We would incorporate them into our organization, to the point where they would outnumber us, and it would be their organization.

This is exemplified in Murray Bookchin's revolutionary program. I think communalist ideas offer anarchists a strategic framework that enables decentralized approaches to a protracted people's war within post-industrial societies. The thing is, this requires doing away with traditional conceptions of class struggle in order for it to work.

My contentions with the notion of a protracted people's war is its emphasis on the countryside; it's grounded in the assumption that political power is concentrated within cities--while true, the nature of how that power propagates itself to the masses has changed. Relatively recent housing crises have left metropolitan areas in a rather barren state with blighted, low density developments making up huge swathes of their sprawl. So people are forced to isolate themselves even further and struggle with something as simple as commuting to work. We all know how this feels; that blurring of white collar and blue collar. With the onset of mass urbanization, our future geographical landscape just isn't conducive to the kind of strategies that maoists propose. They certainly come close, I can see why it's emphasis on radicalizing the peasantry would be deemed radical to some, but the peasantry doesn't exist in large numbers along the countryside; they're all flocking to the city. People need to understand that they have a right to their neighborhoods, towns, and villages; that they have a right to the city. Only then will revolutionary activity truly take shape.