The book talks about three concepts of transformation: ruptural transformation, interstitial transformation, and symbiotic transformation. The authors mention the book when explaining the idea of interstitial revolution which is a theoretical means of societal transformation.
"
And so I think part of the issue when it comes to discussions of anarchism and infrastructure and supply lines and all these different things is that I think people have this misconception, there's this real strange idea of what an anarchist revolution looks like, where we flip a switch just overnight and boom, anarchist society. We have nothing in place, we have no organizations or systems, or networks in place, it's just boom, snap of fingers and all of a sudden we're all living under anarchy. But in reality, as Kropotkin expressed, there's no fallacy as harmful as the fallacy of the one day revolution. Obviously, there's going to be a transition. In fact, a lot of people like to define anarchism as an ongoing process moving further and further towards the ideal of anarchy. The whole idea is not whether or not there will be a transitional society, but what kind of transition that will be. And so in this period of transition is when we would be engaging in the different forms of social experimentation to manifest anarchist principles in every facet of life. And of course, this process will involve engaging with local conditions and local people, and allowing those communities, those individuals to determine for themselves what structures and systems are put in place. Part of the struggle is going to involve mirroring the society that we wish to create. So if our final goal is a communistic anarchistic society, then our methods must be as communistic and anarchistic as possible. The basic duality of means and ends. So when we speak of supply lines, when we speak of infrastructure, the reality is that existing infrastructure is not going to disappear overnight. We're not starting from complete scratch. This isn't a new Minecraft world where we have to go and punch some trees and start society all over again. Revolution is destructive, but it's also constructive and transformative. So we're not going to get rid of all experts and all expertise, we're not going to be floundering to figure out how to make penicillin. People in all fields and all industries and all layers and all backgrounds are going to be involved in the process, adapting their workplaces, adapting their industries towards sustainable and anarchic ends. And it's a process that's going on now and will continue because if we look at revolution as a combination of, I think Eric Olin Wright, he had in his book, Envisioning Real Utopias, three basic concepts of transformation. You had ruptural transformation, interstitial transformation, and symbiotic transformation. And so interstitial revolution is basically the idea, it's basically a mirror of prefigurative politics. It's a theoretical means of societal transformation through progressively and strategically enlarging spaces of social empowerment. And ruptural transformation is, of course, I guess the dichotomy between the insurrectionists and everybody else. Where you have these moments of social outbursts, these moments of rupture where social forms and social developments are undertaken and we sort of figure out how we are, or rather we directly fight back against the systems that are in place. I think rupture is one of the more exciting forms, it's the kind of form of revolution people tend to think of when they think of the term revolution, this idea of all these, this mass of people, this crowd of people storming the Bastille or whatever. But the real work of transformation is the stuff that occurs prior to and post those moments of rupture.