Well, Kevin, this was promised to them since the beginning of the year. I still think I could have edited it more but personal circumstances (job + family) didn't allow me to get it as polished as I would have liked. The funny thing is that it somehow fell into the hands of RS and they told me (or at least someone associated with them) that they have already translated it into Spanish. They'll respond to it in their October issue of the magazine, Regresion.
As for the venue, I have to confess that I have never really considered myself an anarchist, nor do I use anarchism as a goal and/or reference for what I write. I am afraid my nexus is still an inverted Marxism, not in the ethical sense but in the sense of analysis and formulating what I oppose. The left-coms in this milieu are for the most part critical of the left, yet they vary in their criticisms. If you go to the same edition of the magazine, there is an article entitled "Shade of Swords" that quotes Camatte and Tiqqun. I know this guy from other places, he is definitely anti-tech and anti-civ. While the article isn't anti-civ per se, I can't see it being anything else. I advise people to read it as well.
There's lots more I could say about the article, as I still think it can sprawl into a million directions. For example, I am largely in agreement with RS concerning its pessimism about building community or coordinated plans of action. I am also pessimistic if one can put it like that that we can somehow take very basic ideas as time, society, governance, etc and turn them against themselves. In essence, I oppose thinking about "ideal" societies, no matter how small. I also share their skepticism (short of outright rejection) of ideas like equality, justice, etc. I just think those ideas are "purchased" by civilized living in one respect, but I would have to draw those ideas out more elsewhere.
One aspect that I would also draw out, for example, is their use of "indigenism" as contrasted with its use in such left-bourgeois and Marxist theoreticians as Jose Vasconcelos, Mariategui, Lopez-Portilla, etc. That is, unlike the United States where Indians were always seen as uncivilized, in parts of Latin America they were acutely aware of the existence of "indigenous" civilizations that rivaled European civilizations, and this was used in bourgeois nationalist formation, left Marxist politics, and so on as an agitation against "outside imperialism". With RS focusing on the Chichimecas instead of the "civilized" cities of the Valley of Mexico, this was a unique inversion for me as a student of Latin American history. It also indicated the formation of the idea of "wildness" in Mesoamerica itself as I cited in the essay; something always opposed to civilization and seeing itself in a sort of inverted mirror.I think such a perspective is needed.
As for Kevin's need for writings, fear not, I think I can submit something to B&GR by the deadline in August. It will be on invasive species, I think, and their role in determining what wildness is in the "anthropocene". It will either be a review of just one book, or a sprawling (though not too sprawling) essay covering several sources, themes in philosophy and literature, etc. If you want to narrow that down, Kevin, shoot me an email or message about what you are looking at in terms of space (how many words) and I'll think about it some more. I'm pretty flexible and write to order, I'm used to it, and I always am good at absorbing criticism, at least I'd like to think I am.