Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.
Welcome to Anarchy101 Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers about anarchism, from anarchists.

Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.


–4 votes
So far I've got Emma Goldman and Noam Chomsky.
Come on, I know there's some bibliophiles out there..
by (730 points)

2 Answers

+3 votes
I like Peter Gelderloos' "Anarchy Works" and "How Non-Violence Protects the State", Colin Ward's "Anarchy In Action", Peter Kropotkin's "Mutual Aid", Kevin Tucker's "Species Traitor IV" and "For Wildness and Anarchy", Jason Godesky's "Thirty Theses", Uri Gordon's "Anarchy Alive!", CrimethInc's "Work", Jean Liedloff's "The Continuum Concept", Derrick Jensen's "Endgame" and "What We Leave Behind", Kristian William's "Our Enemies In Blue", the massive "An Anarchist FAQ", stuff that Bob Black wrote, and a bunch of others.

Do you have a particular focus?
by (8.9k points)
Practical application. Epistemology. How to understand it. How to live it.
jay, i appreciate that you were honest about being a capitalist. while i get that @caps define capitalism very differently from everyone else in the universe (little joke there), this site doesn't consider @caps to be anarchists.

you are welcome to ask questions, but please don't answer any.


edited to be more clear.
Wow okay then. Moving along to a more open minded forum.
I find it nothing short of hilarious when "anarcho"-capitalists talk shit about actual anarchists defending our communities, spaces, and ideals from co-optation by capitalists. It is no different than if some "anarcho"-nationalists started posting here. Our ideals and your ideals are not compatible.
I would have waited for Jay to define his term, but meh.
it's true. it might have been nice to have a contained and respectful conversation... in my experience the conversations don't stay contained, and i find it more respectful to be up front from the start. (or just easier?)
if i'd known he was going to just leave maybe i would've done something different.
jay, the right forum for you is a neoliberal right wing forum. i think in the USA there is something called the Libertarian Party
I don't know who Jay is, and frankly don't give a shit.  Getting back to the post, Derrik Jensen-by his own admission-is not an Anarchist, and while my opinions about him have changed drastically, I do  think End Game was a good critique of civilization. That said, there are better books out there critiquing capitalism that are not by anarchists.
I think Endgame is a great critique and in no way incompatible with anarchism, despite Jensen's beliefs outside the book and in subsequent books. The premises are definitely pretty green anarchist, as are a lot of the references explicitly in that book. I'm increasingly critical of a lot of his behaviors and recent belief changes and opportunism though.

Jay is an "anarcho-"capitalist troll. He's ranked #6 by site usage, but asked only 2 questions and given 0 answers, and given 417 down votes.
re: jay's lack of answers, not fair to judge him for that since i've changed any answers he gave to comments. although at this point i can't remember how many were him and how many were RBBF.
+3 votes
Based upon your elaboration for practical application and epistemology, I might suggest (and some of this overlaps with Autumn Leaf Cascade):

Practical Application:
*Colin Ward - his stuff is pretty practical, if a bit friendlier towards civilization and the left than I am. In particular "Anarchy in Action."
*Peter Gelderloos, "Anarchy Works" & "Consensus" - The first another example of anarchy in action (similar to Ward's book), the latter an easy to digest and apply guide to consensus decision making.
*Crinethinc. "Expect Resistance" - while largely fictional, provides some good narrative of what anarchist action (and coming to anarchist thought) might look like.
*Uri Gordon "Anarchy Alive" - actually is a nice fusion of theory and action.
*Alexander Berkman "Prison Memoirs of an Anarchist" - This is not, strictly thinking, practical application, but Berkman's account of first his assassination attempt against Henry C. Frick and his subsequent imprisonment is one of the very best narratives of a person living their life according to anarchist principles and coming to understand them on a much deeper level.
*Paul Avrich "Anarchist Voices" - similar to "Prison Memoirs" this collection of narratives provides windows into the lives of anarchist sand those who knew them. It is much more personal and warm than many books that are straight up theory.

*Daniel Guerin, "No Gods, No Masters" & "Anarchism" - NGNM is a collection of writing by some of the "important" thinkers of the classic anarchist era (ending around the time of the Spanish Revolution). Anarchism is a detailed analysis of the philosophy, along with some case studies, as I recall (it's been years since I read it!).
*Bob Black, "Anarchy After Leftism" - While I hesitate to suggest this book (and I encourage you to get it free from, it actually does a good job of fleshing out the split between left and post-left anarchists using the framework of a book I've never read (Bookchin's "Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism? An Unbridgeable Chasm").
*Green Anarchy "Back to Basics" series - covers the basics of anarcho-primitivist/anti-civ thought. Vol 1, "Why Civilization?" outlines a green anarchist critique of civilization. Vol 2 "The Problem of the Left," examines exactly that. Vol 3, "Rewilding" is a look at the concept of reconnecting with our more primal selves (this is actually my lest favorite of the series, though many are crazy for it). Vol 4 "What Is Green Anarchy?" lays out the anarcho-primitivist alternative.
* Peter Kropotkin "Mutual Aid" is a great (but dated) basis for understanding the anarchist perspective on, well, mutual aid.
*L. Susan Brown "The Politics of Individualism" - Is just something that anarchists should read. At times it reads like a thesis paper (it was), but the concept that Brown lays out of an "existential individualism" as opposed to the commonly used definition (what she terms "instrumental individualism"). This one is a game changer.

I am sure I could think of more, but instead of continuing to list things, I would again plug

(edited for two typos. I'm sure more to be found...)
by (22.1k points)
edited by