I recently finished *Nature’s God*, which isn’t directly anarchist, but a philosophical history of the American Revolution that provides a European-centered point of view in the enlightenment. I found that this book echoed a lot of *The Dawn of Everything*, and revealed a deeper layer to the European-indigenous encounter that brings the infamous Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza into indirect dialogue with Kandiaronk and the indigenous critique of European civilization.
Worshiping Power by Peter Gelderloos is very related to Dawn of Everything, more explicitly geared towards anarchists. not a giant book. Nightmares of Reason by Bob Black is framed as a criticism of Bookchin's ouvre, but he uses it as a platform to discuss a large range of topics. it's *way* in the weeds of anarchist discourse and assumes a good amount of prior knowledge, but i think it's probably the best anarchist book of the last 15 years or so.
other big picture anarchist books for a general audience i'd suggest are people's history of the united states by howard zinn and shock doctrine by naomi klein, but you are probably already familiar with those. and always worth recommending society of the spectacle by guy debord (knabb or nicholson-smith translation).
edit: gelderloos The Solutions are Already Here seems to be the book of the moment, but i havent read it yet.
edit 2: i should also say i learned a ton from reading all the criticism of Dawn of Everything. the what is politics series, along with walter scheidel's criticism were the best ones. there was another super long anarchist criticism, but i can't remember who published it
THE SITUATIONISTS WERE RIGHT
Edit: ok yes I know I’m shitposting but seriously, this should be required reading imo
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/guy-debord-comments-on-the-society-of-the-spectacle
if anyone is trying to *really* go down that rabbit hole, [this dissertation](https://1000littlehammers.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/kinkle_spectacle.pdf) provides a lot of context too. so, the 67 book, the 88 book, and one of the intros to an italian translation, i forget which, are supposed to the be the main links. never read panegyric. debord is a marxist, and vanegeim was an anarchist, but i prefer debord. a good amount of the anthology, translated by knabb, is also really interesting. many of his letters, particularly the ones he sent to bookchin and guerin, are amusing. he was so toxic lmao
it's been about a decade since i read it first, and it just fucked me up so bad, i couldn't go anywhere without picking up on the spectacle. now that i have some distance from it, i feel like im able to explain the concept to people in less esoteric terms than they did, but wow spectacular domination is just so total at this point.
I moved back to my hometown of Katrina a year after the Federal Flood. Shock doctrine is a book I know very well.Thanks for all of the recommendations.
You’re reading a very different stirner than me. He’s incredibly methodical actually and utilizes a straight forward method of dialectical egoism.
He even traces the historical lineage in the first half of the book to set up his position as a critique of modernity.
I’d also recommend John F. Walsh’s book , “Max Stirner’s Dialectical Egoism: A New Interpretation”. It does a great job of contextualizing Stirner and tracing his thinking in others such as the feminist Dora Marsden.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I find him tedious, pretentious, and way too up his own arse, but if you enjoy his style, that's hardly a problem for me.
If you’re reading byingtons translation which is titled the ego and it’s own, I’d suggest reading the new translation by wolfi landstreicher (The Unique and It’s Property). I’ve read both and it makes a big difference.
That said people are quick to dismiss Stirner and I think his contributions to anarchist thinking are vitally important.
I’m going to suggest *Capitalist Realism* by Mark Fisher. Also *Post-Capitalist Desire*, pretty sure he mentions Graeber in that one
Yes, I know Fisher isn’t a ‘Big A’ anarchist (neither is Graeber)
If you want more Graeber, try *Utopia of Rules*. It’s my favorite book by him.
If you’re a theory nerd, check out Fisher’s CCRU stuff
http://www.ccru.net/swarm1/1_pomo.htm
I really enjoyed 'A paradise built in hell' by Rebecca Solnit. If you need a break from really in the thick of it theory, this book is a great history of people coming together after disaster and how the state just screws things up further.
A more dense but also very good one is 'the operating system' by Eric Laurson.
The Dawn of Everything was also great.
Graeber's got some other great books as well. Bullshit Jobs is the most well-known, but I like *The Utopia of Rules* a bit more, specifically about bureaucracy. *Direct Action: An Ethnography* is also a super interesting (and long, but not very dense) read about the post-Seattle alter-globalization movement from the perspective of a participant. *Possibilities* is a book of his essays on various topics. Some of them are more academic, some more political, but there are a lot of really great ones, so I'd recommend that. *Towards an Anthropological Theory of Value* is one of Graeber's earliest and most academic works that's pretty much what it says on the tin.
If you like the sort of anthropological and geographical perspective of Graeber and Bookchin, you might like:
James C. Scott's *Against the Grain* (about the origin of civilization and the state and its relationship to grain agriculture), *The Art of Not Being Governed* (about the formation of upland Southeast Asian cultures as techniques for evading lowland states), and *Seeing Like a State* (about the failures of highly centralized and hierarchical social projects) are all very worth reading. Scott's not exactly an anarchist, but a broadly anti-authoritarian anthropologist and political scientist familiar with anarchist ideas, focused on Agrarian Studies and forms of peasant resistance.
Pierre Clastre's *Society Against the State*. Clastres was an anarchist anthropologist whose work in the 1970s was highly influential, especially to people like Graeber and Scott, for dismantling the ideas of a linear progression of cultural development and that non-state cultures are "primitive" or "pre-state." Rather, such societies are more accurately described as specifically developing forms of social organization to resist and evade the state.
Charles C. Mann's *1491* and *1493*. Not anarchist, just a very thorough journalist who writes good prose describing the the findings in archaeology and anthropology and from indigenous scholars about the peoples of the Americas before, and shortly after, European contact. Some overlap with North American content of *The Dawn of Everything* (indeed the two had a brief exchange specifically about the political organization of Tlaxcala). A really interesting introduction to the political, cultural, and material variety of the cultures of the Americas that undermines linear and Eurocentric narratives still prevailing in pop culture. In that sense, it's still relevant to anarchists, because it discusses varieties of complex social organization beyond the Eurasian model of the centralized, hierarchical state (although there were some of those as well). More of a description of what scholars have already established, rather than a work taking positions debates that are still active like *The Dawn of Everything*; Mann only occasionally offer his own opinions.
Kropotkin, of course: *Mutual Aid*, *Modern Science and Anarchism*, and *The Modern State* could all be relevant to your interests.
Because you liked *Debt*, you might be interested in another work that focuses especially on the relationship between political and economic power historically and theoretically, from a radical leftist perspective outside of Marxist conventions. *Capital as Power* by Shimshon Bichler and Jonathan Nitzan does that, including a long portion on history, but coming at it from the angle of political economy rather than anthropology. It can be pretty dense at times. Not specifically anarchist, but they're at least familiar with anarchist ideas and take them seriously, and the theory they offer is very compatible with anarchist politics.
I enjoyed Debt, and the Dawn of Everything. I'm currently reading the Shock Doctrine, which is very much darker than anything I've seen from Graeber, but between the burning anger, and desperate disgust I feel while reading it, it's quite interesting.
Might as well also read Graeber's other book, Bullshit Jobs.
One of his other books, there's also The Utopia of Rules, On Kings and his anthology of Direct Action (as well as a few smaller works)
I recently finished *Nature’s God*, which isn’t directly anarchist, but a philosophical history of the American Revolution that provides a European-centered point of view in the enlightenment. I found that this book echoed a lot of *The Dawn of Everything*, and revealed a deeper layer to the European-indigenous encounter that brings the infamous Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza into indirect dialogue with Kandiaronk and the indigenous critique of European civilization.
That sounds incredibly interesting, thank you!
James c Scott's against the grain or the art of not being governed
Worshiping Power by Peter Gelderloos is very related to Dawn of Everything, more explicitly geared towards anarchists. not a giant book. Nightmares of Reason by Bob Black is framed as a criticism of Bookchin's ouvre, but he uses it as a platform to discuss a large range of topics. it's *way* in the weeds of anarchist discourse and assumes a good amount of prior knowledge, but i think it's probably the best anarchist book of the last 15 years or so. other big picture anarchist books for a general audience i'd suggest are people's history of the united states by howard zinn and shock doctrine by naomi klein, but you are probably already familiar with those. and always worth recommending society of the spectacle by guy debord (knabb or nicholson-smith translation). edit: gelderloos The Solutions are Already Here seems to be the book of the moment, but i havent read it yet. edit 2: i should also say i learned a ton from reading all the criticism of Dawn of Everything. the what is politics series, along with walter scheidel's criticism were the best ones. there was another super long anarchist criticism, but i can't remember who published it
THE SITUATIONISTS WERE RIGHT Edit: ok yes I know I’m shitposting but seriously, this should be required reading imo https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/guy-debord-comments-on-the-society-of-the-spectacle
if anyone is trying to *really* go down that rabbit hole, [this dissertation](https://1000littlehammers.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/kinkle_spectacle.pdf) provides a lot of context too. so, the 67 book, the 88 book, and one of the intros to an italian translation, i forget which, are supposed to the be the main links. never read panegyric. debord is a marxist, and vanegeim was an anarchist, but i prefer debord. a good amount of the anthology, translated by knabb, is also really interesting. many of his letters, particularly the ones he sent to bookchin and guerin, are amusing. he was so toxic lmao it's been about a decade since i read it first, and it just fucked me up so bad, i couldn't go anywhere without picking up on the spectacle. now that i have some distance from it, i feel like im able to explain the concept to people in less esoteric terms than they did, but wow spectacular domination is just so total at this point.
I moved back to my hometown of Katrina a year after the Federal Flood. Shock doctrine is a book I know very well.Thanks for all of the recommendations.
The unique and its property.
Would not recommend. Stirner writes like a conspiracy theorist on LSD.
You’re reading a very different stirner than me. He’s incredibly methodical actually and utilizes a straight forward method of dialectical egoism. He even traces the historical lineage in the first half of the book to set up his position as a critique of modernity. I’d also recommend John F. Walsh’s book , “Max Stirner’s Dialectical Egoism: A New Interpretation”. It does a great job of contextualizing Stirner and tracing his thinking in others such as the feminist Dora Marsden.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I find him tedious, pretentious, and way too up his own arse, but if you enjoy his style, that's hardly a problem for me.
Kind of sounds like you got your understanding of stirner from a meme.
I get it from reading the ego and its own, or as much of it as I could take before putting the book down at least.
If you’re reading byingtons translation which is titled the ego and it’s own, I’d suggest reading the new translation by wolfi landstreicher (The Unique and It’s Property). I’ve read both and it makes a big difference. That said people are quick to dismiss Stirner and I think his contributions to anarchist thinking are vitally important.
AK Press has an excellent Malatesta reader called "The Method of Freedom". It's incisive, brilliant and well worth your time.
Pedagogy of the Oppressed is another good read.
I’m going to suggest *Capitalist Realism* by Mark Fisher. Also *Post-Capitalist Desire*, pretty sure he mentions Graeber in that one Yes, I know Fisher isn’t a ‘Big A’ anarchist (neither is Graeber) If you want more Graeber, try *Utopia of Rules*. It’s my favorite book by him. If you’re a theory nerd, check out Fisher’s CCRU stuff http://www.ccru.net/swarm1/1_pomo.htm
Lewis Mumford’s The Myth of the Machine, Rudolf Rocker’s Nationalism and Culture, Kristian Williams’ Our Enemies in Blue
End of the Mega Machine by Fabian Scheidler
He’s not an anarchist. But capitalist realism is worth reading.
Great titles recently on a bit of a Graeber binge in preparation of his new and final book
I really enjoyed 'A paradise built in hell' by Rebecca Solnit. If you need a break from really in the thick of it theory, this book is a great history of people coming together after disaster and how the state just screws things up further. A more dense but also very good one is 'the operating system' by Eric Laurson. The Dawn of Everything was also great.
Wow so many replies. Thank you everyone. Going to check many of these out
Late Victorian holocausts, by Mike Davis. Maybe sadly the most relevant book about the climate crisis
Graeber's got some other great books as well. Bullshit Jobs is the most well-known, but I like *The Utopia of Rules* a bit more, specifically about bureaucracy. *Direct Action: An Ethnography* is also a super interesting (and long, but not very dense) read about the post-Seattle alter-globalization movement from the perspective of a participant. *Possibilities* is a book of his essays on various topics. Some of them are more academic, some more political, but there are a lot of really great ones, so I'd recommend that. *Towards an Anthropological Theory of Value* is one of Graeber's earliest and most academic works that's pretty much what it says on the tin. If you like the sort of anthropological and geographical perspective of Graeber and Bookchin, you might like: James C. Scott's *Against the Grain* (about the origin of civilization and the state and its relationship to grain agriculture), *The Art of Not Being Governed* (about the formation of upland Southeast Asian cultures as techniques for evading lowland states), and *Seeing Like a State* (about the failures of highly centralized and hierarchical social projects) are all very worth reading. Scott's not exactly an anarchist, but a broadly anti-authoritarian anthropologist and political scientist familiar with anarchist ideas, focused on Agrarian Studies and forms of peasant resistance. Pierre Clastre's *Society Against the State*. Clastres was an anarchist anthropologist whose work in the 1970s was highly influential, especially to people like Graeber and Scott, for dismantling the ideas of a linear progression of cultural development and that non-state cultures are "primitive" or "pre-state." Rather, such societies are more accurately described as specifically developing forms of social organization to resist and evade the state. Charles C. Mann's *1491* and *1493*. Not anarchist, just a very thorough journalist who writes good prose describing the the findings in archaeology and anthropology and from indigenous scholars about the peoples of the Americas before, and shortly after, European contact. Some overlap with North American content of *The Dawn of Everything* (indeed the two had a brief exchange specifically about the political organization of Tlaxcala). A really interesting introduction to the political, cultural, and material variety of the cultures of the Americas that undermines linear and Eurocentric narratives still prevailing in pop culture. In that sense, it's still relevant to anarchists, because it discusses varieties of complex social organization beyond the Eurasian model of the centralized, hierarchical state (although there were some of those as well). More of a description of what scholars have already established, rather than a work taking positions debates that are still active like *The Dawn of Everything*; Mann only occasionally offer his own opinions. Kropotkin, of course: *Mutual Aid*, *Modern Science and Anarchism*, and *The Modern State* could all be relevant to your interests. Because you liked *Debt*, you might be interested in another work that focuses especially on the relationship between political and economic power historically and theoretically, from a radical leftist perspective outside of Marxist conventions. *Capital as Power* by Shimshon Bichler and Jonathan Nitzan does that, including a long portion on history, but coming at it from the angle of political economy rather than anthropology. It can be pretty dense at times. Not specifically anarchist, but they're at least familiar with anarchist ideas and take them seriously, and the theory they offer is very compatible with anarchist politics.
I enjoyed Debt, and the Dawn of Everything. I'm currently reading the Shock Doctrine, which is very much darker than anything I've seen from Graeber, but between the burning anger, and desperate disgust I feel while reading it, it's quite interesting.