Here is the thing about anarchism. Often slated as anti-intellectual, or lacking a rigorous account of political economy, anarchism isn’t essentially about the theorisation of abstractions but the reflection on and elaboration of a diversity of tactics. Ideological discontinuities among anarchists more often than not, although not at all times, comes down to a disagreement over tactics and the deployment of forms. This even counts for the debates around building specific assemblages. Looking at the accelerationist manifesto, I’m sure you could read a large swathe of it as if it were written by a federalist anarchist (and perhaps this is why Mark Fisher exempts the UK’s Solidarity Federation from his critique of neoanarchism, and why the Anarchist Federation should also be considered exempt).
interesting have they been doing something akin to case-studies to compare & contrast differing attempts that they have made at re-assembling?
Here is the thing about anarchism. Often slated as anti-intellectual, or lacking a rigorous account of political economy, anarchism isn’t essentially about the theorisation of abstractions but the reflection on and elaboration of a diversity of tactics. Ideological discontinuities among anarchists more often than not, although not at all times, comes down to a disagreement over tactics and the deployment of forms. This even counts for the debates around building specific assemblages. Looking at the accelerationist manifesto, I’m sure you could read a large swathe of it as if it were written by a federalist anarchist (and perhaps this is why Mark Fisher exempts the UK’s Solidarity Federation from his critique of neoanarchism, and why the Anarchist Federation should also be considered exempt).
interesting have they been doing something akin to case-studies to compare & contrast differing attempts that they have made at re-assembling?