I just noticed something, revolutionary anarchism doesn’t make sense in some way. Anarchism is against authority, but if a revolution happen, anarchists, by destroying the actual system, will force people to adopt a new lifestyle against their freewill.
What do you think about that? Isn’t this a paradox?
EDIT: Just to note, this is not a troll post, I am really asking myself this question. I am discussing on Discord about the same topic and I forgot to mention that I am only talking about a VIOLENT revolution.
Hmmm… I know you’re not trolling, and you’re just learning.
Definitely go ahead and read Engels if you like. But also read some Malatesta (Anarchy), Le Guin (The Disposessed), Gelderloos (Anarchy Works), Goldman, read about the IWW, Kropotkin (Conquest of Bread), Bookchin (Post-Scarcity Anarchism), etc.
If you’re starting a violent revolution before the working class is organised and have already gained the understanding, skills and built the infrastructure to manage their own workplaces and communities your revolution isn’t going to be sustained very long or remain in the interests of the people it’s meant to be in service of.
What need is there for an authority to dictate how people should behave if everyone is already working toward their own emancipation and a common goal that’s beneficial to all?
Anyway, I don’t think many are going to have too much of a dilemma applying force to those using force to maintain the status quo of authority by capitalism and the state.
I’m not sure if I gave much insight here, but hope you have some more ideas to think about.
Yes I think I understand now. I discussed on a Discord server about anarchism and they said the same thing. Thanks for all these recommendations, I already read some extracts of Bookchin, I will take care of the others.