No pedagogy which is truly liberating can remain distinct from the oppressed by treating them as unfortunates and by presenting for their emulation models from among the oppressors. The oppressed must be their own example in the struggle for their redemption.
Paulo Freire
Pedagogy of the oppressed
AK Press will have live webcasts of talks by Ward Churchill on Jan. 23 and 24 at 7pm PST.
Paulo Freire
Pedagogy of the oppressed
AK Press will have live webcasts of talks by Ward Churchill on Jan. 23 and 24 at 7pm PST.
You asked acheron for unrecognized anarchist thinkers. Judging by your interest in chaos, TAZ, and RAW, I would suggest William J. Murray. I can not find anything at all by or about him other than the following two books which makes me suspect he might be a pseudonym, possibly for RAW.
"Unconditional Freedom: Social Revolution Through Individual Empowerment" by William J. Murray
"Anarchic Harmony: The Spirituality of Social Disobedience" by William J. Murray with an intro by Robert Anton Wilson.
"What I found by turning my back on our society-generated mythology was so profound that I had to share it -- presumptuous or not-- because it indicts the social structures of mankind and demands social disobedience, or living according to our inner, heroic nature and not according to the intimidation and demands of society's ineffective ideology." Introduction by Robert Anton Wilson.
P.S. He is not to be confused with the right-wing Christian son of American atheist leader, Madalyn Murray O'Hair.
quite frankly, the most obvious unrecognized anarchist, in my opinion, is james joyce. there are a couple of scholars attempting to explain this theory to people, but no truly successful work has been completed regarding james joyce as an anarchist. yes, he was a half-assed one, but it's clearly there, if you've read enough anarchist theory.
the only person i can think of whose role in historic anarchism is probably a tad underplayed is Ouida. Ouida was bizarre and overly-sentimental. but when you look at emma goldman's speeches, some of the structures are sooooo Ouida. and the over-the-top sentimentalism, i'd suggest, is taken straight from Ouida. and believe me, if you read any Ouida, it will make you laugh, she's so ridiculous. but she was influencial to goldman. and as far as i can tell, she's incredibly hard to find any reference to in scholarly works unless you're prodding extensively through french anarchism.
there are tons of russian anarchists who were involved in propaganda by deed ...i have one favorite who walked up to the bureaucrat responsible for a bunch of pogroms and shot him in the face (this being terribly fascinating because she was a fresh-faced 18-year-old girl who was innocent looking n stuff), but i'd have to dig through my research notes from last year and that would take a looooooong time. erm, i hope this helps you out some.