Image: the cover of the book is a orange background that is a tinted version of a black and white photo of protesters in the street. There is smoke in the air and several figures in various positions our advancing toward a chaotic area of the street. In the center is a white square. And white letters at the top of the square is the author's name Benjamin s case. Below that street rebellion and larger White letters. Below that and smaller white letters is resistance beyond violence and nonviolence.
I did not realize going into Ben Case's Street Rebellion: Resistance Beyond Violence and Nonviolence that I only had one degree of separation from the author. I'm so out of touch with local Pittsburgh organizing these days that I did not know the author personally, but I'm proud that they're from here. This book was one of the more exciting and motivating reads on the topic of movements and tactics. I had all kinds of nostalgia during the experience that made me both miss and NOT miss my rowdy days.
Case tackles many of the sources held up as "evidence" of the success of "purely non-violent" activism in detail. This book does something different than some others in this vein though. Rather than arguing that another form of action is the TRUE way or path to success, he argues that everything from pacifist action to riot is an inevitable consequence of oppression and the fights that exist to combat it. Rather than simply staying "Riots work," Case takes a more nuanced and realistic approach seeking to better understand and inform discussions about movement structure and results.
I honestly never knew the roots of many peoples idea that "non-violent" organizing is the most successful. I keep putting "nonviolence" in quotes because Case makes it clear throughout the book that this is a very poorly defined category, especially by self-professed non-violent organizers and trainers. It turns out many of the sources that people claim are comparing violence and nonviolence are actually comparing revolutionary war efforts including massive human casualty and all other movements. It's more complicated than that but for the sake of a shorter review that's what I'll say. Through the telephone game of life, this data was warped to serve an agenda that states that the only really successful way to challenge oppression is with forms of protest that do not involve any sort of self-defense, property destruction, forms of rioting, and so on. What is possibly the only part of the book that isn't super exciting is a chapter where case does a small analysis of the data around various movement tactics. It's pretty much written like a scholarly article and anyone without a research background is going to struggle with it. But it's necessary because it does something that these other groups claim to have done and shows that there is little basis for what they are saying. Pairing this with his overall analysis was a smart move in my opinion even if it goes over some people's heads because it will prevent detractors from claiming that they have done research and that Case has not.
Pretty much anyone in any form of organizing has met self-professed non-violent activists and/or the peace police. It is widely accepted in many circles that nonviolence, whatever that means, is the most effective means of seeking change. Anyone that diverges from this can be accused of everything from being a fed, being an in outside agitator, co-opting the movement just to have fun breaking things, or just being ignorant of the true nature of justice. Ben Case shows in a myriad of ways that this is not only untrue, but it feeds into the narrative of the state and other authoritarian structures that seek to profit/gain authority from appearing to be allied with resistance to oppression while also being agents of that oppression in very direct ways.
It seems fitting that a Pittsburgher wrote this. I think of very specific examples such as a brief argument I witnessed during the G20 as a black bloc rolled a dumpster into the street. Two women dressed and what looked like a Halloween costume of 60s hippies with flowers painted in their faces started screaming at the A-team, "Non-violent! Nonviolent!" One of the anarchists turned to them and yelled back, "Property destruction isn't violence!" It's an interesting exchange that this book made me think about because it shows a glimpse into how ill fitting this sort of exchange was for a moment when heavily armored police and deputized reactionaries were shooting weapons into the crowd. What those women likely didn't know was that many tactical discussions were had about what kind of things would work in different scenarios. As a result a ton of different kinds of actions from many different groups were planned during the G20. I recall the Pittsburgh principles where many active groups basically agreed not to talk shit on each other's tactics during the movements of that time.
Case also mentioned how former mayor Peduto used the 'outside agitator' myth to make himself appear as if he was allied with anti-racist movements during George Floyd uprisings while simultaneously labeling any action he didn't like as that of a lone invader. He also attempted to lie about police brutality and weaponry to the faces of the victims of it as well as the media. The book doesn't mention (because it's not just about Pittsburgh) that Peduto has a pre-Mayoral history of coming after anarchists, often as a whole, anytime any action was taken that he didn't like. Peduto encourages a parade he can join, not an action that challenges his position or that of his police (who are notoriously corrupt- even for cops- in Pittsburgh, but that's a whole other rant.)
Case also includes interesting conversations that he had with various activists and organized from various generations about their experiences being part of riots. I found this interesting because I see it so little in books about tactics. In these conversations, they talked about how and why people were involved in these things and what function they played. Rather than going through a step-by-step guide of why XYZ tactic is going to work in XYZ situation, there is a much more human aspect to these conversations. And in the end, spontaneous action and even highly pre-organized action is all very very human.
Most of the book takes a confident but gentle approach, walking The reader through each step of cases analysis. When we get to the last section, we really get to feel that passion that the author has for the subject. I think it was smart to leave this to the end carrying the reader along so that they can truly grasp why that passion exists. So, next time you run into somebody who is a non-violent activism trainer or who is telling you that they know for sure that one tactic or a few are the only ones that ever work, hand them this book. I hope more people reading this will lead to better conversations across movement lines about what tactics can work in various situations rather than some sort of argument about what tactics can work at all. I also hope that this book reaches greater audiences to help dispel the extremely successful liberal propaganda about good and bad protesters detailed well in the book.
This was also posted to my goodreads.
