Follow Us

AK Press

Revolution by the Book The AK Press Blog

We Are Many: Call for #Occupy Movement Stories

Posted on February 24th, 2012 in AK Authors!, AK Distribution, AK News, Anarchist Publishers, Recommended Reading

You knew it was coming, right? We have all been swept up in the incredible wind that is #Occupy. We’ve contributed, as a movement publisher, but also as movement actors, to the growth and development of this unique instant in history with zines, reading lists, blog posts, and our bodies out in the streets and in the squares. Now we’re happy to announce our contribution to the growing field of literature about and around #Occupy, WE ARE MANY: REFLECTIONS ON MOVEMENT STRATEGY FROM OCCUPATION TO LIBERATION (due out this August, more info coming soon). And, we’re asking for your help in making this exciting project a reality … read on below:

In August 2012, AK Press will publish a book that pulls together stories, anecdotes, ideas, reflections, and strategic interventions drawn directly from the Occupy movement and our fellow travelers, with an eye towards illuminating key aspects of the strategy that has defined the mass actions in the US and beyond since September 17. The goal is to build a lasting resource, a strategic manual for future movements, to celebrate what went right, and learn from what went wrong. A key part of this learning experience is collecting stories from YOU, our fellow occupiers. We’re looking for short pieces (200-600 words) about your experiences with Occupy. About what went right, what went wrong. What inspired you, and what interrupted your inspiration. Advice for your fellow Occupiers. Aspirations. Critiques. Whatever moves you to write.

Not everything we receive will make it into the book, but we will endeavor to include a diverse set of stories, and may archive the others on a companion website if there is enough interest.

Please send your stories to Margaret Killjoy, one of the editors of the book, at wearemanybook@gmail.com. Share this call out with your local Occupy comrades, and forward to anyone whose story you’d like to see in this book.

With thanks,

The We Are Many editorial team (Kate Khatib, Margaret Killjoy, and Mike McGuire)

Great plug for BIFO’s book …

Posted on February 18th, 2012 in About AK, AK Allies, AK Distribution

I was just looking at the Left Bank Books website, and reading their staff picks, and I noticed that someone’s selected BIFO’s After the Future as one of their picks, with this awesome disclaimer:

“WARNING: Don’t read a book about the end of the future if you’re suffering depression or seasonal affective disorder. Actually, maybe you should. Bifo analyzes the psychological and economic impacts of the last 100 years of capitalism and is much easier to understand than Felix Guattari or Christian Marazzi. This is an excellent, if slightly disjointed, slice of his writing.”

I found it entertaining, and thus, I share it with all of you. Thanks “LS” at Left Bank Books!!

(http://www.leftbankbooks.com/staffpicks.html)

Accumulation of Freedom video promo

Posted on February 17th, 2012 in Uncategorized

The Accumulation of Freedom has been making its way into readers’ hands the last few weeks. The editors and contributors have a number of events scheduled to promote the book and further discuss the contours of an anarchist economics. The topic has been largely ignored in anarchist circles of late, which makes this volume all the more exciting. Here’s a short promo that Anthony J. Nocella, II put together to introduce the book:

Anti-capitalism is too often little more than a sentiment, easily captured as a slogan on a wall or banner. Much of the discussion stays close to the surface. It’s as if we, as anarchists, don’t feel a responsibility to intellectually challenge capitalist dogma on its own terms (because we can’t? because it requires an incredible amount of work?). We rail against capitalist institutions and forms but spend too little time working to understand them and to effectively translate that understanding to others. So it’s with pleasure that we welcome works like Accumulation, David Graeber’s Debt, and forthcoming titles like Wayne Price’s revamped book on Marx’s economics for anarchists (2012), and Geoff Mann’s Dissassembly Required: A Field Guide to Actually Existing Capitalism (2013). Those smug anarchists quick to dismiss the study of economic history and theory are really missing out. It’s the best thing going these days.

Check Out the New, Improved Big Idea Bookstore & Cafe in Pittsburgh!

Posted on February 16th, 2012 in AK Distribution, Store Profiles

Earlier this week I had the pleasure of visiting with some of our comrades at The Big Idea in Pittsburgh. (For more on their project, see this store profile I did a couple years back). Right now they’re in the midst of a very exciting expansion—those of you who have been in their old space might remember it being pretty cozy in there. Now they’ve moved around the corner onto Liberty Ave., where they have room to grow! They have big plans for the new space including opening up a cafe, having more in-store events, and a closer partnership with AK Press!

(Heads up, bookstores and infoshops: whether you’re expanding or not, contact us if you’re interested in partnering with us and getting your own AK Press display… Batman statue optional… we’re here to help.)

If you find yourself in Pittsburgh, stop on by and browse the expanded selection of new and used books, check out AK’s new releases and other titles recommended by the Big Idea collective, and soon you’ll even be able to enjoy coffee and a snack!

And finally, those of you who value the work of The Big Idea and have a few bucks to spare: consider making a donation to help them out with the last stages of their expansion: buying some equipment they need to get the cafe off the ground. So far they’re about 2/3 of the way there and need to raise the rest in the next 10 days. Every little bit helps!

Captive Genders Panel @ Mills College

Posted on February 10th, 2012 in Events

Pathologized, terrorized, and confined, trans/gender non-conforming and queer folks have always struggled against the enormity of the prison industrial complex. The first collection of its kind, Eric A. Stanley and Nat Smith bring together current and former prisoners, activists, and academics to offer new ways for understanding how race, gender, ability, and sexuality are lived under the crushing weight of captivity. Through a politic of gender self-determination, this collection argues that trans/queer liberation and prison abolition must be grown together. From rioting against police violence and critiquing hate crimes legislation to prisoners demanding access to HIV medications, and far beyond, Captive Genders is a challenge for us all to join the struggle.

A panel including some of the book’s contributors will discuss issues of prison abolition and trans politics. More details and exact location coming soon.

Dean Spade & Eric Stanley on Prison Abolition & Trans Politics @ UCSC

Posted on February 10th, 2012 in Events

Join Eric Stanley and Dean Spade in celebration of their recently released books: Captive Genders: Trans Embodiment and the Prison Industrial Complex (AK Press) and Normal Life: Administrative Violence, Critical Trans Politics and the Limits of Law (South End Press). The event is free and open to the public.

Sponsored by College 9, College 10, Feminist Studies, History of Consciousness and the Oakes Provost.

Captive Genders panel @ SF State University

Posted on February 10th, 2012 in Events

Pathologized, terrorized, and confined, trans/gender non-conforming and queer folks have always struggled against the enormity of the prison industrial complex. The first collection of its kind, Eric A. Stanley and Nat Smith bring together current and former prisoners, activists, and academics to offer new ways for understanding how race, gender, ability, and sexuality are lived under the crushing weight of captivity. Through a politic of gender self-determination, this collection argues that trans/queer liberation and prison abolition must be grown together. From rioting against police violence and critiquing hate crimes legislation to prisoners demanding access to HIV medications, and far beyond, Captive Gender is a challenge for us all to join the struggle.

A panel including some of the book’s contributors will discuss issues of prison abolition and trans politics. More details and exact location coming soon.

The next generation of the Friends of AK Press

Posted on February 10th, 2012 in About AK, AK Allies, Uncategorized

If this isn’t the world’s best advertising photo, I don’t know what is:
Thanks Milo (and Milo’s parents) for sending us this pic to brighten our day!

Here’s to the next generation of AK Press readers, rabble-rousers, anarchists, black bloc’ers and beyond!

Concerning the Violent Peace-Police: An Open Letter to Chris Hedges

Posted on February 9th, 2012 in AK Authors!, Current Events

Another one of our authors, David Graeber, has written a response to Chris Hedges’ controversial article “The Cancer in Occupy.” This piece was published this morning over at n+1 and is excerpted here; please head over to n+1 to read it in its entirety. Thanks to David for this thoughtful contribution to the important conversation around the tactics and dynamics of the Occupy movement. Keep ’em coming, folks!


Concerning the Violent Peace-Police: An Open Letter to Chris Hedges

David Graeber

I am writing this on the premise that you are a well-meaning person who wishes Occupy Wall Street to succeed. I am also writing as someone who was deeply involved in the early stages of planning Occupy in New York.

I am also an anarchist who has participated in many Black Blocs. While I have never personally engaged in acts of property destruction, I have on more than one occasion taken part in Blocs where property damage has occurred. (I have taken part in even more Blocs that did not engage in such tactics. It is a common fallacy that this is what Black Blocs are all about. It isn’t.)

I was hardly the only Black Bloc veteran who took part in planning the initial strategy for Occupy Wall Street. In fact, anarchists like myself were the real core of the group that came up with the idea of occupying Zuccotti Park, the “99%” slogan, the General Assembly process, and, in fact, who collectively decided that we would adopt a strategy of Gandhian non-violence and eschew acts of property damage. Many of us had taken part in Black Blocs. We just didn’t feel that was an appropriate tactic for the situation we were in.

This is why I feel compelled to respond to your statement “The Cancer in Occupy.” This statement is not only factually inaccurate, it is quite literally dangerous. This is the sort of misinformation that really can get people killed. In fact, it is far more likely to do so, in my estimation, than anything done by any black-clad teenager throwing rocks.

Let me just lay out a few initial facts:

1. Black Bloc is a tactic, not a group. It is a tactic where activists don masks and black clothing (originally leather jackets in Germany, later, hoodies in America), as a gesture of anonymity, solidarity, and to indicate to others that they are prepared, if the situation calls for it, for militant action. The very nature of the tactic belies the accusation that they are trying to hijack a movement and endanger others. One of the ideas of having a Black Bloc is that everyone who comes to a protest should know where the people likely to engage in militant action are, and thus easily be able to avoid it if that’s what they wish to do.

2. Black Blocs do not represent any specific ideological, or for that matter anti-ideological position.  Black Blocs have tended in the past to be made up primarily of anarchists but most contain participants whose politics vary from Maoism to Social Democracy. They are not united by ideology, or lack of ideology, but merely a common feeling that creating a bloc of people with explicitly revolutionary politics and ready to confront the forces of the order through more militant tactics if required, is, on the particular occasion when they assemble, a useful thing to do. It follows one can no more speak of “Black Bloc Anarchists,” as a group with an identifiable ideology, than one can speak of “Sign-Carrying Anarchists” or “Mic-Checking Anarchists.”

3. Even if you must select a tiny, ultra-radical minority within the Black Bloc and pretend their views are representative of anyone who ever put on a hoodie, you could at least be up-to-date about it. It was back in 1999 that people used to pretend “the Black Bloc” was made up of nihilistic primitivist followers of John Zerzan opposed to all forms of organization. Nowadays, the preferred approach is to pretend “the Black Bloc” is made up of nihilistic insurrectionary followers of The Invisible Committee, opposed to all forms of organization.  Both are absurd slurs. Yours is also 12 years out of date.

4. Your comment about Black Bloc’ers hating the Zapatistas is one of the weirdest I’ve ever seen. Sure, if you dig around, you can find someone saying almost anything. But I’m guessing that, despite the ideological diversity, if you took a poll of participants in the average Black Bloc and asked what political movement in the world inspired them the most, the EZLN would get about 80% of the vote. In fact I’d be willing to wager that at least a third of participants in the average Black Bloc are wearing or carrying at least one item of Zapatista paraphernalia. (Have you ever actually talked to someone who has taken part in a Black Bloc? Or just to people who dislike them?)

5. “Diversity of tactics” is not a “Black Bloc” idea. The original GA in Tompkins Square Park that planned the original occupation, if I remember, adopted the principle of diversity of tactics (at least it was discussed in a very approving fashion), at the same time as we all also concurred that a Gandhian approach would be the best way to go. This is not a contradiction:  “diversity of tactics” means leaving such matters up to individual conscience, rather than imposing a code on anyone. Partly,this is because imposing such a code invariably backfires. In practice, it means some groups break off in indignation and do even more militant things than they would have otherwise, without coordinating with anyone else—as happened, for instance, in Seattle. The results are usually disastrous. After the fiasco of Seattle, of watching some activists actively turning others over to the police—we quickly decided we needed to ensure this never happened again. What we found that if we declared “we shall all be in solidarity with one another. We will not turn in fellow protesters to the police. We will treat you as brothers and sisters. But we expect you to do the same to us”—then, those who might be disposed to more militant tactics will act in solidarity as well, either by not engaging in militant actions at all for fear they will endanger others (as in many later Global Justice Actions, where Black Blocs merely helped protect the lockdowns, or in Zuccotti Park, where mostly people didn’t bloc up at all) or doing so in ways that run the least risk of endangering fellow activists.

(more…)

To Be Fair, He Is a Journalist: A Short Response to Chris Hedges on the Black Bloc

Posted on February 7th, 2012 in AK Authors!, Current Events

One of our lovely authors, wrote the following response to Chris Hedges’ recent, sadly misinformed attack on anarchists…


To Be Fair, He Is a Journalist: A Short Response to Chris Hedges on the Black Bloc

By Don Gato

It was a little weird to wake up today to an article by Chris Hedges on a website called “Truth-Out” when “truth” is in such short supply in the piece. Hedges was trained as a journalist and worked for years at such luminaries of lies like the New York Times, so it shouldn’t be a secret where he’s gotten his sensationalism, his tendency to lie, his hyperbole, and, most of all, his seeming inability to do rudimentary research. Nonetheless, when activist celebrities like Hedges (and his friend here, Derrick Jensen) write even complete nonsense like this, it tends to have a certain conceptual currency with people. And though I’d much rather be visiting with friends today (who promised me peanut butter cookies, no less!), I figured I’d take a few minutes to point out some of the more egregious distortions in Hedges’ terrible piece.

Definitions

First, we need to clear up some definitional problems. Now, as a journalist, I really don’t expect Hedges to be able to “research,”—it does seem to go against the prime directives of the profession, but let’s be clear: There’s no such thing as “The Black Bloc movement.” The black bloc is a tactic. It’s also not just a tactic used by anarchists, so “black bloc anarchists” is a bit of a misnomer—particularly because Hedges doesn’t know the identities of the people under those sexy, black masks. In fact, it was autonomists in the 80s who came up with the (often quite brilliant) idea in Germany. Protecting themselves against the repression of what Hedges calls “the security and surveillance state,” squatters, protesters, and other rabble rousers would dress in all black, covering up tattoos, their faces, and any other identifying features so they could act against this miserable world and, with some smarts and a sharp style, not get pinched by the pigs. This was true of resisters who were protecting marches (because the state never needs an excuse to incite violence and police are wont to riot and attack people), destroying property, or sometimes just marching en masse. That is, the black bloc has all kinds of uses. And in Oakland, where Hedges seems particularly upset by people actually having the gall to defend themselves against insane violent police thugs instead of just sit there idly by getting beaten, on Move-In Day the bloc looked mostly defensive—shielding themselves and other protesters from flash grenades and police mob violence with make-shift shields (and even one armchair). So, to be clear: The black bloc is a tactic used by lots of people, not just anarchists, and it has all kinds of uses. It’s not a “movement.”

Who Is This Straw Frankenstein?

And, importantly, people in black blocs don’t have “unity” with one another about politics. This is another bizarre part of Hedges’ hatchet job. He goes on this long diatribe about what “The Black Bloc Movement” (this weird straw Frankenstein he’s created) believes. We learn in his piece that this Frankenstein is “against organization” when members of the black bloc, anarchists included, have all kinds of ideas about organization (none of which are “against organization”). If Chris did a little research, he’d find that “The Black Bloc Papers,” for example, were edited and compiled by two members of a formal political organization. And while many anarchists do reject formal political organizations, no anarchists oppose “organization” as such. Rather, we have disagreements over organizational form, duration, formality, purpose, and so on. Not to state the obvious, but considering our collective failure to smash capitalism, the state, and all other manifestations of coercive power over others, uh, shouldn’t we be building those kinds of critiques? If Hedges were interested in honesty, he might know that’s also why many anarchists are critical of the Left (I imagine dishonest and divisive hatchet jobs by Leftist celebrities like this one is another reason why more and more anarchists reject the Left—among its many other shortcomings and failures).

He goes on to state that this Frankenstein he’s created is universally under the influence of John Zerzan, then attacks Zerzan. Again, this just shows how out of touch Hedges is and how he’s fooled himself into believing he knows what he’s talking about when he doesn’t (a very common trait for celebrity journalists). Apparently it needs repeating, the black bloc is not a unified “movement”—it’s a bunch of folks dressed similarly so they can’t be identified by the popo. There are all kinds of thoughts on Zerzan in such a grouping, some supportive, some not, some who, no doubt, have no idea who he is. But Zerzan doesn’t speak for the bloc—no one does. And so there’s this weird “guilt-by-association” in this piece which ends in blaming criticisms of the Zapatistas on this “Black Bloc Movement” that he’s created.

Gender Essentialism! It’s Not Just For the 70s Anymore!

Hedges also critiques the black bloc for its supposed “hypermasculinity,” engaging in a gender essentialism that belies his inability to keep up with contemporary radicalism. In Oakland, part of the militant march on Move-In Day was the “Feminist and Queer Bloc.” I’m sure they would be quite surprised to learn that self-defense against violent police thugs and petty vandalism is actually a man’s activity! Why, those poor, beleaguered women and queers are probably alienated from such militancy, along with the befuddled masses that Hedges seems to be writing for! Rather than a lengthy critique of this already-disposed-of pseudo objection, I’ll let Harsha Walia enlighten Hedges on the problems of wealthy white, men like himself attempting to speak for the alienated and frightened “victims” of such “masculine” activities as building a confrontational and militant movement against capitalism and the state. Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oesjegD1-Vg

The Personal Is Antipolitical

Some of this is personal to me, in the interest of full disclosure. I have friends in Oakland. They’re brave and awesome. Seeing them stand up to police repression and attempt to take an empty building while people sleep in the streets was exciting and invigorating for me. It was a welcome sight in today’s age of non-violent fundamentalism, where so many are beset with the crippling belief that if we just get beat up badly enough we’ll attract “the masses” with our moral superiority and somehow the wealthy and powerful will recognize the error of their ways and give us the world back that they’ve so successfully turned into their nightmarish, authoritarian, and wasted playground. My friends were gassed, beaten, given broken faces, broken dreams, and locked in cages for their bravery. And now they’re being denounced by a comfortable journalist who wasn’t there who refers to them as a “cancer”.

I don’t want to suggest that they shouldn’t be critiqued. Self-critique is important for any improvement of practice—if it’s honest.

But here I feel betrayed. When Hedges wrote about the Greeks, notorious for their black blocs, he praised them for “getting it.” Indeed, according to Hedges, they knew what to do. In Hedges own words:

“They know what to do when they are told their pensions, benefits and jobs have to be cut to pay corporate banks, which screwed them in the first place. Call a general strike. Riot. Shut down the city centers. Toss the bastards out. Do not be afraid of the language of class warfare—the rich versus the poor, the oligarchs versus the citizens, the capitalists versus the proletariat. The Greeks, unlike most of us, get it.”

Apparently for Hedges, that’s good enough for the Greeks. But, by God, don’t you dare bring this filthy resistance to his home! You might accidentally (horror of horrors!) break a window! Perhaps it might belong to Hedges! Well, I passed around his piece on Greece thinking that perhaps there was, in fact, a journalist that “gets it.” I was wrong and I feel betrayed.

So I am angry at Hedges. I know it shows and it will look ugly to some people, but at one point, I trusted his work. And now, I have broken and brave friends that he is denouncing in a movement that he is dividing and presuming to speak for.

After the Move-In Day, the Mayor of Oakland, Jean Quan, asked the Occupy movement to “disown” Oakland because they were militant, uncompromising, and because they were willing to engage in the kinds of “class warfare” that Hedges once praised in Greece. Occupy groups quickly dismissed this as a divisive tactic, but Hedges and Derrick Jensen seem all too eager to help Mayor Quan out. We live in interesting times, but we need to see these kinds of attacks for what they are—forms of recuperating needed and justified rage. When rigid ideologues who think they have some kind of special access to “Truth” come in swinging like this, particularly right after being politely asked to by liberal Mayors like Quan to do so, it’s time to do some quick disowning. We should reject the attempts to divide us by the likes of Quan, Jensen, and Hedges and, more importantly, reject the lies and distortions embedded in these facile “critiques.” Shame on you, Chris. If you want to denounce “violence,” you might use your time to target the police and Mayor Quan instead of doing the work they’ve asked Occupy “leaders” to do for them.