EDIT: I finished it, and I guess desert's purpose may be to take the most pessimistic view of humanity possible and then say there's space for anarchism. I think it's particularly ineffective on MLs. But even from the perspective of an anarchist – it's fundamentally flawed, it relies on the same premises that capitalist and imperialist realism does: that people are greedy, desire religious authoritarianism and fascinatingly, love destruction. Even the cynical readings of the consensus on the biological nature of people cannot lead you to the conclusions in this. I'm surprised by the wholesale rejection of the work done by Kropotkin et al in this. The view of humanity in this is dominated by fascist views of people. Particularly frustrating is it's relies entirely on a scientist largely enamored with selling doom as a 'truth teller'. Mathusianism abounds.

Original comment: I was enjoying the rejection of accelerationism.

I'm halfway through this so it's a good downer rn... But this section on climate change is particularly excellent.

Climate change... is certainly a suitable testing ground for the politics of manufactured hope, being so alienated from our actual everyday realities. But whilst the new movement politicians — facilitators not dictators — watch their movements grow, there is still a case for living in the real world

Some lands may remain (relatively) temperate — climatically and socially. As for civilisation, so for anarchy and anarchists — severely challenged, sometimes vanquished; possibilities for liberty and wildness opening up, possibilities for liberty and wildness closing. The unevenness of the present will be made more so. There is no global future.