lot of the other things I’m reading right now. I have some critiques of it too, personally my main critique is of the way it centers European countries as « civilized » countries and the only ones worthy in considering in theoretical analysis, which tbh is a problem you find in all areas of science. I think if one thing can be agreed upon everywhere is that « the master’s tools cannot take apart the master’s house » gradual change within the political system will never be fundamental change or revolutionary. It’s not bad though, certainly important to read. I have some other thoughts and questions but those may be worth bringing up when I actually finish the book.

Hm. I think for themes maybe things like Leftist Speculative Fiction or Historical Fiction or Fiction by Indigenous Authors for instance. And I’m sure there’s better and more specific ideas but those are mine.

I think fiction could also work. Fiction that explores certain themes or is by certain authors for example.

I haven’t read much this year but I really enjoyed Blood Child and other short stories by Octavia E Butler.

Sorry, I realize this comment is about a year old. I get your concerns and I've certainly heard them before although I wouldn't consider myself educated enough to thoroughly debunk or really debunk at all the claims you have. Instead, I'd like you to consider the idea of Anarchist praxis as community building. I think to me this is what brings it from completely unfeasible to a workable ideology. Or maybe community building is the wrong word but I think including ideas of mutual aid and community care and support in your analysis is a good first step in understanding how Anarchism could possibly be achievable. I don't think Anarchism can necessarily be done all at once but I do think it can be done by you and by me. Sure you cannot inflict your will on another but you can do what you can to be there for them in times of crisis, to help them heal, to realize that you don't need punishment to build a better society. I'm not sure exactly how to word this but I think a good first step, in general, is questioning the necessity of punitive justice and looking for solutions beyond those we have been given.
I think also what turns me off of Authoritarian Communism is the denial of real atrocities. I am not saying Communism Bad as the Right tends to do and I'm definitely not here to make the argument that Communism is worse than Capitalism or that the Communism that we have seen in States is the Communism that Communists identify. I am simply saying there have been under communist regimes atrocities committed against indigenous and other marginalized people and that trying to cover that up or make it sound less bad or dismiss it all as CIA propaganda whether or not it actually is is not something I want to do.
My final not really point more so much as thought is validating indigenous societies. There have in the past been many a Stateless peoples and the idea that their societies were less complex or that the transition from Stateless to State to is one of complexity I think is false. Also, I really don't want to continue the legacy of imposing States upon indigenous peoples who never consented to being governed.
This isn't the most coherent or well-cited analysis but I hope it offers some useful ideas when it comes to considering Anarchism as an ideology that you can take in good faith.

I’ve personally been really enjoying « Worshipping Power » by Peter Gelderloos. You can find it here
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/libra....

Hi! I'm Five. I'm an Engineering student in the US state of Missouri. I use they/xe/he pronouns. I'd identify myself as an Anarchist who thinks that there is no liberation without decolonization. One of my favorite books of all time is
Homegoing. Recently I've been reading
Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents and "Freedom of the Land: a Critical Pedagogy of Peace" by Jevne Mohr.