Never have I felt a stronger need for these two things: To write, and to acquire this thing called "self-discipline" (it does not feel the accurate name for it, but is one that people have converged on) -- I think I begin to understand my apparent, almost life-long, lack of it better now, for one thing. Which means there might be a chance of improvement.

I am acquiring such a different perspective on things. History, that of the world, of nations, but then also my family's and my own.

Looking at my life: Along with the apparent lack of self-discipline, there's a lack of notable accomplishments or competencies. That's what I've felt for a long time, and boy, how much it used to bother me.

Now I think, this lack is a sign of our times, and it is also due to an interplay of various constellations in my early history. It is as if I've been a ball in a pinball machine, and the way I have hit against the objects on the table have always kept me on a trajectory of dependency, doubtfulness, indecisiveness and so on.

I was successful at school, I managed to complete a degree equivalent to a Master's, and I have managed to hold down a few jobs, though my first ones pretty badly. But that was it. Am I too harsh? I think I pitch it against what people would have expected of me.

The important thing is, it does not bother me so much anymore, and I have never had more of an appetite for learning and working on things. No paid work at the moment, and I am glad for it. I plan to look at that again soon, but not yet.

I have developed a great interest in all the things that as a young girl I did not understand and therefore found boring. History, economics, social structures. I recently read Frederic Laloux's book
'Reinventing Organisations' (illustrated version) and I just spent several hours browsing arcticles about anarchism and anarchists. I ended up reading the wikipedia article on Emma Goldman.

This is adding more puzzle pieces to a changed picture I have of polictics, democracy and so on. And the state. There is too much good in what "the state" provides for me to say, doing away with it would be good. But then, it might be worth looking at where these things are coming from. State-run schools. They could be run independently, and would work just as well, or better? The good thing about state schools is that kids come from very diverse backgrounds (certainly the case with the school my kids attend), and most of the teachers are really good and care -- true for private schools as well. It's called a state school, but do you need the state for it?

The NHS, which I love. Now being sold off by the lovely representatives of our state to the highest private bidders. The people who work in its hospitals and practices would need no state to do their work. We just don't know it any other way than it being under control of the state.

These are just thoughts whitout much background, and yet to even just think that way would not have occured to me a few years back. There could be a difference between something 'communal' (or 'the Commons') and 'run by the state' while we often don't differentiate.

I've come to all this partly from reading and watching videos about cryptoanarchy, which perhaps is not even anarchy. But fascinating in its own right. I have not made my mind up about it yet, and don't know if that's even possible.

And anarchism - while I bet you'd associate that mainly with men, is a very female, and feminist affair. Of the latter article, I like this in particular: "And this is something that we tend to forget: patriarchy is oppressive for everybody, not only for women."