This is interesting as Bookchin describes how he moved past the classical socialist theory of class exploitation when he realized that the working class had become a middle class, that unions had become status quo institutions, and Marxism simply a new form of statist oppression. Here, he’s endorsing the revision of anarchist class theory into an attack on “hierarchy and domination” of the kind that dominates the thinking of the left-anarchist milieu today. Eventually, he became discouraged with that as well, realizing that it leads to nothing other than the kind of non-threatening lifestyle politics that characterizes the modern Left. His classic “Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism” essay is available from LibCom. (It’s also interesting how the workerists at LibCom seem to misconstrue Bookchin’s critique of lifestyle anarchism as an endorsement of their own even more archaic views.)
In some ways, I have long considered ARV/ATS to be a continuation of where Bookchin left off. If we regard proletarian socialist-anarchism as an anachronism and cultural/lifestyle leftist-anarchism as having becoming status quo and non-revolutionary, where do we go from here? It seems the logical place would be to concentrate our attacks on the state itself. Hence, our revision of anarchist theory from “bosses vs workers” or “WASPs vs traditional outgroups” to “those aligned with the state vs those under attack by the state.” Hence, our orientation towards lumpenproletarianism, the ten core demographics, and liberty and populism.