Anti-Oedipus is a good place to start. It appears dense at first, but you’ll get in a rhythm quickly. In my opinion, Deleuze’s personal works, like Difference and Repetition or Logic of Sense are very metaphysically dense, but in D&G’s combined work they introduce some of the concepts Deleuze first uses in those works (such as extensive vs intensive properties in A Thousand Plateaus). I’ve heard Pure Immanence is good as well, although I’ve yet to read it.

Maybe. Deleuze and Guattari never tell us to get rid of territory or hierarchy. This is a big misreading of their philosophy. They never tell us to get rid of organs as such and just reduce ourselves to pure flows. I’m not sure if you’ve read A Thousand Plateaus, but they make this *abundantly* clear, yet the myth abounds and I’m still not sure why. In the “How Do You Make Yourself a Body Without Organs?” chapter they address that rather directly. Deleuze and Guattari are really advocating for Nietzsche’s eternal return: they make us insist that what is is not all that can be and to think creatively about new solutions. This idea that they just want us to “go schizzo” and remove all our organs is probably the fault of the accelerationists who co-opted Deleuze for their needs without seeming to have read him nearly as closely as they should. Deleuze and Guattari are in favor of territory (how can you deterritorialize without some territory to *be* deterritorialized?), but merely choose to make it the object, not of a bare repetition (repetition of the same, pure reproduction of a model), but rather the object of a refrain (repetition of the difference inherent in a process or idea that has yet to be totalized and therefore changing and developing it like a musical theme, leading to creative changes). I understand your criticisms, and we do need “real world” solutions to real world problems, but we also need to realize that creativity is requisite for fighting global capitalism. Just make sure the D&G you’re opposing isn’t a watered down misrepresentation of their thought based on lazy readings that proliferate in the academic community.

When I see the zapatista’s in Chiapas Mexico I see a way. They understand the warmachine