Posts Tagged ‘Anarchist Cookbook’


With the events in Charlottesville still fresh in our minds, and with seemingly daily confrontations between neo-Nazis and anti-racists, the information and analysis Keith McHenry presents below couldn’t be more timely. It’s a reasonable bet to assume that the FBI will focus more on anti-racists than on white supremacists and neo-Nazi domestic terrorists, and will attempt to entrap anti-racists.

Even if the FBI, by some miracle, focuses on alt-right thugs, it’s still a certainty that they’ll continue to infiltrate leftist groups and will continue to attempt to entrap activists. If you’re a left political activist, please read on and understand what we’re up against.

Dummy 3 flat 72-small

(The following piece is from The Anarchist Cookbook, by Keith McHenry with Chaz Bufe — an actual cookbook written by anarchists which includes accurate information about anarchism and “recipes” for social change.)

* * *

How to Avoid FBI Entrapment

by Keith McHenry

The government wastes millions, probably tens of millions, of dollars annually spying on and disrupting the anarchist movement. It wouldn’t waste all that money trying to stop us if it wasn’t worried that we might inspire resistance.

Even though most anarchists are dedicated to nonviolent direct action and many participate in useful projects such as infoshops, bicycle co-ops, and the sharing and growing of food, the police, state agencies, federal agencies, and military intelligence units in the United States routinely infiltrate anarchist groups, and government provocateurs have repeatedly attempted to entrap activists. For the most part, they’ve failed at that.

But unfortunately some activists have not only been arrested, but have been tried, convicted, and sentenced to years in prison.

The FBI and other law enforcement agencies can and do frame or entrap anarchists to devastating effect, so it is important to do all you can to reduce the possibility of being set up on phony “terrorism” or other charges. Not only could you be removed from the community for many years, your family and friends would suffer through your ordeals in court and through the pain of knowing you are in prison. Defense activities also siphon off huge amounts of energy, time, and resources from the good work of building a better world.

Still it is not always possible to avoid being the target of the authorities, so take precautions to limit the damage if the state seeks to silence you. Taking actions that you can be proud of may be the most important single thing you can do. Think of the consequences of your acts. How will you feel if someone is injured or killed because of something you did? Could your actions be used to discredit the movement? Could they add to the divisions, fear, and paranoia in the community?

Don’t think that you can get away with risky, pointless actions. You’re not clairvoyant. The government targets even the most peaceful groups (including Quaker groups)  through its use of informers and provocateurs, and surveillance is unrelenting and omnipresent. So what can you do beyond carefully considering your actions and doing only things you feel good about?
You can take some simple steps to reduce the possibility of being arrested and prosecuted on phony charges. When people talk or joke about taking up arms, trashing communities, or bombing or burning down some place, speak loudly about how you would never participate in any action that could injure someone.

The fact that we know that we are not considering acts of terrorism can cause us to make light of statements about arson, bombings, and rock throwing, but the FBI and Homeland Security have sent infiltrators to political meetings to talk about using violence or property destruction, or initiated conversations while being wired to record conversations. Months later, out-of-context statements can appear as evidence that anarchists were plotting acts of terrorism. When the cases get to court, prosecutors and the media can point out that the accused activists didn’t object to the comments made by the informants, “proving” their guilt.

You can minimize the success of the state in harming you and your efforts by making it clear that you are not going to participate in acts of violence or destructive sabotage. (They’re not the same: violence involves damage to people or animals; sabotage involves—sometimes, not always—damage to property.) If you are planning to damage property, consider making your intentions clear in advance by offering a public explanation of your actions. Examples could include pulling up genetically modified crops or dismantling the separation wall in Palestine, actions designed to stop an egregious harm. At the same time you can refrain from giving the exact time or location of your plans so that the authorities will have at least some difficulty blocking your actions. While you may still be accused of taking part in a “terrorist” plot, you will have much more popular support, and you’ll make the authorities’ “terrorism” accusations less credible.

You can make your positions clear in your literature, statements to the media, at meetings, social gatherings, and during informal conversations. If people are joking about using violence or talking about the virtues of acts that could injure or kill people, it is wise to make several statements making it clear that you will not engage in any kind of violent activity. Point out that you are dedicated to nonviolent direct action and that anyone considering any other strategies or methods should talk elsewhere.

It once was possible to use the defense of entrapment, but that is no longer the case. Vice News contributor Natasha Lennard’s article, “The Line Between FBI Stings and Entrapment Has Not Blurred, It’s Gone,” makes this quite clear.

In her introduction to the Human Rights Watch report, “Illusions of Justice: Human Rights Abuses in US Terrorism Prosecutions,” Andrea Prasow said that “Americans have been told that their government is keeping them safe by preventing and prosecuting terrorism inside the US . . . But take a closer look and you realize that many of these people would never have committed a crime if not for law enforcement encouraging, pressuring, and sometimes paying them to commit terrorist acts.” While this report focuses on the entrapment and framing of people in the Muslim community, anarchists in the United States have also been targeted, as described in the report.

Natasha Lennard writes:

Since 9/11, Muslims in the US have been the focus of major counterterror stings. But other groups have been caught in the net where sting meets entrapment. A small group of self-identified anarchists in Cleveland were all convicted and sentenced to around 10 years in prison for allegedly plotting to blow up a bridge in Ohio. But an FBI infiltrator provided the target and the fake C-4 explosives. Rick Perlstein wrote of the case in Rolling Stone, ‘the alleged terrorist masterminds end up seeming, when the full story comes out, unable to terrorize their way out of a paper bag without law enforcement tutelage.

The case of entrapment in Cleveland provides concrete examples of what activists should watch out for. The FBI sent an informant, Shaquille Azir or “Kalvin Jackson,” to the kitchen at Occupy Cleveland on October 21, 2011, seeking to build a relationship with some of the cooks.
FBI Special Agent Ryan M. Taylor filed Federal Complaint 1:12-mj-3073 regarding the matter. The government presented it at the defendants’ May 1, 2012 arraignment; it details how the entrapment worked. It’s a stark warning to anyone who might be a target of the FBI. In sections 8 and 9, the FBI admits to using a Confidential Human Source (CHS) and Undercover Employee (UCE) to encourage acts of terrorism:

8. The (CHS) Confidential Human Source hereinafter has been working as a source for the FBI since July 20, 2011. The CHS has a criminal record including one conviction for possession of cocaine in 1990, one conviction for robbery in 1991, and four convictions for passing bad checks between 1991 and 2011. The CHS is currently on probation in Cuyahoga and Lorain Counties for passing bad checks. Since July 20, 2011, the CHS has been paid approximately $5,750 for services and $550 for expenses, the CHS has not been paid since beginning her/his probation.

9. The (UCE) Undercover Employee has been employed by the FBI for over 15 years and has been working in an undercover capacity for 10 years. The UCE has received ongoing training in conducting undercover investigations and has participated in dozens of investigations in an undercover capacity.

Section 12 suggests the FBI was seeking anarchists to frame at Occupy Cleveland.

12. Based on an initial report of potential criminal activity and threats involving anarchists who would be attending an event held by a protest group, the Cleveland FBI directed the CHS to attend that event. On October 21, 2011, at approximately 6:30 pm, and while the CHS was attending the event, the CHS identified four suspicious males with walkie-talkie radios around their necks. Three of the four men had masks or something covering their faces; one male did not. The men were wearing black or dark colored shirts, had black backpacks, carried the anarchist flags and acted differently than the other people in attendance.

Section 29 shows that informant Shaquille Azir was recording meetings for the FBI and claimed that one of those targeted, Michael Wright, had talked of making smoke bombs from a recipe taken from the William Powell book titled The Anarchist Cookbook (NOT this Anarchist Cookbook).

(In a separate case, according to a terrorism complaint filed in Brooklyn in April 2015, FBI informants provided Asia Siddiqui and Noelle Velentzas with copies of the Powell book on November 2, 2014, circling the types of bombs the government thought would help build their case.)

29. On March 22, 2012, the CHS was provided a body recorder [and] consensually recorded a meeting between the CHS and WRIGHT. In sum and substance, WRIGHT described using an upcoming festival as an opportunity to create a civil distraction in order to commit a larger act of violence. WRIGHT also discussed making smoke bombs and other explosive destructive devices using the ‘Anarchist Cookbook,’ a book that describes the construction and use of weapons and explosives. The following are some of the relevant excerpts from that conversation:

Sections 97 and 98 show that phone calls and conversations were recorded a couple of days before the FBI-engineered May Day fake bombing:

97. On April 29, 2012, the UCE recorded a telephone call with WRIGHT. In sum and substance WRIGHT said that he would call the UCE around 1:30 pm to give the UCE the exact meeting location, however it was in the Warrensville Heights, Ohio area.

98. On April 29, 2012, the CHS was provided with a body recorder and consensually recorded a meeting with the UCE and WRIGHT, BAXTER, and HAYNE.

In Section 110 of the federal complaint, the FBI admits that the alleged criminal activity that they were investigating amounted to no more than “smoke grenades and destruction of signage on buildings in downtown Cleveland”:

110. WRIGHT recruited BAXTER, C.S. and the CHS to participate in some form of direct action, initially involving smoke grenades and destruction of signage on buildings in downtown Cleveland;” Erick Trickey of Cleveland Magazine noted that defendant Connor Stevens expressed support for nonviolent direct action.

On a Saturday in April, about three weeks before his arrest, Stevens served dinner in Market Square with Food Not Bombs. He got talking with fellow volunteer Aidan Kelly about Ernest Hemingway’s novel For Whom the Bell Tolls, in which an American joins the Republican side in the Spanish Civil War to fight a fascist uprising, and is assigned to dynamite a bridge. “I remember distinctly talking about his ideas about pacifism,” Kelly says. He and Stevens agreed that movements such as Food Not Bombs offered a better alternative for creating social change than violence.

Trickey writes of the first meeting of Stevens and co-defendant Brandon Baxter, a meeting like those you may have had if you travel in anarchist circles.

At Food Not Bombs last year, Stevens met another young anarchist, Brandon Baxter, as intense and passionate as Stevens was cerebral.

The 19-year-old Lakewood High graduate’s influences weren’t long-dead, bearded writers, but websites ranging from the far right (the conspiracy-minded InfoWars) to the far left (the Anonymous “hacktivist” movement). He embraced Food Not Bombs with gusto, screaming “Free food!” across Market Square when dinner was ready.

Yet the FBI claims that Wright downloaded Powell’s version of the Anarchist Cookbook with the purpose of making a bomb, which would have been a good trick given that to all appearances Powell’s book has never been sold in e-book format.

111. WRIGHT repeatedly asserted he downloaded the ‘Anarchist Cookbook’ in an attempt to learn how to make explosives including constructing plastic explosives from bleach and other household items; . . .

The complaint finally shows that the FBI was moving their own plot along by providing the defendants with phony C4.

112. When presented with the opportunity to purchase C4, WRIGHT and BAXTER met with an individual offering it for sale;

Michael Winter of USA Today reported that “Three self-described anarchists were sentenced to prison Tuesday for trying to blow up a highway bridge between Cleveland and Akron using dummy explosives provided by an undercover FBI agent.”

Ed Meyer of the Akron Beacon Journal wrote that “U.S. District Judge David D. Dowd, Jr. rejected the government’s insistence that the defendants get 30 years in prison and instead gave Douglas L. Wright 11½ years, Brandon L. Baxter nine years and nine months and Connor C. Stevens eight years and one month.”

Both of Stevens’ parents, James and Gail Stevens, lashed out at the government’s actions.

“My son is guilty, and so are you!” James Stevens told federal prosecutor Duncan Brown at one point. Gail Stevens called her son “my hero,” said she loved him with all her heart, and that he never would have acted as he did if not for the provocateur.

The entrapment of the young Occupy anarchists in Cleveland was the most dramatic attempt to discredit the Occupy movement. And it worked—with the help of some protesters who played into the hands of the police.

Efforts to re-energize the movement failed as the media reported on a wave of Occupy-related violence. Reuters reported:

Occupy Wall Street protesters smashed windows in Seattle, fled police on scooters through the streets of New York, and clashed with officers in Oakland on Tuesday in a May Day effort to revive the movement against economic injustice with demonstrations around the United States. . . .

New York police reported 10 instances of harmless white powder—apparently meant to raise an anthrax scare—being mailed to financial institutions and others . . .

In Seattle, some 50 black-clad protesters marched through downtown, carrying black flags on sticks they used to shatter the windows of several stores including a Nike Town outlet and an HSBC bank before police moved them out of the area. Others smashed windows at a Seattle federal building, and swarms of demonstrators gathered in an open-air plaza.

May 2012 was not the first time authorities used an alleged May Day bomb plot to discredit anarchists. Chicago police, seeking to stop the movement for an eight-hour workday, attacked a peaceful rally in May 1886. A bomb was set off and police shot into the rally in what has become known as the Haymarket massacre. The bomber was never identified and the government provided no evidence linking them to the bombing, yet anarchists August Spies, Samuel Fielden, Adolph Fischer, George Engel, Louis Lingg, and Albert Parsons were accused of the bombing, convicted, and executed.

Historians James Joll and Timothy Messer-Kruse claim the evidence points to Rudolph Schnaubelt, brother-in-law of Michael Schwab, as the likely bomber. Howard Zinn, in A People’s History of the United States also indicates it was Schnaubelt, suggesting “he was a provocateur, posing as an anarchist, who threw the bomb so police would have a pretext to arrest leaders of Chicago’s anarchist movement.”

Spies would later testify, “I was very indignant. I knew from experience of the past that this butchering of people was done for the express purpose of defeating the eight-hour movement.”

That was in the 19th century. The government has been framing, imprisoning, and occasionally murdering anarchists ever since.

But you’re not powerless. You can take some simple steps to protect yourself from being arrested, charged, and convicted of planning or participating in acts of terrorism. The FBI and Homeland Security have sent infiltrators to our meetings to talk about using violence. The authorities will often attempt to give the impression in affidavits or typed memos that someone other than their informant or undercover officer made statements advocating violence, and imply that everyone participating in the discussion supported its use.

One of the most successful strategies used by the FBI is to have those infiltrating joke about the use of violence. When the words they used become the text in memos or court filings, they’re out of context, they no longer seem humorous, and can be presented as a serious conversation supporting the use of violence. Since those participating in such conversation consider the statements nothing more than an awkward attempt to be humorous or fit in with the group, no one thinks to make it clear that they don’t intend to participate in a violent action. Months later, out-of-context statements can appear as evidence that anarchists were plotting acts of terrorism. Even if you state clearly that it is not appropriate to talk or joke about violence, you can still be arrested and tried, but you will greatly reduce that possibility if you do speak up.

Activists have been charged as terrorists after getting a ride home with people that turned out to be infiltrators. After dropping off their passengers, provocateurs and those they’re setting up have burned down buildings or torched vehicles. The fact that you were seen getting into the informant’s vehicle before the act of alleged terrorism happened can provide the evidence needed to accuse you of taking part. The FBI and their informants are not always honest, and may choose not to mention that you were not at the scene of the crime, even though they can honestly say you got into a vehicle with the arsonist. Sometimes federal prosecutors have been able to get convictions simply because the set-up activists were intimidated into not expressing their dedication to nonviolence, fearing that they would be accused of being “weak” and not serious about social change, the well-being of animals, or the environment. Both provocateurs and holier-than-thou true believers use such fears to manipulate people into saying or doing things they would never otherwise say or do. Don’t let anyone manipulate you into silence. Don’t let anyone manipulate you into saying or doing things that could land you in prison.

The first step is to make it clear that you are not going to participate in acts of violence or destructive sabotage. You can make this clear in your literature, statements to the media, at meetings, social gatherings and during informal conversations. If people are joking about using violence or talking about the virtues of acts that could injure or kill people, it is wise to make several statements making it clear that you will not engage in any kind of violent activity. Point out that you are dedicated to nonviolence and that anyone considering any other strategies or methods should meet elsewhere. To help protect your friends you might also point out that it is very unlikely that such plans could be concealed from the government. As you can see in the Cleveland case, otherwise innocent conversations can be recorded and provide support for prosecution.

Another step you can take is to include statements about nonviolence in your literature about any direct action you might be planning or supporting. On occasion, the media and prosecutors will claim that our literature didn’t make any mention that our protests would be nonviolent, and use that as “proof” we are terrorists. If your group is planning an action, you can protect yourself by including explicit language about nonviolence in your publications. This can be difficult when working in coalition with groups that might not share our principles of nonviolence, but you could publish your own literature on the action. Don’t be intimidated into remaining silent on the issue of violence. It isn’t necessary to exclude reference to nonviolent direct action just because people are arguing in support of a “diversity of tactics.” You may initiate a pledge of nonviolence for the campaign you are supporting and organize nonviolence training sessions. Nonviolent resistance is every bit as valid as other methods and is often more effective.

Nonviolent direct action, noncooperation, and nonviolent resistance can be very empowering. It takes courage to organize and participate in campaigns of nonviolent struggle. Nonviolent struggle can build trust between participants and the public. Campaigns of nonviolent direct action and civil disobedience can be so effective that governments and corporations will try anything to push our movement into adopting violent tactics. That is one reason groups like Food Not Bombs have been the focus of infiltration and why the authorities rely on agents provocateur to reduce the impact of nonviolence, while sowing fear and alienation.

Don’t let people intimidate you into silence. People can make comments about nonviolent activists being “wimps” or “pussies,” that nonviolence never works, or that you are not really committed to change if you aren’t willing to use sabotage or violence. You might even hear that nonviolence is racist because people of color “have to take up arms,” and that white, first-world people have the luxury to use nonviolence. Infiltrators or government agents may be talking to some of your friends at cafes, clubs, or other public locations, promoting the idea that armed resistance or arson is the only solution. Honest discussion of all tactics and methods, including types of violence, is fine, but make it clear that you and your group are dedicated to nonviolence.

At the same time, it is not wise to make claims of infiltration or accuse someone of being an informant. It is best to not worry about infiltration and to stay focused on the work of your organization. Just take the simple precautions of asking that any discussions of violent tactics take place somewhere other than at public meetings, make it clear you are dedicated to nonviolence; and make that plain in your publications and through organizing nonviolence trainings. If you do this, attempts to convict you on terrorism charges will likely fail, and the fear and mistrust that so often destroy movements will be defused. The government can use the fear of infiltration as a way of destroying trust in your community. Don’t accuse people—just be careful about what you say and do.

You can make sure you and your friends will not fall prey to the government’s efforts to disrupt your work. First, stay focused on the fundamentals of your project or campaign. Don’t feel guilty about refusing to take violent action. Since the world is facing so many dire crises, it might seem rational to consider arson or other acts deemed violent by the corporate state, but these tactics often backfire. They can cause the public to withdraw any support they may have had for your cause. The use of violence also breeds distrust among activists, because of the secrecy involved. But as we have learned from Ed Snowden and other whistle blowers, it is nearly impossible to have secrets in the United States. According to the Washington Post, over eighty billion dollars is spent each year on government and corporate spying.

A campaign of violence would add to the disempowerment in our community and scare the public into greater support of the authorities. If you feel you must investigate tactics that include violent action, ask yourself whether such tactics will do more harm than good for you personally and for the cause you support. Are you really ready to live fearing capture? How will you feel if your friends spend their lives in prison while you’re all portrayed as dangerous and crazy? Will your actions really inspire the public to rise up and save the earth? How will you feel if you kill someone or if one of your friends is killed? Can you really see yourself coordinating a campaign of bombings, arson, shootings? How will you feel spending the rest of your life in prison, seeing the stress this puts on your family and friends?

While it is possible you could spend decades in prison for taking nonviolent direct action, you are likely to feel more empowered and have wider support on the outside than if you were imprisoned for violent acts. Unlike people who are doing life in prison for bombings or shootings, if you are sentenced to a long prison term for organizing or participating in a campaign of nonviolent direct action and noncooperation, you have a much greater chance of inspiring popular support, possibly achieving your political or environmental goals, and of leaving prison before your sentence is up.

In addition, mass nonviolent direct action based on a thoughtful strategy is more likely to be effective. Agents provocateur encourage drastic actions, knowing we are knowledgeable about environmental and economic threats. If pressured, you can remind your friends that many of the anarchists in prison were framed for “terrorist” acts and that as anarchists we are dedicated to nonviolent direct action.

Along with making it clear you are not going to be silent when people suggest using violence, you may want to organize nonviolence preparations, trainings or workshops with your friends or organizations. Suggest that your community study the history of nonviolent direct action in books by people such as Emma Goldman, Erica Chenoweth, Gene Sharp, Martin Luther King Jr., and others who experienced first hand the power of noncooperation and nonviolence.

Again, be concerned about jokes concerning violence. If people joke about armed revolution, bombings, rock throwing or other acts of violence, make it clear that you are dedicated to nonviolent direct action and ask them to stop. You might remind your friends that conversations and jokes about using violence have resulted in activists being framed and sentenced to long prison terms. Terms sometime decades long. The activists that are joking about violence or making statements about the need to use violence are not necessarily infiltrators or police agents, so don’t make any accusations. They may have been influenced by someone they met or may have read some of the many books romanticizing violence. It is best not to worry and to stay focused on the work of your group. The government can use the fear of infiltration as a way of destroying trust in your community. Again, simply remind your friends that you are dedicated to nonviolent direct action and that we don’t joke or talk about taking violent action.

While armed resistance has worked to overthrow governments and change the power structure of some countries, in virtually every case the system that resulted continued to use violence to retain its authority. That is the exact opposite of what anarchists are seeking: a society free of coercion, exploitation and domination. Nonviolent social change offers the clearest route there.

* * *

Keith McHenry is the author of Hungry for Peace: How You Can Help End Poverty and War with Food Not Bombs.

hungry

 


Anarchist Cookbook front coverIn the new Anarchist Cookbook (2015), we considered various means to social change, recommending some and criticizing others, among them “simple living.” We noted its inadequacy as a primary approach to change, but also noted that both of us follow many “simple living” practices simply because they make sense.

A few days ago we received the following from Tammy Mackenzie, of the Print Our Home blog, which advocates simple living and has a large amount of material on various aspects of the subject. Her comments are presented here in their entirety.


Hello Mr. McHenry, Mr. Bufe:

Thank you for your excellent cookbook.

I humbly submit that your section “Simple Living”, page 48, is partially incorrect, and needlessly divisive. Here is a short essay to make the point and case, 800 words which include 17 primary and/or respected sources for reference. I hope that it can be of service.

Simple living is a process of making conscious choices about day to day life that are more ecological (2: Science Daily), more economical (3: Mother Earth News), and healthier (4: Johns Hopkins).  It is also adopted specifically by many people (5: Research Gate) as a way to reduce reliance on and destabilize consumerist / capitalist systems (6: Sagepub Journals). It’s called “simple”, because it happens that many healthy and affordable things are simpler than their mass-produced counterparts. Like vinegar for cleaning, or growing your own tomatoes instead of trucking them across continents.

Examples of ways in which people have “simplified”, or “found sufficiency” are well explained in your book’s chapter, Common Approaches to Social Change, page 48: “They include growing food locally, using alternatives to private cars, recycling, using recycled building materials, using environmentally friendly building practices (passive solar, etc.), using alternative energy sources, growing your own fruits and vegetables, and eating lower on the food chain.”

However, after acknowledging some of the very good reasons for making such choices, including large-scale stakes such as the fossil fuel industry and food additive subsidies, the conclusions of your book’s section on simple living are then incomplete, and partially incorrect, in 3 ways.

FIRST:

“Simple Living” is not a day-and-night drastic and expensive lifestyle change as your section concludes. For most people it is a series of incremental changes (7: Wikihow) towards better ways that save them time, money, and stress.

In fact, the “average” person who looks into Simple Living practices (8: Research Gate) is something like an enlightened soccer mom. Here are some demographics (6: Sagepub Journals).

  • They’re family-minded: 68% of them are married, 64% have children. In the literature, it is mostly women who report.
  • They’re urban and suburban omnivores: only 21% live on farms and though
  • 83% grow some food, only 21% are vegetarian or vegan.
  • They’re socially active: 67% are involved in community groups, 38% in barter or exchange groups, 90% want more political action on issues of pertinence to living simply.
  • They’re from all economic classes, with about 70% reducing their income as they go along.

87% of them are happier because of voluntary simplicity and, in western countries, some measure of simplifiying can be seen in 20% to 30% of the population, depending on the country.

SECOND:

Simplifying daily life contributes to non-violent social change in
important ways

  • Grows local economies: People in the habit of thinking in detail about how to improve little things tend to congregate into groups to share resources, think about bigger things, and start creating flexible local economies as well as food autonomy. Maker culture (9: Techshop) is an example of voluntary simplicity aggregating at mass scales.
  • Increases personal freedoms: Old (10: Yes Magazine) and new (11: Taylor & Francis Online) ways of doing things without mass-production are retained, and promoted, decreasing the population’s reliance on capitalist growth/waste cycles as well as on markets. It also saves people money (6: Sagepub Journals).
  • Inspires activism: Studies show that people get happier as they decrease their consumption of disposable goods and increase simplicity in daily life (6: Sagepub Journals). Further studies show that happy people are more likely to affect social change (12: Ideas.Repec.org). Anyhow, that’s how it’s working in Canada (13: Carleton University).
  • Involves the whole population: Some people are left out (14: Notre Dame University) of many of the ways in which social change can be inspired. These include young families, seniors, and handicapped persons. Simple living, by virtue of being accessible to all as well as its other advantages, makes it possible to mobilize a lot more of the 3.5% of the population (15: Rational Insurgence) we look to for social power.

Teaches people to think rationally: It is a rewarding way for people from all economic and social classes to learn how to research, critically analyze, test, and repeat experiments. Such skills are fundamental to learning to understand the current political and ecological situation.

THIRD

Intersectionality and respect are vital to social change.

The authorities and media have worked hard (16: Huffington Post, 17: Forbes) to make adherents of living simply look like cultish, dogmatic flower children. Consequently, even in anarchist and social change publications, derision is common and the strengths of simple living in educating people, helping to create community, and inspiring the autonomy that gives people courage to move are often overlooked.

Your book is truly a masterpiece, and will have an influence on humanity for a long time. I am concerned that the chapter on Simple Living as written risks being counter-productive to our shared social hopes, but am personally grateful for the many tools you have assembled for us.

References:

1. https://www.foodnotbombs.net/a.%20Anarchist%20Cookbook%20interior%207-30-15-1.pdf

2. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160224132923.html

3. http://www.motherearthnews.com/homesteading-and-livestock/self-reliance/tips-to-save-money-zm0z14fmzrob

4. https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-center-for-a-livable-future/news-room/News-Releases/2014/Study-Suggests-Home-Cooking-Main-Ingredient-in-Healthier-Diet.html

5. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270720813_Voluntary_simplifiers_as_political_consumers_Individuals_practicing_politics_through_reduced_consumption

6. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1469540512444019

7. http://www.wikihow.com/Live-a-Simple-and-Peaceful-Life

8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228310981_The_Voluntary_Simplicity_Movement_Reimagining_the_Good_Life_Beyond_Consumer_Culture

9. http://www.techshop.ws/images/0071821139%20Maker%20Movement%20Manifesto%20Sample%20Chapter.pdf

10. http://www.yesmagazine.org/happiness/the-movement-to-live-more-simply-is-older-than-you-thought

11. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13527260701869148

12. https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diwsop/diw_sp199.html

13. https://curve.carleton.ca/system/files/etd/3ab45993-4497-4fc5-9fc9-b482d516d9b3/etd_pdf/940c60612fde74d3a9e1c8ceb240c9ad/hatfield-voluntarysimplicitylifestyleactivisiminlate.pdf

14. https://mobilizingideas.wordpress.com/2015/09/02/who-gets-left-out-when-we-talk-about-activism/

15. https://rationalinsurgent.com/2013/11/04/my-talk-at-tedxboulder-civil-resistance-and-the-3-5-rule/

16. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/phillip-vannini-and-jonathan-taggart/offgrid-living-voluntary-_b_3497138.html

17. http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/06/28/to-discredit-the-anti-capitalists-pro-capitalists-need-to-learn-how-to-use-words/#3000426f60e3


Anarcho-Syndicalist ReviewAnarcho-Syndicalist Review just published a nice review of the new Anarchist Cookbook in their Fall 2016 issue. Here’s the full review:

___________

The Anarchist Cookbook, by Keith McHenry with Chaz Bufe. See Sharp Press, 2015, 154 pp. [8.5″X11″], $19.95.

This book was released as a refutation of the earlier book of the same title, which (in addition to its bad politics and dangerous recipes has repeatedly been used by police to entrap people on terrorism charges. Its first 89 pages briefly discuss anarchist theory and ‘recipes for social change’ such as organizing events (a practical, detailed section that any novice should find helpful), blockades and occupations. Part III opens with a discussion of the politics of food before offering 24 pages of vegan recipes, many suited for large crowds. Chris Hedges’ introduction offers a sympathetic appraisal of the anarchist tradition, stressing (as does the book as a whole) the movement’s fundamentally nonviolent nature.

Anarchist Cookbook front coverThe book is grounded in Food Not Bombs’ practice of activist feeding, but also draws on See Sharp’s library of anarchist pamphlets. Part One distinguishes anarchism from terrorism, primitivism, chaos, rejection of (non-coercive) organization, amoral egotism, and the right-wing has co-opted as capitalist-friendly ‘libertarianism.’ An excerpt from the classic You Can’t Blow Up a Social Relationship reminds us that revolution is fundamentally about organizing people to create a new society.

The practical nature of the book emerges in its second half. There is extensive and sensible discussion of provocateurs and informants, some of who have lured FNB volunteers into long prison terms. Brief chapters offer steps on organizing meetings, a consensus flow chart (FNB has always been fond of this profoundly anti-democratic decision-making process), promoting local events, and convening a gathering. There are useful tips for novices on public outreach, such as how to pack a literature table’s contents, and why rocks (police can accuse one of stocking them as weapons) are not as good as rubber bands to secure flyers.

McHenry believes that conscious eating brings people together to live more lightly off the land. Community is formed as we meet and eat together. So he offers recipes for small groups of five or six, many of which can be expanded to feed 100. The recipes are generally simple, hard to mess up (necessary if volunteers unused to working with each other are doing the cooking), and filling.

__________

Anarcho-Syndicalist Review is always well worth reading. The cover article in this issue, “The Cult of Che,” is worth the price of the entire magazine. Subscriptions are $15 for three issues. and the address is ASR, P.O. Box 42531, Philadelphia, PA 19101. Their web site is at http://www.syndicalist.us.

 


We put up our 1,000th post about three weeks ago. Since then, we’ve been looking through everything we’ve posted, and have been putting up “best of” lists in our most popular categories.

This is the ninth of our first-1,000 “best of” lists. We’ve already posted the Science Fiction, HumorMusicInterviews, AtheismEconomics, Science/Skepticism, and Addictions lists, and will shortly be putting up our final “best of”: Religion.

Here, we’ve folded three categories (Anarchism, Libertarianism, and Politics) into this post because of the relative paucity of posts on Anarchism and Libertarianism. We hope you’ll enjoy at least some of these posts.

Anarchism

Libertarianism

Politics


Anarchist Cookbook front coverby Chaz Bufe (co-author The Anarchist Cookbook)

At a reading last weekend, an audience member asked me and Keith (McHenry, primary author of the “cookbook” and co-founder of Food Not Bombs) why we had written a new “Anarchist Cookbook.” The question took us aback a bit, as we’d assumed that the answer was blindingly obvious. Evidently it’s not. Here’s the story:

Forty-five years ago, William Powell, then a 19-year-old kid, spent several weeks prowling through the stacks at the New York Public Library searching for every instructional  book and article he could find on drug making, bomb making, and other forms of mayhem. He then compiled all of this material, unedited, into a book. He field tested none of the “recipes,” and as a result the book is riddled with “recipes” that simply don’t work and/ or are dangerous to the user.  At that point, Powell had another unknown write introductory political material that was as incoherent as it was inaccurate (equating anarchism with Maoism, for instance), and that explicitly recommended violence as a political tactic.

Powell then presented this toxic mess to publisher Lyle Stuart. Evidently smelling money, Stuart, over the objections of his staff, accepted the book. He also did something I (and virtually everyone else in the publishing field) consider grossly unethical: he presented Powell with  a contract in which Powell surrendered the copyright to him.  Powell signed, and a misbegotten monster was born. (Powell subsequently had a change of heart and has publicly denounced his book and asked that it be taken out of print, but because he handed over the copyright to Stuart, he has no control over that; we included Powell’s denunciation in the front matter of our new “cookbook.”)

Powell’s book has been in print continuously ever since it was first published in 1971, and has done untold harm. After publication, the “cookbook”  quickly became a very popular ornament for young guys who wanted an edgy coffee table book with which to impress their friends. Fortunately, probably not one in ten ever read it, probably not one in twenty ever tried its lousy drug recipes (e.g., for “bananadine”–a “drug” derived from banana peels), and probably not one in a hundred ever tried its explosives recipes.

Still, it was a constant irritant to actual anarchists. Year after year, decade after decade, it reinforced the stereotype that anarchists are violent morons with no coherent political philosophy.

Worse, the FBI began using the book to entrap naive political activists. They’d give a copy of the book to their victims, or have the victims buy it, and then use the book as evidence in trumped-up terrorism cases. This use of the Powell book accelerated drastically after 9/11, with set-up victims being both Muslims and leftist political activists. A case in point is the 2012 “Cleveland Five” case, in which the FBI used the book as part of its entrapment of five young, homeless guys at Occupy Cleveland, who it had enticed with a place to stay, hot showers, and food. As a result of this FBI-orchestrated “plot,” which prominently featured the Powell book, the “Cleveland Five” received sentences ranging from eight years and one month to eleven-and-a-half years.

That was the situation that faced us when Keith and I began talking about producing a real anarchist cookbook two years ago. Anarchists had been talking about producing such a book for decades, but nothing ever came of it, and it had become obvious that if we didn’t write, and See Sharp Press didn’t publish, a real anarchist cookbook, no one else was likely to do so. (There are a few PDF food recipe “books” around under the name, but no other physical books.)

We decided to go considerably beyond food recipes in our new “cookbook.” We decided that we’d include the following: 1) Accurate information on the nature of anarchism; 2) A section on why use of violence is almost always a self-defeating political tactic; 3) A section on nonviolent political activism, both from a theoretical and practical standpoint; 4) An evaluation of all common social change tactics and approaches; 5) A how-to section detailing ways of putting those tactics and approaches into practice; 6) A section on the nuts and bolts of political organizing; 7) A section on food politics; 8) Vegan recipes for both large and small groups; and 9) A lengthy bibliography, to give those interested in further study a handy jumping-off point.

To put this another way, we decided to write an antidote to the Powell book, a book that would do good rather than harm.

We think we succeeded. We hope you’ll agree.


Graphic from The Anarchist Cookbook

On: MAY 1, 1984. At: (where else?)

MARX MEADOW in GOLDEN GATE PARK

CONTEST RULES

 

You will have two hours to compose a manifesto using the terms struggle, heroic, vanguard, revolution, revolutionary, reified, liberated zone, workers party (penalty for use of apostrophe), people’s army, revolutionary government, youth (as a plural), people of color (not colored people), differently (insert preferred adjective — abled is acceptable though pedestrian), phallocracy, womyn, wimmin, wimin, wimmen, wymyn, petit bourgeois, trade union consciousness, moral imperative, moral duty, revolutionary duty, infantile, objectively reactionary, objectively counterrevolutionary, imperialism, bosses, stooge, puppet, decadent, exploitation, fight, smash, hands off, build, stop, unleash, free (fill in the blank—Bob Avakian is a good choice), revisionist, fascist, opportunist, deviationistrunning dog, white skin privilegeand islamophopic. You must use all terms!! (Special prize for the most inventive neologism. Last year’s winner: cisgender.)

You will then have two hours to put your manifesto into publishable form. Supply your own tools. Preferred typesetting equipment: dot-matrix printer or old manual typewriter (extra points for worn ribbons, broken or filled-in characters, handwritten corrections). The longest, most unreadable entry wins. The triumphant manifesto will then be copied on a 25-year-old xerox machine which hasn’t been cleaned since 2002, bound with a staple in one corner, and distributed to contest participants. Losers will face the moral imperative of reading it. Those who refuse will be unmasked as objectively counterrevolutionary petit bourgeois anarchists and will face the revolutionary justice of the people’s democratic dictatorship.

* * *

–from The Anarchist Cookbook; this is a slightly edited version of a fake ad that appeared in Processed World magazine about 35 years ago. Amusingly, a few people reportedly showed up at the designated time and place for the “contest.”

Anarchist Cookbook front cover

(And, yes folks, in case you’re wondering, “The People’s Democratic Dictatorship” is the actual title of one of Mao Tse-Tung’s — nowadays Mao Zedong’s — essays.)


Anarchist Cookbook front cover(This is an excerpt from The Anarchist Cookbook by Keith McHenry with Chaz Bufe, introduction by Chris Hedges.)

by Keith McHenry

The government wastes millions, probably tens of millions, of dollars annually spying on and disrupting the anarchist movement. It wouldn’t waste all that money trying to stop us if it wasn’t worried that we might inspire resistance.

Even though most anarchists are dedicated to nonviolent direct action and many participate in useful projects such as infoshops, bicycle co-ops, and the sharing and growing of food, the police, state agencies, federal agencies, and military intelligence units in the United States routinely infiltrate anarchist groups, and government provocateurs have repeatedly attempted to entrap activists. For the most part, they’ve failed at that.

But unfortunately some activists have not only been arrested, but have been tried, convicted, and sentenced to years in prison.

The FBI and other law enforcement agencies can and do frame or entrap anarchists to devastating effect, so it is important to do all you can to reduce the possibility of being set up on phony “terrorism” or other charges. Not only could you be removed from the community for many years, your family and friends would suffer through your ordeals in court and through the pain of knowing you are in prison. Defense activities also siphon off huge amounts of energy, time, and resources from the good work of building a better world.

Still it is not always possible to avoid being the target of the authorities, so take precautions to limit the damage if the state seeks to silence you. Taking actions that you can be proud of may be the most important single thing you can do. Think of the consequences of your acts. How will you feel if someone is injured or killed because of something you did? Could your actions be used to discredit the movement? Could they add to the divisions, fear, and paranoia in the community?

Don’t think that you can get away with risky, pointless actions. You’re not clairvoyant. The government targets even the most peaceful groups (including Quaker groups)  through its use of informers and provocateurs, and surveillance is unrelenting and omnipresent. So what can you do beyond carefully considering your actions and doing only things you feel good about?
You can take some simple steps to reduce the possibility of being arrested and prosecuted on phony charges. When people talk or joke about taking up arms, trashing communities, or bombing or burning down some place, speak loudly about how you would never participate in any action that could injure someone.

The fact that we know that we are not considering acts of terrorism can cause us to make light of statements about arson, bombings, and rock throwing, but the FBI and Homeland Security have sent infiltrators to political meetings to talk about using violence or property destruction, or initiated conversations while being wired to record conversations. Months later, out-of-context statements can appear as evidence that anarchists were plotting acts of terrorism. When the cases get to court, prosecutors and the media can point out that the accused activists didn’t object to the comments made by the informants, “proving” their guilt.

You can minimize the success of the state in harming you and your efforts by making it clear that you are not going to participate in acts of violence or destructive sabotage. (They’re not the same: violence involves damage to people or animals; sabotage involves—sometimes, not always—damage to property.) If you are planning to damage property, consider making your intentions clear in advance by offering a public explanation of your actions. Examples could include pulling up genetically modified crops or dismantling the separation wall in Palestine, actions designed to stop an egregious harm. At the same time you can refrain from giving the exact time or location of your plans so that the authorities will have at least some difficulty blocking your actions. While you may still be accused of taking part in a “terrorist” plot, you will have much more popular support, and you’ll make the authorities’ “terrorism” accusations less credible.

You can make your positions clear in your literature, statements to the media, at meetings, social gatherings, and during informal conversations. If people are joking about using violence or talking about the virtues of acts that could injure or kill people, it is wise to make several statements making it clear that you will not engage in any kind of violent activity. Point out that you are dedicated to nonviolent direct action and that anyone considering any other strategies or methods should talk elsewhere.

It once was possible to use the defense of entrapment, but that is no longer the case. Vice News contributor Natasha Lennard’s article, “The Line Between FBI Stings and Entrapment Has Not Blurred, It’s Gone,” makes this quite clear.

In her introduction to the Human Rights Watch report, “Illusions of Justice: Human Rights Abuses in US Terrorism Prosecutions,” Andrea Prasow said that “Americans have been told that their government is keeping them safe by preventing and prosecuting terrorism inside the US . . . But take a closer look and you realize that many of these people would never have committed a crime if not for law enforcement encouraging, pressuring, and sometimes paying them to commit terrorist acts.” While this report focuses on the entrapment and framing of people in the Muslim community, anarchists in the United States have also been targeted, as described in the report.

Natasha Lennard writes:

Since 9/11, Muslims in the US have been the focus of major counterterror stings. But other groups have been caught in the net where sting meets entrapment. A small group of self-identified anarchists in Cleveland were all convicted and sentenced to around 10 years in prison for allegedly plotting to blow up a bridge in Ohio. But an FBI infiltrator provided the target and the fake C-4 explosives. Rick Perlstein wrote of the case in Rolling Stone, ‘the alleged terrorist masterminds end up seeming, when the full story comes out, unable to terrorize their way out of a paper bag without law enforcement tutelage.

The case of entrapment in Cleveland provides concrete examples of what activists should watch out for. The FBI sent an informant, Shaquille Azir or “Kalvin Jackson,” to the kitchen at Occupy Cleveland on October 21, 2011, seeking to build a relationship with some of the cooks.
FBI Special Agent Ryan M. Taylor filed Federal Complaint 1:12-mj-3073 regarding the matter. The government presented it at the defendants’ May 1, 2012 arraignment; it details how the entrapment worked. It’s a stark warning to anyone who might be a target of the FBI. In sections 8 and 9, the FBI admits to using a Confidential Human Source (CHS) and Undercover Employee (UCE) to encourage acts of terrorism:

8. The (CHS) Confidential Human Source hereinafter has been working as a source for the FBI since July 20, 2011. The CHS has a criminal record including one conviction for possession of cocaine in 1990, one conviction for robbery in 1991, and four convictions for passing bad checks between 1991 and 2011. The CHS is currently on probation in Cuyahoga and Lorain Counties for passing bad checks. Since July 20, 2011, the CHS has been paid approximately $5,750 for services and $550 for expenses, the CHS has not been paid since beginning her/his probation.

9. The (UCE) Undercover Employee has been employed by the FBI for over 15 years and has been working in an undercover capacity for 10 years. The UCE has received ongoing training in conducting undercover investigations and has participated in dozens of investigations in an undercover capacity.

Section 12 suggests the FBI was seeking anarchists to frame at Occupy Cleveland.

12. Based on an initial report of potential criminal activity and threats involving anarchists who would be attending an event held by a protest group, the Cleveland FBI directed the CHS to attend that event. On October 21, 2011, at approximately 6:30 pm, and while the CHS was attending the event, the CHS identified four suspicious males with walkie-talkie radios around their necks. Three of the four men had masks or something covering their faces; one male did not. The men were wearing black or dark colored shirts, had black backpacks, carried the anarchist flags and acted differently than the other people in attendance.

Section 29 shows that informant Shaquille Azir was recording meetings for the FBI and claimed that one of those targeted, Michael Wright, had talked of making smoke bombs from a recipe taken from the William Powell book titled The Anarchist Cookbook (NOT this Anarchist Cookbook).

(In a separate case, according to a terrorism complaint filed in Brooklyn in April 2015, FBI informants provided Asia Siddiqui and Noelle Velentzas with copies of the Powell book on November 2, 2014, circling the types of bombs the government thought would help build their case.)

29. On March 22, 2012, the CHS was provided a body recorder [and] consensually recorded a meeting between the CHS and WRIGHT. In sum and substance, WRIGHT described using an upcoming festival as an opportunity to create a civil distraction in order to commit a larger act of violence. WRIGHT also discussed making smoke bombs and other explosive destructive devices using the ‘Anarchist Cookbook,’ a book that describes the construction and use of weapons and explosives. The following are some of the relevant excerpts from that conversation:

Sections 97 and 98 show that phone calls and conversations were recorded a couple of days before the FBI-engineered May Day fake bombing:

97. On April 29, 2012, the UCE recorded a telephone call with WRIGHT. In sum and substance WRIGHT said that he would call the UCE around 1:30 pm to give the UCE the exact meeting location, however it was in the Warrensville Heights, Ohio area.

98. On April 29, 2012, the CHS was provided with a body recorder and consensually recorded a meeting with the UCE and WRIGHT, BAXTER, and HAYNE.

In Section 110 of the federal complaint, the FBI admits that the alleged criminal activity that they were investigating amounted to no more than “smoke grenades and destruction of signage on buildings in downtown Cleveland”:

110. WRIGHT recruited BAXTER, C.S. and the CHS to participate in some form of direct action, initially involving smoke grenades and destruction of signage on buildings in downtown Cleveland;” Erick Trickey of Cleveland Magazine noted that defendant Connor Stevens expressed support for nonviolent direct action.

On a Saturday in April, about three weeks before his arrest, Stevens served dinner in Market Square with Food Not Bombs. He got talking with fellow volunteer Aidan Kelly about Ernest Hemingway’s novel For Whom the Bell Tolls, in which an American joins the Republican side in the Spanish Civil War to fight a fascist uprising, and is assigned to dynamite a bridge. “I remember distinctly talking about his ideas about pacifism,” Kelly says. He and Stevens agreed that movements such as Food Not Bombs offered a better alternative for creating social change than violence.

Trickey writes of the first meeting of Stevens and co-defendant Brandon Baxter, a meeting like those you may have had if you travel in anarchist circles.

At Food Not Bombs last year, Stevens met another young anarchist, Brandon Baxter, as intense and passionate as Stevens was cerebral.

The 19-year-old Lakewood High graduate’s influences weren’t long-dead, bearded writers, but websites ranging from the far right (the conspiracy-minded InfoWars) to the far left (the Anonymous “hacktivist” movement). He embraced Food Not Bombs with gusto, screaming “Free food!” across Market Square when dinner was ready.

Yet the FBI claims that Wright downloaded Powell’s version of the Anarchist Cookbook with the purpose of making a bomb, which would have been a good trick given that to all appearances Powell’s book has never been sold in e-book format.

111. WRIGHT repeatedly asserted he downloaded the ‘Anarchist Cookbook’ in an attempt to learn how to make explosives including constructing plastic explosives from bleach and other household items; . . .

The complaint finally shows that the FBI was moving their own plot along by providing the defendants with phony C4.

112. When presented with the opportunity to purchase C4, WRIGHT and BAXTER met with an individual offering it for sale;

Michael Winter of USA Today reported that “Three self-described anarchists were sentenced to prison Tuesday for trying to blow up a highway bridge between Cleveland and Akron using dummy explosives provided by an undercover FBI agent.”

Ed Meyer of the Akron Beacon Journal wrote that “U.S. District Judge David D. Dowd, Jr. rejected the government’s insistence that the defendants get 30 years in prison and instead gave Douglas L. Wright 11½ years, Brandon L. Baxter nine years and nine months and Connor C. Stevens eight years and one month.”

Both of Stevens’ parents, James and Gail Stevens, lashed out at the government’s actions.

“My son is guilty, and so are you!” James Stevens told federal prosecutor Duncan Brown at one point. Gail Stevens called her son “my hero,” said she loved him with all her heart, and that he never would have acted as he did if not for the provocateur.

The entrapment of the young Occupy anarchists in Cleveland was the most dramatic attempt to discredit the Occupy movement. And it worked—with the help of some protesters who played into the hands of the police.

Efforts to re-energize the movement failed as the media reported on a wave of Occupy-related violence. Reuters reported:

Occupy Wall Street protesters smashed windows in Seattle, fled police on scooters through the streets of New York, and clashed with officers in Oakland on Tuesday in a May Day effort to revive the movement against economic injustice with demonstrations around the United States. . . .

New York police reported 10 instances of harmless white powder—apparently meant to raise an anthrax scare—being mailed to financial institutions and others . . .

In Seattle, some 50 black-clad protesters marched through downtown, carrying black flags on sticks they used to shatter the windows of several stores including a Nike Town outlet and an HSBC bank before police moved them out of the area. Others smashed windows at a Seattle federal building, and swarms of demonstrators gathered in an open-air plaza.

May 2012 was not the first time authorities used an alleged May Day bomb plot to discredit anarchists. Chicago police, seeking to stop the movement for an eight-hour workday, attacked a peaceful rally in May 1886. A bomb was set off and police shot into the rally in what has become known as the Haymarket massacre. The bomber was never identified and the government provided no evidence linking them to the bombing, yet anarchists August Spies, Samuel Fielden, Adolph Fischer, George Engel, Louis Lingg, and Albert Parsons were accused of the bombing, convicted, and executed.

Historians James Joll and Timothy Messer-Kruse claim the evidence points to Rudolph Schnaubelt, brother-in-law of Michael Schwab, as the likely bomber. Howard Zinn, in A People’s History of the United States also indicates it was Schnaubelt, suggesting “he was a provocateur, posing as an anarchist, who threw the bomb so police would have a pretext to arrest leaders of Chicago’s anarchist movement.”

Spies would later testify, “I was very indignant. I knew from experience of the past that this butchering of people was done for the express purpose of defeating the eight-hour movement.”

That was in the 19th century. The government has been framing, imprisoning, and occasionally murdering anarchists ever since.

But you’re not powerless. You can take some simple steps to protect yourself from being arrested, charged, and convicted of planning or participating in acts of terrorism. The FBI and Homeland Security have sent infiltrators to our meetings to talk about using violence. The authorities will often attempt to give the impression in affidavits or typed memos that someone other than their informant or undercover officer made statements advocating violence, and imply that everyone participating in the discussion supported its use.

One of the most successful strategies used by the FBI is to have those infiltrating joke about the use of violence. When the words they used become the text in memos or court filings, they’re out of context, they no longer seem humorous, and can be presented as a serious conversation supporting the use of violence. Since those participating in such conversation consider the statements nothing more than an awkward attempt to be humorous or fit in with the group, no one thinks to make it clear that they don’t intend to participate in a violent action. Months later, out-of-context statements can appear as evidence that anarchists were plotting acts of terrorism. Even if you state clearly that it is not appropriate to talk or joke about violence, you can still be arrested and tried, but you will greatly reduce that possibility if you do speak up.

Activists have been charged as terrorists after getting a ride home with people that turned out to be infiltrators. After dropping off their passengers, provocateurs and those they’re setting up have burned down buildings or torched vehicles. The fact that you were seen getting into the informant’s vehicle before the act of alleged terrorism happened can provide the evidence needed to accuse you of taking part. The FBI and their informants are not always honest, and may choose not to mention that you were not at the scene of the crime, even though they can honestly say you got into a vehicle with the arsonist. Sometimes federal prosecutors have been able to get convictions simply because the set-up activists were intimidated into not expressing their dedication to nonviolence, fearing that they would be accused of being “weak” and not serious about social change, the well-being of animals, or the environment. Both provocateurs and holier-than-thou true believers use such fears to manipulate people into saying or doing things they would never otherwise say or do. Don’t let anyone manipulate you into silence. Don’t let anyone manipulate you into saying or doing things that could land you in prison.

The first step is to make it clear that you are not going to participate in acts of violence or destructive sabotage. You can make this clear in your literature, statements to the media, at meetings, social gatherings and during informal conversations. If people are joking about using violence or talking about the virtues of acts that could injure or kill people, it is wise to make several statements making it clear that you will not engage in any kind of violent activity. Point out that you are dedicated to nonviolence and that anyone considering any other strategies or methods should meet elsewhere. To help protect your friends you might also point out that it is very unlikely that such plans could be concealed from the government. As you can see in the Cleveland case, otherwise innocent conversations can be recorded and provide support for prosecution.

Another step you can take is to include statements about nonviolence in your literature about any direct action you might be planning or supporting. On occasion, the media and prosecutors will claim that our literature didn’t make any mention that our protests would be nonviolent, and use that as “proof” we are terrorists. If your group is planning an action, you can protect yourself by including explicit language about nonviolence in your publications. This can be difficult when working in coalition with groups that might not share our principles of nonviolence, but you could publish your own literature on the action. Don’t be intimidated into remaining silent on the issue of violence. It isn’t necessary to exclude reference to nonviolent direct action just because people are arguing in support of a “diversity of tactics.” You may initiate a pledge of nonviolence for the campaign you are supporting and organize nonviolence training sessions. Nonviolent resistance is every bit as valid as other methods and is often more effective.

Nonviolent direct action, noncooperation, and nonviolent resistance can be very empowering. It takes courage to organize and participate in campaigns of nonviolent struggle. Nonviolent struggle can build trust between participants and the public. Campaigns of nonviolent direct action and civil disobedience can be so effective that governments and corporations will try anything to push our movement into adopting violent tactics. That is one reason groups like Food Not Bombs have been the focus of infiltration and why the authorities rely on agents provocateur to reduce the impact of nonviolence, while sowing fear and alienation.

Don’t let people intimidate you into silence. People can make comments about nonviolent activists being “wimps” or “pussies,” that nonviolence never works, or that you are not really committed to change if you aren’t willing to use sabotage or violence. You might even hear that nonviolence is racist because people of color “have to take up arms,” and that white, first-world people have the luxury to use nonviolence. Infiltrators or government agents may be talking to some of your friends at cafes, clubs, or other public locations, promoting the idea that armed resistance or arson is the only solution. Honest discussion of all tactics and methods, including types of violence, is fine, but make it clear that you and your group are dedicated to nonviolence.

At the same time, it is not wise to make claims of infiltration or accuse someone of being an informant. It is best to not worry about infiltration and to stay focused on the work of your organization. Just take the simple precautions of asking that any discussions of violent tactics take place somewhere other than at public meetings, make it clear you are dedicated to nonviolence; and make that plain in your publications and through organizing nonviolence trainings. If you do this, attempts to convict you on terrorism charges will likely fail, and the fear and mistrust that so often destroy movements will be defused. The government can use the fear of infiltration as a way of destroying trust in your community. Don’t accuse people—just be careful about what you say and do.

You can make sure you and your friends will not fall prey to the government’s efforts to disrupt your work. First, stay focused on the fundamentals of your project or campaign. Don’t feel guilty about refusing to take violent action. Since the world is facing so many dire crises, it might seem rational to consider arson or other acts deemed violent by the corporate state, but these tactics often backfire. They can cause the public to withdraw any support they may have had for your cause. The use of violence also breeds distrust among activists, because of the secrecy involved. But as we have learned from Ed Snowden and other whistle blowers, it is nearly impossible to have secrets in the United States. According to the Washington Post, over eighty billion dollars is spent each year on government and corporate spying.

A campaign of violence would add to the disempowerment in our community and scare the public into greater support of the authorities. If you feel you must investigate tactics that include violent action, ask yourself whether such tactics will do more harm than good for you personally and for the cause you support. Are you really ready to live fearing capture? How will you feel if your friends spend their lives in prison while you’re all portrayed as dangerous and crazy? Will your actions really inspire the public to rise up and save the earth? How will you feel if you kill someone or if one of your friends is killed? Can you really see yourself coordinating a campaign of bombings, arson, shootings? How will you feel spending the rest of your life in prison, seeing the stress this puts on your family and friends?

While it is possible you could spend decades in prison for taking nonviolent direct action, you are likely to feel more empowered and have wider support on the outside than if you were imprisoned for violent acts. Unlike people who are doing life in prison for bombings or shootings, if you are sentenced to a long prison term for organizing or participating in a campaign of nonviolent direct action and noncooperation, you have a much greater chance of inspiring popular support, possibly achieving your political or environmental goals, and of leaving prison before your sentence is up.

In addition, mass nonviolent direct action based on a thoughtful strategy is more likely to be effective. Agents provocateur encourage drastic actions, knowing we are knowledgeable about environmental and economic threats. If pressured, you can remind your friends that many of the anarchists in prison were framed for “terrorist” acts and that as anarchists we are dedicated to nonviolent direct action.

Along with making it clear you are not going to be silent when people suggest using violence, you may want to organize nonviolence preparations, trainings or workshops with your friends or organizations. Suggest that your community study the history of nonviolent direct action in books by people such as Emma Goldman, Erica Chenoweth, Gene Sharp, Martin Luther King Jr., and others who experienced first hand the power of noncooperation and nonviolence.

Again, be concerned about jokes concerning violence. If people joke about armed revolution, bombings, rock throwing or other acts of violence, make it clear that you are dedicated to nonviolent direct action and ask them to stop. You might remind your friends that conversations and jokes about using violence have resulted in activists being framed and sentenced to long prison terms. Terms sometime decades long. The activists that are joking about violence or making statements about the need to use violence are not necessarily infiltrators or police agents, so don’t make any accusations. They may have been influenced by someone they met or may have read some of the many books romanticizing violence. It is best not to worry and to stay focused on the work of your group. The government can use the fear of infiltration as a way of destroying trust in your community. Again, simply remind your friends that you are dedicated to nonviolent direct action and that we don’t joke or talk about taking violent action.

While armed resistance has worked to overthrow governments and change the power structure of some countries, in virtually every case the system that resulted continued to use violence to retain its authority. That is the exact opposite of what anarchists are seeking: a society free of coercion, exploitation and domination. Nonviolent social change offers the clearest route there.

 


Dummy 3 flat 72-small(From The Anarchist Cookbook, by Keith McHenry with Chaz Bufe, introduction by Chris Hedges. The book shipped from the printer on Tuesday and will be available in bookstores and from online booksellers by the end of next week.)

by Keith McHenry

The popular graffiti tag “Anarchy is love” speaks to the roots of revolutionary action, action taken by those seeking to make anarchism real. As we seek to replace coercive, hierarchical organizations with positive, life-affirming projects such as info shops, community gardens, worker-managed collectives, free schools, and other do-it-yourself efforts, we must organize against coercion, exploitation, and domination in all their forms.

Nonviolent resistance and noncooperation are probably the most effective ways to achieve long-lasting, positive social change. There is dignity in nonviolent resistance, a dignity needed to sustain change. To be effective, it is often necessary to have large numbers of supporters and to be persistent. Your intentions should be clear to both the institutions resisting change and the people you intend to attract as supporters. Honesty and truth are your most important allies. While often difficult, compassion and respect for your opponents, combined with truth and honesty, are essential to undermining the power of even the most ruthless and inhumane institutions. The longer and more violent the repression, the harder it is to remain compassionate, but by retaining your integrity in the face of extreme conditions you will often attract increased popular support and weaken the resolve of those hired to stop your efforts. Participants in nonviolent resistance will increase their feelings of empowerment and pride the longer they remain dedicated to nonviolence.

Nonviolence is not just a theory; it means responding to injustice with action. Nonviolence should not be confused with inaction. Withholding support and refusing to cooperate with institutions and policies of violence, exploitation and injustice is a principal tactic of nonviolent resistance.

Just because participants are dedicated to nonviolence, you can’t expect the authorities to restrain their violence. Often the state will increase its violence if it believes your campaign is succeeding, but as repression grows so will your support. What might seem like months, maybe years of failure can change suddenly.

San Francisco Food Not Bombs (FNB) persisted in sharing food every week for seven years of near daily arrests that became violent due to the police; and, in 1995, the local media, which had been very critical of FNB, finally started ridiculing city officials for wasting money and resources on stopping our meals for the homeless. Their reports reflected the perspective of their corporate owners and politicians in San Francisco who came to see it was not possible to stop Food Not Bombs. Our persistence and dedication to nonviolence attracted public support. Our volunteers would not give up, knowing that, if we did, future efforts to silence Food Not Bombs groups in other cities were more likely.

The San Francisco police officers hired to arrest and beat us withdrew their support for the campaign against Food Not Bombs and started to see themselves as allies of our volunteers against those ordering the repression. Seven years of building relationships with the officers caused the department leaders to first issue an order to “stop fraternizing” with our volunteers, and once it became clear that they could not count on their patrol men and women to continue arresting and beating us with enough enthusiasm, they called off the whole project. The officers grew to see we were honest, caring people and not anti-American criminals bent on disobeying the law out of self-interest, as they had been told by their superiors.

Corporate and government leaders ended their repressive campaign in order to protect their illusion of control; worried that if it became clear to the public that our persistence and relationships with the police had worked, more sectors of the community might have withdrawn support for their authority. Imagine if the patrol officers were perceived by the public as refusing orders. What would be next?

It is extremely important that we act in a manner which is consistent with our values. We want a future without violence and exploitation. Means determine ends. It is never in our interest to use violence against the police or others.

Campaigns of violence, even against the most unethical opponents, can be very disempowering and, even if successful will usually install new institutions that rely on violence to protect their authority. If power changes hands after a campaign of nonviolence, it is more likely that the new institutions will have popular support and maintain their power through consent of the people.

On the practical side, the dominant power usually can muster significantly more violent force than we can. The authorities strive to engage their opponents in realms where they have the advantage, notably armed conflict. But, more philosophically, we don’t want to use power for domination in our efforts for social change. Imagine if San Francisco Food Not Bombs adopted a strategy of throwing rocks at the police when they came to arrest us. Instead of the public understanding our message that the government and corporations are intentionally redirecting resources toward the military while letting thousands go without food, the impression would have been that the police were justified in using violence to protect themselves and the community from criminals who have no respect for the public, let alone for the police. (The media reported extensively for years about how violent our volunteers were after several frustrated activists tossed bagels over a line of riot police to hungry people blocked from getting to the food.) We want to create a society based upon human rights and human needs, not dependent on the threat and use of violence. We do not want to dominate. We want to seek the truth and support each other as we work to resolve conflicts without violence.

University of Denver political science professor Erica Chenoweth, co-author with Maria J. Stephan of the book Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, was surprised to find that “campaigns of nonviolent resistance were more than twice as effective as their violent counterparts.” She, like many others, assumed that the most effective way to topple dictatorships and other repressive regimes is to use military tactics.
Chenoweth’s and Stephan’s research showed that “uprisings were 50 percent more likely to fail if they turn to violence.”

Washington Post reporter Max Fisher put it like this:

Political scientist Erica Chenoweth used to believe, as many do, that violence is the most reliable way to get rid of a dictator. History is filled, after all, with coups, rebellions and civil wars. She didn’t take public protests or other forms of peaceful resistance very seriously; how could they possibly upend a powerful, authoritarian regime?

A nonviolent uprising can evolve into long lasting change since its power comes from popular support and participation of a substantial number of people. It was once believed that it would take the participation of at least 5% of the population to force change, but Chenoweth and Stephan found that in most uprisings since 1900 it took only 3.5% of the population to bring down a dictator.

Their research also showed that when a government changed hands through the use of violence, the new government turned to violence to stay in power. Using violence to take power often reduces popular support, and so increases the “need” for more violence.

Chenoweth believes that “a violent uprising is more physically demanding and dangerous and thus scares off participants, but I’d add that violence is controversial and can engender sympathy for police and soldiers at the other end of dissidents’ rifles.”

She tells the Washington Post that “The data shows the number may be lower than that [3.5%]. No single campaign in that period failed after they’d achieved the active and sustained participation of just 3.5% of the population.” She adds, “But get this: every single campaign that exceeded that 3.5% point was a nonviolent one. The nonviolent campaigns were on average four times larger than the average violent campaigns.”

Public support for Occupy Oakland was at an all time high after 26-year-old Iraq war veteran Scott Olsen was nearly killed on October 25, 2011 by Oakland police who deliberately fired a tear gas canister into his head. The Oakland city council even scheduled a special meeting to vote on a proposal to endorse the occupation. Support vanished overnight after people claiming to support “diversity of tactics” vandalized Whole Foods and several local small businesses on November 2, 2011.

Rebecca Solnit’s November 2011 essay, “Throwing Out the Master’s Tools and Building a Better House: Thoughts on the Importance of Nonviolence in the Occupy Revolution,” describes her decades of activism and her direct experience of radical anarchist successes being derailed by macho acts of violence.

Solnit participated in the “N30” protests that blockaded the World Trade Organization Ministerial Summit in Seattle in 1999. She writes, “To shut down the whole central city of Seattle and the World Trade Organization ministerial meeting on November 30, 1999, or the business district of San Francisco for three days in March of 2003, or the Port of Oakland on November 2, 2011—through people power—is one hell of a great way to stand up. It works. And it brings great joy and sense of power to those who do it.” She could have also mentioned the week-long blockade of the San Francisco federal building during the first Gulf War, which she also participated in.

Anarchists in places around the world, including Zagreb and Manila, have asked me if I participated in the “heroic black bloc” assault on the windows of Starbucks and Nike during the 1999 Seattle protest. They were surprised to learn that we shut down the WTO summit despite those “heroic” assaults. They had never heard of the years of organization or the Direct Action Network and its pledge of nonviolent action, and the months of nonviolence preparations that went into shutting down the WTO meeting.

Anarchist and New York Times best-selling author Starhawk wrote an essay called “How We Really Shut Down the WTO.” She writes about seeing news of the protests after having been freed from the King County jail:

The reports have pontificated endlessly about a few broken windows, and mostly ignored the Direct Action Network, the group that successfully organized the nonviolent direct action that ultimately involved thousands of people. The true story of what made the action a success is not being told.

Food Not Bombs organized the UnFree Trade Tour in 1997 visiting 60 cities in North America explaining the dangers of the WTO and advocating a mass mobilization to shut it down if it ever held a ministerial meeting in North America. A year later the WTO announced it would meet in Seattle in November 1999, and the organizing started in earnest with formation of the Direct Action Network. Organizers came to consensus to present a pledge to participants to take nonviolent action. Activists agreed to “refrain from violence, physical or verbal, not to carry weapons, not to
bring or use illegal drugs or alcohol, and not to destroy property.”

Starhawk notes:

We were asked to agree only for the purpose of the 11/30 action—not to sign on to any of these as a life philosophy, and the group acknowledged that there is much diversity of opinion around some of these guidelines.

She goes on to say:

In the weeks and days before the blockade, thousands of people were given nonviolence training—a three hour course that combined the history and philosophy of nonviolence with real life practice through role plays in staying calm in tense situations, using nonviolent tactics, responding to brutality, and making decisions together. Thousands also went through a second-level training in jail preparation, solidarity strategies and tactics and legal aspects. As well, there were first aid trainings, trainings in blockade tactics, street theater, meeting facilitation, and other skills.

Rebecca Solnit’s response to the black bloc attack on local businesses in Oakland in 2011 comments on the literature within the anarchist community glorifying violence. She writes:

CrimethInc, whose logo is its name inside a bullet, doesn’t actually cite examples of violence achieving anything in our recent history. Can you name any? The anonymous writers don’t seem prepared to act, just tell others to (as do the two most high-profile advocates of violence on the left).

Solnit continues:

CrimethInc issued a screed in justification of violence that circulated widely in the Occupy movement. It’s titled “Dear Occupiers: A Letter from Anarchists,” though most anarchists I know would disagree with almost everything that follows. Midway through it declares, “Not everyone is resigned to legalistic pacifism; some people still remember how to stand up for themselves. Assuming that those at the front of clashes with the authorities are somehow in league with the authorities is not only illogical . . . It is typical of privileged people who have been taught to trust the authorities and fear everyone who disobeys them. . . .”

[D]espite the smear quoted above that privileged people oppose them, theirs is the language of privilege. White kids can do crazy shit and get slapped on the wrist or maybe slapped around for it . . . [Those with skin of a a different] color face far more dire consequences.

As do families with children and older people who are in danger when the black bloc provides the opportunity for the authorities to use violence—with the blessing of a public disturbed by images of rampaging thugs.

Anarchists dedicated to nonviolent direct action are not opposed to all forms of property damage. It can be an effective strategy if the decision to do it involves all participants, the target chosen is one that will guarantee no one who is not part of the action could be injured, and the method used does not frighten the public. If those participating also take credit and destroy property that is clearly injurious, that sends a clear message to both those who are being targeted and the public; that type of property damage can be empowering to those participating in it and can serve as an inspiration to those you want to join you.

A simple example is the Food Not Bombs actions taken the night of August 19th and at lunch time on August 20, 1981. Food Not Bombs shared vegan meals outside a weapons bazaar at Boston University the day after we spray-painted the outline of “dead” bodies on the ground, stenciled mushroom clouds with the word “Today?” and wheat-pasted “War is Murder for Profit” posters along the route that the weapons buyers and sellers would take from their hotel to the conference hall. We stood outside the conference holding poster boards with the mushroom cloud image that we had stenciled dozens of times outside the Student Union and along Commonwealth Avenue, taking credit for hundreds of dollars in graffiti damage to Boston University’s property. Who did this frighten into the arms of the state? No one.

Solnit explains anarchist support of property damage this way:

I want to be clear that property damage is not necessarily violence. The firefighter breaks the door to get the people out of the building. But the husband breaks the dishes to demonstrate to his wife that he can and may also break her. It’s violence displaced onto the inanimate as a threat to the animate. Quietly eradicating experimental GMO crops or pulling up mining claim stakes is generally like the firefighter. Breaking windows during a big demonstration is more like the husband. I saw the windows of a Starbucks and a Niketown broken in downtown Seattle after nonviolent direct action had shut the central city and the World Trade Organization ministerial down. I saw scared-looking workers and knew that the CEOs and shareholders were not going to face that turbulence and they sure were not going to be the ones to clean it up. Economically it meant nothing to them.

French farmer and anti-globalization activist José Bové has taken part in several actions involving property damage during campaigns of nonviolent resistance. Bové declared, “I am an anarcho-syndicalist. I am closer to Bakunin than Marx. My references are the Jura Federation in the First International in the [19th] century and the Spanish CNT of 1936.”

Bové participated an a nonviolent direct action destroying genetically engineered maize in a grain silo in Nérac in the department of Lot-et-Garonne, France. At his trial he stated, “Today, I am present in this court together with Rene Riese and Francois Roux, accused of committing a serious crime according to the law. The alleged crime is the destruction of sacks of genetically modified maize [corn]. Yes, on January 8, I participated in the destruction of genetically modified maize, which was stored in Novartis’ grain silos in Nerac. And the only regret I have now is that I wasn’t able to destroy more of it.”

On August 12, 1999 Bové participated with activists from the Confédération Paysanne, the second largest farmers’ union in France, in the “dismantling” of a McDonald’s franchise that was under construction in Millau, Aveyron, France. Bové was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment for his role in the destruction. He was imprisoned for 44 days and released on August 1, 2002. The actions of the Confédération Paysanne helped bring global attention to the policies of the World Trade Organization and neoliberal structural adjustment/economic austerity programs. Over 40,000 people attended the trial of Bové and his co-defendants.

Anarchism is fundamentally about collective action using the nonhierarchical process of consensus in the decision-making process to include all those affected. Actions such as those taken by the black bloc cannot by design be agreed to by all those who are affected. Rather, they’re imposed on other participants in actions.

Solnit writes:

The euphemism for violence is “diversity of tactics,” perhaps because diversity has been a liberal-progressive buzzword these past decades. But diversity does not mean that anything goes and that democratic decision making doesn’t apply.

I participated in the protests against the Democratic National Convention in Denver in 2008. While staffing the Food Not Bombs table I witnessed two white vans arrive in Civic Center Park in the early evening of August 25, unloading twelve buff men in black Obama for President t-shirts, black pants, and black bandanas covering their crewcuts. Two of these men had a knapsack. The vans drove away leaving the 12 “black bloc” men. They divided into two groups, one headed to the west side of the protesters preparing to march to the convention and the other six went to the east end of the gathering. I followed those walking to the west side and was joined by a reporter from the Denver Post. He asked me if I thought they were policemen. I told him that I just saw them get out of two vans driven by uniformed officers.

Before long the “black bloc” on the west side was taunting the riot police. Then all of a sudden they turned and rushed into the crowd and seconds later the riot police started firing pepper spay, mace, and other crowd control weapons into the protesters. Riot police surrounded the march along a one-block stretch of 15th Street between Court and Cleveland. A total of 96 people were arrested that evening. I spoke with a woman who watched the protest on her local Fox TV station, and she felt the arrests were justified because of how violent the black bloc had been, throwing stones through windows and taunting the police. When the arrests started I returned to the Food Not Bombs table. The twelve “black bloc” men arrived soon after and stood before me talking. After about ten minutes the two white vans returned and the “black bloc” climbed in and the vans drove away from Civic Center Park. (This is not to say that the black bloc are police agents, just that their tactics make it very easy for police provocateurs to impersonate them and disrupt demonstrations.)

Some people who were not police agents joined them in their provocations. The domination, exploitation, and destruction of capitalism is brutal and it is not difficult for the state to encourage sensitive people to buy into the romantic vision of “revolutionary” resistance personified by the black bloc.

CrimethInc published a personal account of the Denver protests from a young person who attempted to join the black bloc:

Donning a black shirt and jeans, I raced down the street on my scooter, wind in my face, to catch up to my friend. It was the first day of the Democratic National Convention and we were running late for the black bloc protest in Civic Center Park. Having grown up in Denver, an overlooked bastion of liberalism in the Rockies, I never thought I would be able to get involved in a nationally publicized protest without moving to Washington D.C. or New York. This was the first major political action in which I had the chance to participate, and I wasn’t about to miss it.

Solnit’s essay on the Oakland assault on Whole Foods is pertinent here: “This account is by a protestor who also noted in downtown Oakland that day a couple of men with military-style haircuts and brand new clothes put bandanas over their faces and began to smash stuff.” She thinks that infiltrators might have instigated the property destruction, and Copwatch’s posted video seems to document police infiltrators at Occupy Oakland.

One way to make the work of provocateurs much more difficult is to be clearly committed to tactics that the state can’t co-opt: nonviolent tactics. If an infiltrator wants to nonviolently blockade or march or take out the garbage, well, that’s useful to us. If an infiltrator sabotages us by recruiting others to commit mayhem, that’s a comment on what such tactics are good for.

Solnit quotes Oakland Occupier Sunaura Taylor: “A few people making decisions that affect everyone else is not what revolution looks like; it’s what capitalism looks like.”

Peter Marshall’s book on the history of anarchism, Demanding the Impossible, points out that “The word violence comes from the Latin violare and etymologically means violation. Strictly speaking, to act violently means to treat others without respect … A violent revolution is therefore unlikely to bring about any fundamental change in human relations. Given the anarchists’ respect for the sovereignty of the individual, in the long run it is nonviolence and not violence which is implied by anarchist values.”


 

Anarchist Cookbook front cover

This is the bibliography from our upcoming release, The Anarchist Cookbook, by Keith McHenry with Chaz Bufe, introduction by Chris Hedges (October 2015).

For decades, anarchists have talked about publishing a real anarchist cookbook–a book that accurately reflects its title, a book with recipes for social change and tasty food, and accurate information on anarchism–but no one has produced one. Until now. Here’s its bibliography. It’s not meant to be comprehensive; it’s intended only as a jumping off point for further study.

(Sorry about the lack of capitalization of the book titles. The formatting did not transfer with the text.)

Anarchism

Antliff, Allan. Only a Beginning: An Anarchist Anthology. Vancouver, BC: Arsenal Pulp Press, 2004.
Avrich, Paul. Anarchist Portraits. Princeton, NJ: Princton University Press, 1988.
Bakunin, Michael.God and the State. New York: Dover, 1970.
Bakunin, Michael. Marxism, Freedom and the State. London: Freedom Press, 1984.
Berkman, Alexander. What Is Anarchism? Oakland: AK Press, 2003.
Bookchin, Murray. Post-Scarcity Anarchism. Oakland: AK Press, 2004.
Bookchin, Murray. Remaking Society. Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 1990.
Brinton, Maurice. Toward Workers Power. Oakland: AK Press, 2004.
Chomsky, Noam. On Anarchism. New York: New Press, 2013.
Dark Star Collective (eds.) Quiet Rumours: An Anarcha-Feminist Reader, New Edition. Oakland: AK Press, 2012.
Dolgoff, Sam (ed). Bakunin on Anarchy. New York: Knopf, 1972.
Ehrlich, Howard and a.h.s. boy (eds.). The Best of Social Anarchism. Tucson, AZ: See Sharp Press, 2013.
Ehrlich, Howard (ed.). Reinventing Anarchy Again. Oakland: AK Press, 2001.
Fabbri, Luigi. Bourgeois Influences on Anarchism. Edmonton, Alberta: Thoughtcrime Ink, 2010.
Fernández, Frank. Cuban Anarchism: The History of a Movement. Tucson, AZ: See Sharp Press, 2001.
Flores Magón, Ricardo (Mitchell Verter and Chaz Bufe, eds.). Dreams of Freedom: A Ricardo Flores Magón Reader. Oakland: AK Press, 2005.
Goldman, Emma. Anarchism and Other Essays. New York: Dover, 1969.
Goldman, Emma. Living My Life (volumes 1 & 2). New York: Dover, 1970.
Guerin, Daniel. Anarchism: From Theory to Practice. New York: Monthly Review, 1996.
Kropotkin, Peter. Anarchism and Anarchist Communism. London: Freedom Press, 1987.
Kropotkin, Peter. The Conquest of Bread. New York: Dover, 2011.
Kropotkin, Peter. Fields, Factories and Workshops Tomorrow. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1974.
Kropotkin, Peter. Mutual Aid. Boston, Porter-Sargent, n.d.
Kroptkin, Peter. Kropotkin’s Revolutionary Pamphlets. New York: Dover, 1970.
Malatesta, Errico. Anarchy. London: Freedom Press, 1984.
Marshall, Peter. Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. Berkeley, CA: PM Press, 2010.
Mbah, Sam and Igariwey, I.E. African Anarchism: The History of a Movement. Tucson, AZ: See Sharp Press, 1997.
Meltzer, Albert. Anarchism: Arguments For & Against. Edinburgh: AK Press, 1996.
Richards, Vernon (ed.). Life and Ideas: The Anarchist Writings of Errico Malatesta. Berkeley, CA: PM Press, 2015.
Rocker, Rudolf. Anarchism and Anarcho-Syndicalism. London: Freedom Press, 1988.
Rocker, Rudolf. Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice. Oakland: AK Press, 2004.
Rooum, Donald. What Is Anarchism? London: Freedom Press, 1992.
Ward, Colin. About Anarchism. London: Freedom Press, 2002.
Ward, Colin. Anarchism: A Very Brief Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Ward, Colin. Anarchy in Action. London: Freedom Press, 1992.
Woodcock, George. Anarchism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004.

Anarchist Science Fiction

Banks, Iain M. The Player of Games,. New York: Orbit, 1988.
Banks, Iain M. Matter. New York: Orbit, 2008.
Banks, Iain M. Surface Detail New York: Orbit, 2010.
Carlsson, Chris. After the Deluge. San Francisco: Full Enjoyment Books, 2004.
Danvers, Dennis. The Fourth World. New York: Avon, 2000.
Harrison, Harry. The Stainless Steel Rat Gets Drafted. New York: Bantam, 1987.
Hogan, James P. Voyage from Yesteryear. New York: Doubleday, 1982.
LeGuin, Ursula. The Dispossessed.New York: Harper, 1974.
Macleod, Ken. The Stone Canal. New York: Tor, 1996.
Macleod, Ken. The Cassini Division. New York: Tor, 1998.
Oakley, Nicholas P. The Watcher. Tucson: See Sharp Press, 2014.
Rucker, Rudy. Software. New York: Eos, 1987.
Rucker, Rudy. Wetware. New York: Eos, 1988.
Rucker, Rudy. Freeware. New York: Eos, 1997.
Stross, Charles. Neptune’s Brood. New York: Ace, 2014.
Teflon, Zeke. Free Radicals: A Novel of Utopia and Dystopia. Tucson: See Sharp Press, 2012.
Wilson, Robert Anton and Shea, Bob. The Illuminatus Trilogy. New York, Dell, 1975.

Art & Anarchism

Antiff, Allan. Anarchist Modernism: Art, Politics, and the First American Avant-Garde. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007.
Antiff, Allan. Anarchy and Art: From the Paris Commune to the Fall of the Berlin Wall. Vancouver, BC: Arsenal Pulp Press, 2007.
Harper, Clifford. The Education of Desire: The Anarchist Graphics of Clifford Harper. London: Anarres, 1984.
Harper, Clifford. Anarchy: A Graphic Guide. London: Camden Press, 1987.
Kinney, Jay. Anarchy Comics: The Complete Collection. Oakland: PM Press, 2012.
Rooum, Donald. Wildcat: Anarchist Comics by Donald Rooum. London: Freedom Press, 1985.
Rooum, Donald. Wildcat: Twenty Year Millenium, A selection celebrating 20 years of Wildcat appearances in Freedom newspaper. London: Freedom Press, 1999.
Weire, David. Anarchy and Culture: The Aesthetic Politics of Modernism. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusettes Press, 1997.

Cookbooks

Calvo, Luz. Decolonize Your Diet: Plant-Based Mexican-American Recipes for Health and Healing.Vancouver, BC: Arsenal Pulp Press, 2013.
Chef AJ. Unprocessed: How to achieve vibrant health and your ideal weight, Los Angeles: CreatSpace, 2011.
Goldhammer, Alan. The Health Promoting Cookbook. Summertwon, TN: Book Publishing Co., 1997.
Hagler, Louise and Bates, Dorothy. The New Farm Vegetarian Cookbook.Summertown, TN: Book Publishing Co., 1988
Kalper, Michael A. The Cookbook for People Who Love Animals. Kapa’au, HI: Gentle World, 1981.
Katzen, Mollie. The Enchanted Broccoli Forest, Mollie Katzen, Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press, 1995
Katzen, Mollie. Moosewood Cookbook. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press,, 2000
Kloss, Jethro. Back to Eden. Santa Barbara: Woodbridge Press, 1972.
Moskowitz, Isa Chandra. Vegan with a Vengeance: Over 150 Delicious, Cheap, Animal-Free Recipes That Rock, Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press, 2005
Robertson, Laurel. Laurel’s Kitchen: A Handbook for Vegetarian Cookery and Nutrition. Berkeley, CA: Nilgiri Press, 1971.
Shurtleff, William. The Book of Miso. New York: Ballantine, 1976.
Thomas, Ann. The Vegetarian Epicure. New York: Vintage, 1972

Direct Action

Beck, Julian. The Life of the Theatre. San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1972.
Billboard Lieration Front. The Art & Science of Billboard Improvement. Tucson: See Sharp Press, 2000.
Boyle, Francis. Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Transnational Publishers, 1987.
Crimethinc. Recipes for Disaster:An Anarchist Cookbook. Salem, OR: Crimethinc, 2005
DAM Collective. Earth First! Direct Action Manual. Earth First!, 1997.
Flynn, Elisabeth G. and Smith, Walker C. Direct Action and Sabotage! Chicago: IWW, 1991.
Foreman, Dave (ed.). Ecodefense: A Field Guide to Monkeywrenching. Chico, CA: Abbzug Press, 1993.
Hedemann, Ed. (ed.). War Resisters League Organizers Manual. New York: War Resisters League, 1981.
Lane, James H. Direct Action and Desegregation 1960–1962: Towards a Theory of the Rationalization of Protest. Brooklyn, NY: Carlson Publishers, 1989.
Thoreau, Henry David. Walden and Civil Disobedience. New York: Signet, 2012.

Economics

Albert, Michael. Looking Forward: Participatory Economics for the Twenty First Century. Boston: South End, 1999.
Albert, Michael. Of the People, By the People: The Case for a Participatory Economy. Oakland: AK Press, 2001.
Albert, Michael. Parecon: Life After Capitalism. New York: Verso, 2004.
Albert, Michael. Thinking Forward: Learning To Conceptualize Economic Vision. Winnipeg: Arbeiter Ring, 1997.
Alperovitz, Gar. America Beyond Capitalism: Reclaiming Our Wealth, Our Liberty, and Our Democracy, 2nd Edition. Boston: Democracy Collaborative Press/Dollars and Sense, 2011.
Alperovitz, Gar. What Then Must We Do?: Straight Talk about the Next American Revolution. White River Jct., Vermont: Chelsea Green, 2013.
Hahnel, Robin. Of the People, By the People: The Case for a Participatory Economy. Oakland: AK Press, 2012.
Hahnel, Robin. The ABCs of Political Economy: A Modern Approach. London: Pluto Press, 2015.
Hahnel, Robin and Wright, Erik Olin. Alternatives to Capitalism: Proposals for a Democratic Economy. New Left Project, 2014.
Wolff, Richard. Capitalism Hits the Fan: The Global Economic Meltdown and What to Do About It. Northampton, MA: Interlink, 2013.
Wolff, Richard. Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism. Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2012.
Wolff, Richard. Occupy the Economy: Challenging Capitalism. San Francisco: City Lights, 2012.
Zweig, Michael. The Working Class Majority. Ithaca, New York: ILR Press, 2011.

Environment

Bertell, Rosalie. No Immediate Danger: Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth. Summertwon, TN: Book Publishing Co., 2000.
Bertell, Rosalie. Planet Earth: The Latest Weapon of War. London: Quartet Books, 2002.
Carson, Rachel. Silent Spring. New York: Mariner Books, 2002.
Hartmann, Thom. The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight: Revised and Updated: The Fate of the World and What We Can Do Before It’s Too Late. New York: Three Rivers Press, 2004.
Leopold, Aldo. A Sand County Almanac: Outdoor Essays & Reflections. New York: Ballantine Books, 1986.
McKibben, Bill. End of Nature. New York: Random House, 2006.
McKibben, Bill. Earth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet. New York: Times Books, 2010.
Tokar, Brian. Redesigning Life?: The Worldwide Challenge to Genetic Engineering. London: Zed Books, 2001.
Tokar, Brian. Gene Traders: Biotechnology, World Trade, and the Globalization of Hunger. Burlington, VT: Toward Freedom, 2004.
Tokar, Brian and Eiglad, Erik. Toward Climate Justice. Porsegrunn, Norway: Communalism Press, 2010.

Food Politics

Aoki, Keith. Seed Wars: Cases and Materials on Intellectual Property and Plant Genetic Resources. Druham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2007.
Bello, Walden. The Food Wars. London, Verso, 2009.
Berry, Wendell. The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture. San Francisco: Sierra Club, 1986.
Blood Root Collective. The Political Palate. Bridgeport, CT: Sanguinaria Publishing, 1980.
Boyd, Billy Ray. For The Vegetarian in You. San Francisco: Taterhill Press, 1987.
Collins, Joseph. Food First. New York: Ballantine, 1977.
Collins, Joseph. World Hunger: Twelve Myths. New York: Grove Press, 1986.
Cribb, Julian. The Coming Famine: The Global Food Crisis and What We Can Do to Avoid It, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2010.
Gottlieb, Robert. Food Justice: Food, Health, and the Environment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010.
McHenry, Keith. Hungry for Peace: How You Can Help End Poverty and War with Food Not Bombs. Tucson: See Sharp Press, 2012.
Katz, Sandor Ellix. The Revolution Will Not Be Microwaved: Inside America’s Underground Food Movements. White River Jct., VT: Chelsea Green, 2006.
Lappé, Frances Moore. Diet for a Small Planet. New York: Random House, 1991.
Nestle, Marion. Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002.
Patel, Raj. Stuffed and Starved: The Hidden Battle for the World Food System. Brooklyn, NY: Melville House, 2008.
Pollan, Michael. The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. New York: Penguin Press, 2006.
Robbins, John. Diet for a New America. Novato, CA: H.J. Kramer, 1998.
Robbins, John. The Food Revolution: How Your Diet Can Help Save Your Life and Our World. Newbury Port, MA: Conari Press, 2001.
Schlosser, Eric. Fast Food Nation. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2002.
Shiva, Vandana. The Hijacking of the Global Food Supply. Boston: South End Press, 2007.
Shiva, Vandana (ed). Manifestos on the Future of Food and Seed. Boston: South End Press, 2007.
Shiva, Vandana. Soil Not Oil. Boston: South End Press, 2008
Sinclair, Upton. The Jungle: The Uncensored Original Edition. Tucson: See Sharp Press, 2003.
Tokar, Brian and Magdoff, Fred. Agriculture & Food in Crisis: Conflict, Resistance and Renewal. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2010.
Tuttle, Will. The World Peace Diet, Eating For Spiritual Health And Social Harmony. New York: Lantern Books, 2005.
Wolfe, David. Superfoods: The Food and Medicine of the Future. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 2009.

Gardening

Bartholomew, Mel. All New Square Foot Gardening, Second Edition: The Revolutionary Way to Grow More In Less Space. Minneapolis: Cool Springs Press, 2013.
Brookbank, George. The Desert Gardener’s Calendar: Your Month-by-Month Guide. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1999.
Brookbank, George. Desert Gardening: The Complete Guide. Boston: Da Capo Press, 1991.
Coburn, Heather. Food Not Lawns: How to Turn Your Yard into a Garden and Your Neighborhood into a Community. White River Jct., VT: Chelsea Green, 2010.
Fell, Derek. Vertical Gardening: Grow Up, Not Out, for More Vegetables and Flowers in Much Less Space. Emmaus, PA: Rodale, 2011.
Fukuoka, Masanobu. The One-Straw Revolution: An Introduction to Natural Farming. New York: NYRB Clasics, 2008.
Logsdown, Gene. Holy Shit: Managing Manure To Save Mankind. White River Jct., VT: Chelsea Green, 2010.
Markham, Brett. Mini Farming: Self-Sufficiency on 1/4 Acre. New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2010.
Madigan, Carleen. The Backyard Homestead: Produce all the food you need on just a quarter acre! North Adamas, MA: Storey, 2009.
Nyhuis, Jane. Desert Harvest: A Guide to Vegetable Gardening in Arid Lands. Tucson: Growing Connections, 1982.
Owens, David. Extreme Gardening: How to Grow Organic in the Hostile Deserts. Phoenix: Poco Verde, 2000.
Smith, Edward. The Vegetable Gardener’s Bible. North Adams, Massachusetts: Storey Publishing, 2009.
Wilson, Peter Lamborn and Weinberg, Bill (eds). Avant Gardening Ecological Struggles in the City & the World. New York: Autonomedia, New York,1999.

Labor

Boyer, Richard and Marais, Herbert. Labor’s Untold Story. UE, 1979.
Brecher, Jeremy. Strike! (exp. ed.). Oakland: PM Press, 2014.
Brinton, Maurice. For Workers’ Power. Oakland: AK Press, 2004.
Lynd, Staughton. Doing History from the Bottom Up: On E.P. Thompson, Howard Zinn, and Rebuilding the Labor Movement from Below. Chicago: Haymarket, 2014.
Ness, Immanuel. New Forms of Worker Organization: The Syndicalist and Autonomist Restoration of Class-Struggle Unionism. Oakland: PM Press, 2014.
Ness, Immanuel and Azzellino, Dario (eds.). Ours to Master and to Own: Workers’ Control from the Commune to the Present. Chicago: Haymarket, 2011.
Pannekoek, Anton. Workers’ Councils. Oakland: AK Press, 2002.
Thompson, Fred and Bekken, Jon. The Industrial Workers of the World: Its First 100 Years. Chicago: IWW, 2006.

Nonviolence

Cohen, Tom. Three Who Dared. New York: Avon, 1971.
Gandhi, Mohandas. Gandhi An Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments With Truth. Boston: Beacon Press, 1993.
Gandhi, Mohandas. The Essential Gandhi: An Anthology of His Writings on His Life, Work, and Ideas. New York: Vintage, 2002.
King, Martin Luther Jr. Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? Boston: Beacon Press, 1968.
King, Martin Luther Jr. Letter from the Birmingham Jail. Harper Collins, New York, 1994.
King, Martin Luther Jr. The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. New York: Grand Central Publishing, 2001.
Peace Pilgrim. Peace Pilgrim: Her Life and Work in Her Own Words.. Santa Fe, NM: Ocean Tree Books, 1992.
Sharp, Gene. Waging Nonviolent Struggle: 20th Century Practice and 21st Century Potential. Manchester, NH: Extending Horizons Books, 2005.
Sharp, Gene. The Politics of Nonviolent Action. Boston: Porter Sargent, 1973.

Political / Social Theory & Change

Bey, Hakim. TAZ: Temporary Autonomous Zones. New York: Autonomedia, 1985.
Biehl, Janet. Rethinking Ecofeminist Politics. Boston: South End, 1991.
Biehl, Janet and Staudenmaier, Peter. Ecofascism: Lessons from the German Experience. Oakland: AK Press, `1995.
Bookchin, Murray. Remaking Society. Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 1990.
Bookchin, Murray. Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism: An Unbridgeable Chasm. Edinburgh: AK Press, 1995.
Bookchin, Murray. Re-enchanting Humanity. New York: Cassell, 1995.
Carlsson, Chris. Nowtopia. Oakland: AK Press, 2008.
Castle, Marie Alena. Culture Wars: The Threat to Your Family and Your Freedom. Tucson: See Sharp Press, 2013.
Chomsky Noam. Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies. Boston: South End Press, 1989.
Chomsky, Noam. Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Boston, South End Press, 1988.
Debord, Guy. Society of the Spectacle. Detroit: Black & Red, 2000.
French, Marilyn. Beyond Power, On Women, Men and Morals. New York: Ballantine, 1986.
Fussell, Paul. Class: A Guide Through the American Status System. New York: Touchstone, 1992.
Gelderloos, Peter. Consensus. Tucson: See Sharp Press, 2006.
Goodman, Paul. Utopian Essays and Practical Proposals. New York: Vintage, 1962.
Greenleaf, Phyllis. Our Changing Sex Roles. Somerville, MA: New England Free Press, 1979.
Grogan, Emmett. Ringolevio: A Life Played for Keeps. Secaucus, NJ: Citadel, 1990.
Hedges. Chris. American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. New York: Nation Books, 2008.
Hedges, Chris and Sacco, Joe. Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt. New York: Nation, Books, 2014.
Hedges. Chris. Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle. New York: Nation Books, 2015.
Hedges. Chris. Wages of Rebellion. New York: Nation Books, 2015.
Klein, Naomi. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. New York: Picador, 2009.
Klein, Naomi. No Logo. New York: Picador, 2009.
Knabb, Ken (ed.). Situationist International Anthology. Berkeley, CA: Bureau of Public Secrets, 2007.
Korten, David C. The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2007.
Korten, David C. When Corporations Rule the World . San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2001.
Kropotkin, Peter. Memoirs of a Revolutionist. New York: Doubleday, 1962.
Kunstler, James Howard. The Long Emergency: Surviving the Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2005.
Malcolm X. The Autobiography of Malcolm X: As Told to Alex Haley. New York: Ballantine, 1992.
Maximoff, Gregory Petrovich. The Guillotine at Work: The Leninist Counter-Revolution. Sanday, Orkney: Cienfuegos Press, 1979.
McHenry, Keith. Hungry for Peace: How You Can Help End Poverty and War with Food Not Bombs. Tucson: See Sharp Press, 2012.
Morris, Brian. Social Change and Social Defense. London: Freedom Press, 1993.
Ott, Jeff. My World: Ramblings of an Aging Gutter Punk. North Hills, CA: Hopeless Records, 2000.
Reich, Wilhelm. The Mass Psychology of Fascism. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1980.
Ross, John. ¡Zapatistas! Making Another World Possible: Chronicles of Resistance 2000–2006. New York: Nation Books, 2007.
Roy, Arundhati. Public Power in the Age of Empire. New York: Seven Stories, 2004.
Sampson, Ronald V. The Psychology of Power. New York: Vintage, 1965.
Scahill, Jeremy. Dirty Wars: The World Is a Battlefield. New York: Nation Books, 2014.
Shiva, Vandava. Staying Alive. Boston: South End Press, 2010.
Spring, Joel. A Primer of Libertarian Education. New York: Free Life Editions, 1975.
Sprouse, Martin, ed. Sabotage in the American Workplace. San Francisco: Pressure Drop Press, 1992.
Starhawk. The Spiral Dance. New York: Harper and Row, 1979.
Taibbi, Matt. The Great Derangement: A Terrifying True Story of War, Politics, and Religion. New York: Spiegel & Grau, 2011.
Taibbi, Matt. Griftopia: A Story of Bankers, Politicians, and the Most Audacious Power Grab in American History. New York: Spiegel & Grau, 2009.
Taibbi, Matt. The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap. New York: Spiegel & Grau, 2014.
Uzcátegui, Rafael. Venezuela: Revolution as Spectacle. Tucson: See Sharp Press 2010.
Vaneigem, Raoul. The Revolution of Everyday Life. Oakland: PM Press, 2012.
Wilde, Oscar. The Soul of Man Under Socialism. Tucson: See Sharp Press, 2009.
Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States. New York: Harper, 2005.

Poverty and Homelessness

Davis, Mike. Planet of Slums. New York: Verso, 2007.
Day, Dorothy. The Long Loneliness: The Autobiography of the Legendary Catholic Social Activist, Dorothy Day. New York: HarperOne, 1996.
Ehrenreich, Barbara. Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America. New York: Holt, 2008.
Fanon, Franz. The Wretched of the Earth. New York: Grove, 2005.
Freire, Paolo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Continuum, 2000.
Piven, Frances Fox and Cloward, Richard. Poor People’s Movements: Why They Succeed, How They Fail. New York: Vintage, 1979.
Piven, Frances Fox and Cloward, Richard. Regulating the Poor: The Functions of Public Welfare. New York: Vintage, 1993.
Roy, Arundhati. Capitalism: A Ghost Story. Chicago: Haymarket Press, 2014.
Steinberg, Michael. Homes Not Jails! San Francisco: Black Rain Press, 1998.
Wasserman, Jason and Clair, Jeffrey. At Home on the Street: People, Poverty, and a Hidden Culture of Homelessness. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2009.

Russian Revolution

Avrich, Paul. Kronstadt, 1921. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991.
Berkman, Alexander. The Bolshevik Myth. London: Pluto Press, 1989.
Berkman, Alexander. The Russian Tragedy. London: Phoenix, 1986.
Brinton, Maurice. The Bolsheviks and Workers’ Control. London: Solidarity, 1970. (now a part of For Workers’ Power. Oakland: AK Press, 2004)
Goldman, Emma. My Disillusionment in Russia. New York: Dover, 2003.
Goldman, Emma. My Further Disillusionment in Russia. New York: Dover, 2003.
Maximoff, Gregory Petrovich. The Guillotine at Work: The Leninist Counter-Revolution. Sanday, Orkney: Cienfuegos Press, 1979.
Voline (E.K. Eichenbaum). The Unknown Revolution. Detroit: Black & Red, 1974.

Spanish Revolution

Bolloten, Burnett. The Grand Camouflage. New York: Prager, 1961.
Bolloten, Burnett. The Spanish Civil War. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1979.
Bookchin, Murray. The Spanish Anarchists: The Heroic Years (1868–1936). Oakland: AK Press, 2001.
Borkenau, Franz. The Spanish Cockpit. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, 1971.
Dolgoff, Sam (ed.). The Anarchist Collectives. New York: Free Life Editions, 1974.
Gómez Casas, Juan. Anarchist Organization: The History of the FAI. Montreal: Black Rose, 1986.
Leval, Gaston. Collectives in the Spanish Revolution. London: Freedom Press, 1975.
Mintz, Frank. Anarchism and Workers Self-Management in Revolutionary Spain. Oakland: AK Press, 2013.
Peirats, José. Anarchists in the Spanish Revolution. London: Freedom Press, 1987.
Porter, David (ed.). Vision on Fire: Emma Goldman on the Spanish Revolution. Oakland: AK Press, 2006.


Dummy 3 flat 72-small

(From The Anarchist Cookbook, by Keith McHenry with Chaz Bufe, scheduled for October 2015. This Cookbook will provide dozens of tasty vegans recipes, recipes for social change, and accurate information on anarchism.)

There are many good reasons to garden: personal, political, economic, and ecological. Among the personal benefits gardening provides are exercise and relaxation–there are few things more restful than working in your garden, which provides a pleasant respite from our sedentary and tense society.

Another benefit of gardening is that it can easily be a social affair; working in a cooperative garden is a good way to make new friends and deepen friendships with those you already have. Given the isolating, lonely American way of life, this benefit should not be underestimated.

On a political and economic level, gardening can make people less dependent on the corporations that control the food chain. It can also benefit individuals and communities economically, in that in areas with good soil and adequate rainfall it’s inexpensive to garden, and your harvest will far outstrip your minimal costs. Even in areas ill suited to gardening, such as Tucson, which is about as bad as it gets for gardeners (very poor soil, very hot summers, very expensive water), you should at least break even and probably come out a bit ahead growing your own fruits and vegetables.

On an ecological level, gardening is beneficial because it reduces the amount of fossil fuels used in the production of fruits and vegetables. Factory farming is energy intensive. One widely cited study from the 1980s estimated that vegetables used in Chicago were shipped on average over 1,500 miles. While there are economies of scale in factory farming, local production of high-yield fruits and vegetables does reduce, even if marginally, the amount of fossil fuels used in food transport.

However, only 11% of fuels used to power the factory farm food chain are used in transport. The rest are used in production, particularly in the production and distribution of massive amounts of chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. How massive? Frederick M. Fishel, of the University of Florida, reports that in 2007 U.S. agribusiness used approximately 680 million pounds of herbicides and pesticides costing approximately $7.9 billion on to-a-large-extent monocultural crops.

In contrast, organic gardening uses no chemical fertilizers, herbicides, or pesticides, and (if you plant heirloom varieties) helps to preserve biodiversity. IOrganic gardening also uoften entails eating healthier, more ecologically friendly food than that in the average American diet. As an example of the benefits of eating a healthier diet, the Johns Hopkins School of Public healrth reports that “if Americans followed a solely plant-based diet one day per week, they could cut more GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions than by following an entirely local diet.”

Gardening is good for you, your family and friends, your community, and the planet. In itself, gardening will not bring about “the revolution.” But it’s a good, useful, and enjoyable thing to do, and it does bring us a few steps further toward the society we want.

There are many good reasons to garden: personal, political, economic, and ecological. Among the personal benefits gardening provides are exercise and relaxation–there are few things more restful than working in your garden, which provides a pleasant respite from our sedentary and tense society.

Another benefit of gardening is that it can easily be a social affair; working in a cooperative garden is a good way to make new friends and deepen friendships with those you already have. Given the isolating, lonely American way of life, this benefit should not be underestimated.

On a political and economic level, gardening can make people less dependent on the corporations that control the food chain. It can also benefit individuals and communities economically, in that in areas with good soil and adequate rainfall it’s inexpensive to garden, and your harvest will far outstrip your minimal costs. Even in areas ill suited to gardening, such as Tucson, which is about as bad as it gets for gardeners (very poor soil, very hot summers, very expensive water), you should at least break even and probably come out a bit ahead growing your own fruits and vegetables.

On an ecological level, gardening is beneficial because it reduces the amount of fossil fuels used in the production of fruits and vegetables. Factory farming is energy intensive. One widely cited study from the 1980s estimated that vegetables used in Chicago were shipped on average over 1,500 miles. While there are economies of scale in factory farming, local production of high-yield fruits and vegetables does reduce, even if marginally, the amount of fossil fuels used in food transport.

However, only 11% of fuels used to power the factory farm food chain are used in transport. The rest are used in production, particularly in the production and distribution of massive amounts of chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. How massive? Frederick M. Fishel, of the University of Florida, reports that in 2007 U.S. agribusiness used approximately 680 million pounds of herbicides and pesticides costing approximately $7.9 billion on to-a-large-extent monocultural crops.

In contrast, organic gardening uses no chemical fertilizers, herbicides, or pesticides, and (if you plant heirloom varieties) helps to preserve biodiversity. IOrganic gardening also uoften entails eating healthier, more ecologically friendly food than that in the average American diet. As an example of the benefits of eating a healthier diet, the Johns Hopkins School of Public healrth reports that “if Americans followed a solely plant-based diet one day per week, they could cut more GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions than by following an entirely local diet.”

Gardening is good for you, your family and friends, your community, and the planet. In itself, gardening will not bring about “the revolution.” But it’s a good, useful, and enjoyable thing to do, and it does bring us a few steps further toward the society we want.

There are many good reasons to garden: personal, political, economic, and ecological. Among the personal benefits gardening provides are exercise and relaxation–there are few things more restful than working in your garden, which provides a pleasant respite from our sedentary and tense society.

Another benefit of gardening is that it can easily be a social affair; working in a cooperative garden is a good way to make new friends and deepen friendships with those you already have. Given the isolating, lonely American way of life, this benefit should not be underestimated.

On a political and economic level, gardening can make people less dependent on the corporations that control the food chain. It can also benefit individuals and communities economically, in that in areas with good soil and adequate rainfall it’s inexpensive to garden, and your harvest will far outstrip your minimal costs. Even in areas ill suited to gardening, such as Tucson, which is about as bad as it gets for gardeners (very poor soil, very hot summers, very expensive water), you should at least break even and probably come out a bit ahead growing your own fruits and vegetables.

On an ecological level, gardening is beneficial because it reduces the amount of fossil fuels used in the production of fruits and vegetables. Factory farming is energy intensive. One widely cited study from the 1980s estimated that vegetables used in Chicago were shipped on average over 1,500 miles. While there are economies of scale in factory farming, local production of high-yield fruits and vegetables does reduce, even if marginally, the amount of fossil fuels used in food transport.

However, only 11% of fuels used to power the factory farm food chain are used in transport. The rest are used in production, particularly in the production and distribution of massive amounts of chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. How massive? Frederick M. Fishel, of the University of Florida, reports that in 2007 U.S. agribusiness used approximately 680 million pounds of herbicides and pesticides costing approximately $7.9 billion on to-a-large-extent monocultural crops.

In contrast, organic gardening uses no chemical fertilizers, herbicides, or pesticides, and (if you plant heirloom varieties) helps to preserve biodiversity. IOrganic gardening also uoften entails eating healthier, more ecologically friendly food than that in the average American diet. As an example of the benefits of eating a healthier diet, the Johns Hopkins School of Public healrth reports that “if Americans followed a solely plant-based diet one day per week, they could cut more GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions than by following an entirely local diet.”

Gardening is good for you, your family and friends, your community, and the planet. In itself, gardening will not bring about “the revolution.” But it’s a good, useful, and enjoyable thing to do, and it does bring us a few steps further toward the society we want.

Since this book will be read around the world, we’ll restrict ourselves to general comments here.

First, be prepared for at least partial failure, especially if you’re new to gardening. If you are, start small: cultivate no more than about 100 square feet (about 10 square meters). You’ll be amazed at how much produce you can raise in such a small space.

In places with good soil, such as the U.S. East, Midwest, and Plains States, you can just turn the soil over to the depth of eight or nine inches (roughly 22 centimeters — the length of the blade of the average garden shovel) and plant without adding soil amendments. In subsequent years, you will want to add some compost and manure when you turn the soil over.

In places with poor soil, mostly desert and semi-desert areas, such as the U.S. Southwest, preparing soil is more complicated. First, dig down to a depth of eight or nine inches (22 cm), and once you’ve dug up your entire plot shovel out the soil, putting it to one side. Dig down another eight or nine inches. Once you’ve done that, put at least three inches (8 cm) of compost or steer manure on the soil in the hole and thoroughly mix. (Using horse manure is not a good idea: it’s nitrogen poor and contains a lot of salts.) Shovel the first layer of soil back in, put at least three inches (8 cm) of compost and/or steer manure on top of it, and mix thoroughly. In arid regions, put a lip of at least three inches around the edges of the entire plot, in order to conserve water.

In most places, you’ll want your plot to be shaded during at least part of the day, especially the afternoon. If no partially shaded spots are available, suspend shade cloth six or seven feet (about two meters) above your plot. Use the 50%-blocking rather than the 80% blocking type.

Because shade cloth is expensive (though very durable), it’s advisable in your first year or two–while you’re figuring out if you want to continue gardening–to use old sheets instead. They’ll deteriorate rapidly, but they cost next to nothing, and they get the job done.

Now it’s time to plant. When to do that will, of course, vary with your altitude and with how far north or south of the equator you are.

In your first year, you’ll probably want to buy starts, unless you already know gardeners who will give you some. Rather than buying starts at big-box store garden departments (expensive and very limited variety), plant nurseries are generally a better bet, but there are even better places to get starts. In many places there are organic gardening associations, and they almost always have events where members sell starts during the Spring planting season. Farmers markets can be another good source.

Once you have your first crop, you can harvest seeds and raise your own starts, beginning about six to eight weeks prior to the beginning of Spring planting season. (For Fall and Winter crops, you can just stick the seeds in the ground.) The easiest types of vegetables and herbs from which to harvest seeds are eggplants, bell peppers, chiles, beans, squash, okra, melons, peas, lettuce, broccoli, cilantro, and tomatoes.

Harvest seeds only from mature vegetables and from the largest vegetables. In most cases, this simply means removing the seeds, spreading them out on a tray, and letting them dry. Tomatoes are a different matter. Using only the largest, most mature tomatoes, drain the seeds and the liquid they’re in into a bowl, add a little water, and let sit at room temperature for two to four days, until a scum forms on top. Skim off the scum, drain the liquid from the bowl, and the let the seeds dry for several days. This will drastically increase the germination rate when you plant the seeds.

In preparing planting starts, it’s a good idea to recycle small plastic containers (yogurt containers, sawed off soda bottles, sawed off half-and-half bottles, etc.) and poke several holes in the bottoms with a knife to facilitate proper drainage. It works well to use cheap commercial potting soil mixed with compost and manure in about a 4:2:1 ratio. Put in several seeds per container, and a few weeks after they’ve come up you can thin the seedlings, replanting the thinned ones in other containers. If you live in an area with occasional freezes prior to the planting period, it’s a good idea to put your starts on trays so that you can take them inside on nights that it freezes.

In dry areas, you’ll want to use mulch to hold in soil moisture. Straw is common, good, inexpensive mulch. Put down about three inches (8 cm) all around your plants. Water it immediately once you’ve put it down, so it doesn’t blow away in the wind. (Figure one bale per every 150 square feet–approximately 10 square meters.) Before you buy a bale or two of straw at your local feed store , ask what kind it is. Because it contains seeds which will sprout in your garden, and which you’ll need to weed out, wheat straw is the best choice. Barley straw is acceptable, though more of a pain to deal with, and under no circumstances buy sorghum straw, which will produce a weeding nightmare for years to come.

One final note: Even before you start your garden, you’ll want to start composting. It’s a simple process. You don’t need to buy an expensive container to do it, just find an out-of-the way spot in your yard, and start throwing your kitchen waste there, as well as vegetation waste from your yard (weeds, fallen leaves, etc.), shredded paper, and occasionally soil when necessary to cover kitchen waste (if you don’t have yard waste or shredded paper available). Unless you live in an area with a lot of rain, water the compost pile regularly.

Good practices with compost include keeping a three- or five-gallon covered bucket in your kitchen for kitchen waste, and emptying it onto the compost pile whenever it’s near full, and occasionally poking holes roughly six inches (15 cm) apart all the way down through your compost pile with a piece of rebar or steel pipe. This will help with aeration and the growth of aerobic bacteria which turn waste into compost. Turn the entire pile over with a pitchfork every couple of months. Finally, compost weeds before they go to seed. Unless you’re prepared to do an ungodly amount of unnecessary weeding, do not compost seeding weeds; throw them in the garbage.

This all sounds like a lot of work, and it is, but gardening is restful, a form of meditation, and there’s nothing like eating your own produce and sharing it with your friends and neighbors.