Tuesday, April 8, 2025

Book Review: A Continuous Struggle

Image: The cover of the book is a cream background with a photo of Martin Sostre broken up into several squares divided by thin lines. Sostre is bald, with medium brown skin and a very short beard. Across the top in black is "a continuous struggle," below that in red is "the revolutionary life of Martni Sostre." Across the bottom is the author's name Garret Felber and "Foreword by Robin D.G. Kelley."

In modern day USA, those unfamiliar with anarchism may only have government smear campaigns and mainstream media depictions to draw from. These usually portray anarchists as small groups of young privileged white people breaking windows for no reason or the anarchy=chaos colloquial use of the term. One of the biggest challenges in terms of growing anarchist community is connecting with people and showing them that anarchism is about dismantling and resisting hierarchies, building mutual aid/community based structures, and growing/practicing liberatory frameworks (and while we're at it, that those windows were broken for a reason.) Part of the optics problem also lies at the feet of our own communities. Anarchists who are often centered are white and as a result, a greater effort is needed needed to combat white supremacy within movements. While there are histories of anarchist movements from a variety of countries with mostly white demographics, some better or less problematic than others, the tent of anarchism is much larger and unfortunately often ignored or simply not known. As a result, people often miss out on the rich history and present of Black anarchism. One of the most passionate and often unknown anarchist organizers is Martin Sostre. It is very tough to find anything comprehensive out there about him for a variety of reasons I will detail later. When I saw that a biography about Sostre was being released, I was excited to learn more about him and his life. 

A Continuous Struggle: The Revolutionary Life of Martin Sostre is a labor of love by Garrett Felber. He begins the book humbly, expressing his concern that he may not be able to do this story justice, but being willing to try his best anyway. He also mentions that there were mixed feelings about whether or not Sostre would have wanted a biography as even his death was kept private when he passed. I think that Felber executed this biography well. There is an extensive and impressive level of research into history and materials that are not easily accessible. Much of Sostre's writing was in the form of letters or small pamphlets rather than books and better archived things of the past. I also think that Felber did well to center the revolutionary aspect of Sostre's existence, as Felber and Sostre's family guessed he would have preferred. Felber did this without sacrificing honesty, though, and did well to tell the story of Sostre as a human being rather than a flawless leader.

The life and history of Martin Sostre is essentially also a history of USAmerican prison industrial complex and civil rights movements for both Black and Puerto Rican communities at large. One cannot understand Sostre without also understanding these histories. I believe that Felber did well to set the stage for things that were going on at the time, including giving mini bios of the various organizers that worked with Sostre. Sostre spent so much of his time incarcerated, that much of his organizing took place behind bars. It was frankly quite intense reading about what he went through. In early life, he was incarcerated for drug offenses that he did admit to. However, moving on, changing, and creating community and liberatory structures landed him in the sights of the state, who then framed him (now documented and admitted to by the officers involved) in order to put him back in prison. He endured torture regularly, but remained so defiant throughout it all. I honestly don't understand how someone could have kept going, even with the supports he had and how incredibly strong his beliefs in the struggle were.

Sostre truly exemplified the "propaganda of the deed" style of organizing. While he did write and make speeches, which are unfortunately often lost to time, his real focus was in taking action and building community. Outside prison (or in part from within via help from his support system,) Sostre created revolutionary spaces that worked as book stores, libraries, community gathering areas, and so on. Dealing with everything from closures and fire bombs from the state, he kept going through it all. He also was involved in organizing for prisoners, despite the absolute brick walls built up around him. In prison, he resisted oppression every chance he got, even from solitary confinement, including the fighting the regular sexual assault of invasive bodily searches and the beatings that ensued. There was a lot of interesting history in this book about Muslim organizing in prison which led to many religious freedoms we see as more common today, however flawed. Sostre had an amazing support system outside composed of stellar and unrelenting organizers. However, even they could only do so much in the face of state repression. I found myself regularly thinking about what it was like for prisoners- political and non- who didn't have any support. Once he was finally out of prison for good later in life, Sostre continued the practice of radical bookstore/infoshop creation and also took up organizing around housing and education in his communities. Essentially, Sostre was known far more for what he did than what he said.

Sostre's journey towards identifying as anarchist was also interesting to read about. Like many, he initially saw anarchism as a white thing, but later realized it as a larger struggle. He discovered time and again that authoritarianism from state structures to the Nation of Islam were flawed at the center. To read about someone going from a corrupt military cop in his late teens (a story too long for a review) to black nationalist-adjacent/Muslim marxist-leninist to a prolific anarchist organizer added a level of hope to my worldview (and also forgiveness of my younger imperfect self.) Sostre went on to influence other Black anarchists such as Lorenzo Kom'boa Ervin who met Sostre in prison and was inspired by his guidance. The story is far more complex and interesting than I have detailed in this paragraph, so I highly recommend the book before seeing this as the whole picture.

In the end, I do think Felber was successful in this monumental task of telling the complex story of someone's life taking place in a complex time and in complex institutions. I like to hope that if Sostre were alive today, he would appreciate the way his story was told. This book is a necessary addition to the bookshelves of anyone interested in history as well as any anarchist or leftist thinkers. It expands upon not only general assumptions about what anarchism is but also about the various belief systems and activities taking place during the civil rights movements at the time all well telling the story of Martin Sostre, who kept fighting until the very end.

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph.

10 comments:

  1. I think if you engaged more seriously with contemporary Black anarchist thought you might have written that opening paragraph differently. You literally did #notallwhitepeople a book review about a Black anarchist...that aside, though, the anarchist movement on Abya Yala has been white-dominated (demographically as well as ideologically) since its inception, & its revival in recent decades has also been closely tied to punk & related subcultures, which are not only white-dominated in the ways mentioned above but have long skewed "young." It is apparent that there has been systematic erasure of Black anarchists, & I might prefer if anarchists broke as many windows as they were reputed to, but I bristle at the suggestion that anarchism hasn't actually been another white (radical) politic for most of its existence. The paucity of Black anarchist contemporaries for Sostre to build with during his lifetime speaks to this. People like him are exceptional in this regard, & as someone who doesn't *want* it to be that way I think not acknowledging that that's where we're at does a disservice to changing it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your comment seems like a vent rather than commentary on this review. Are you saying you would have preferred that I wrote "Anarchism is mostly white kids breaking windows except for Martin Sostre"? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but it seems like you started commenting before even finishing the first paragraph that you're critiquing. We are in agreement. Maybe I needed to weird things better.

      Delete
    2. Also if you read this book, which I'm not entirely sure you did before commenting, you'd see a rich history of black Anarchism often hidden in discussions as well as an acknowledgement of the issues with white anarchists. It kinda seems like you didn't read this book or my review fully.

      Delete
  2. - I was simultaneously commenting on your review *and* venting, since the opening paragraph of the review did something I find characteristically frustrating of white anarchists living on Abya Yala, which I believe you are. (If you aren't, this would be a great time to tell me otherwise.)
    - I read the review in its entirety the month you published it, & reread the opening portion just before commenting.
    - I'm not claiming that you said things that aren't true in your opening paragraph, but objecting to the emphasis & framing. Why write something like "there are some truly amazing anarchists throughout history who were/are white. I am not here saying they shouldn't be studied and admired."? What imagined audience is going to take issue with this book review for saying - or being misinterpreted as saying - something like "There aren't any amazing white anarchists to study or admire?"
    - I don't see why it matters that I haven't read the book if my comment is about the book review, unless I said something contentious about the contents of the book itself - which you, as someone who has read it, are best positioned to correct. I said that there was a "paucity of Black anarchist contemporaries for Sostre to build with during his lifetime". If that is false, & there were in fact many Black *anarchists* he was able to organize with (outside the handful of names already dropped in radical circles, like LKE, Kuwasi Balagoon, & Ashanti Alston), that would be exactly the kind of thing I'd like to read in a review (or in an interview with the author about the book, though the one I did listen to didn't mention it).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deleted and reposted to fix nonsensical typos

      I'm sure you're aware that the inclusion of marginalized people in many of these discussions amounts to nothing more than tokenism. (White) people (or cishet or whatever the topic at hand is) will name drop someone with a throwaway quote to fill a quota without actually engaging in the complex history and present. The part you are highlighting was intended to separate from that (and I obviously failed,) to avoid accusation that I was mischaracterizing Anarchism as devoid of white people or bipoc-centering anarchists, to point to what you're discussing and to make it clear that I'm not trying to push a false demographic focus in one direction or another.

      But, given what you're saying here it seems like removing things would also get it wrong because writing it in another way would also be in conflict with your statements here in other ways. I'm still not clear on what you think would be the best way to write things.

      I also believe that there are many people who were anarchists before anarchism was even a word and many of Sostre's co organizers may or may not have identified that way (and much like him, many changed identification multiple times,) but as I mention in this review, Sostre (and many of them) were concerned more with actions than with labels. His isolation in prison and the lack of support across the board for that also affects the numbers of people that identify whatever way- but again, the label isn't the point. The deed is. You seem to be most concerned with how the label was used, and that's fine. But, that's not how Sostre came to his belief systems nor is it how people across the world doing anarchist deeds come to their positions. I'm sure there are people who say "i want to be an anarchist" then learn from there, but most people discover anarchism in things already existing in their beliefs and life, like mutual aid, and evolve from there.

      I will never claim to be an amazing or flawless writer. I do reviews so I can have cool books to read and to add a little feeling of responsibility to my disabled life. So I certainly could do things better here. I see the point you are making. The other point that anarchism is white youth dominated seems to also require a mention that that even among white anarchists, antifash and antiracism are central. I know way more old anarchists than young because I'm older, we just don't get the focus of media, and tend to be more behind the scenes and less physically able through age or disability to be as active on the streets which is what I'm referring to in the stereotype. At the g20 in my area long ago one of the main goals was to help the greater public understand anarchism as more than black blocs (yet there was still diversity of tactics during the entire event.). I don't see that as the same as "not all white people are racist!" But more an acknowledgement that white antiracism is central to anarchist ideology which is different to me than other systems like liberalism where that statement would be tokenizing for the sake of it.

      I mentioned you not reading the book because this and your other comment both draw conclusions about both my review and how it pertains to the text without reading the text which seems unproductive. But, I appreciate your words nonetheless and will be thinking about them in future reviews on texts like this. And if you do read the book I would love to hear your thoughts as I'm sure you will add much to the conversation with a wider perspective. (I mean these words genuinely, just in case they aren't translating well through text.)

      Delete
    2. Just reread the review and the 4th and 5th paragraphs were meant to represent the things you are claiming to wait to know in your comments.

      Delete
    3. (I don't know why blogspot doesn't want me to be able to reply inline.)

      To be clear, I'm here to have the discussion about the underlying motivations/structures/etc. behind the reasons why I didn't like the way the review opened, not have you rewrite it so it passes some test. It's not about you being a good/bad writer.

      "I also believe that there are many people who were anarchists before anarchism was even a word and many of Sostre's co organizers may or may not have identified that way (and much like him, many changed identification multiple times,) but as I mention in this review, Sostre (and many of them) were concerned more with actions than with labels."

      I find the subsumption of people doing things that anarchists like into the category "anarchist" without regard or concern for those people's self-identifications irritating. Quoting Russell Maroon Shoatz: “First off, let me state that I’m not an anarchist. Yet, a lot of what you’ll read here is gonna look a whole lot like anarchism! To that I will only quote an unknown ancient, who after racking his brain to formulate answers to vexing problems, only later to discover that those who had come along before him had already expounded on what he thought were his intellectual inventions, is supposed to have blurted, 'confound those ancients, they’ve stolen all of our best ideas.'” https://usa.anarchistlibraries.net/library/russell-maroon-shoats-the-dragon-and-the-hydra#toc2

      I won't pull the whole introduction which continues on this point, but Maroon's words in the context of his life are a clear demonstration that concern for if & how people self-identify politically isn't necessarily separate from what else they do & how they do it. I don't have much to say about how Sostre (or Black people generally, or anyone) came to anarchism & the book's depiction of it here because I'm not objecting to how you or the author characterized those specific things, not because I'm unconcerned with them.

      The 4th & 5th paragraphs seem to confirm my understanding, since they don't have anything I wasn't already aware of regarding Sostre before this weekend. So again, this isn't about you doing a "bad job" of a review (though I said what I said to make it easier for you to mention that you may have left out information that would change my mind), but the friction between our political perspectives.

      "white antiracism is central to anarchist ideology which is different to me than other systems like liberalism where that statement would be tokenizing for the sake of it."

      It is precisely part of my understanding that white anarchists generally have more in common with white liberal & other "less radical" white politics than they/you recognize or are willing to admit, in large part *because of* their/your antiracism. It has limits & flaws - systematic ones, not just "hey, people have flaws" ones - which have been critiqued by many, including contemporary Black anarchists. Your review does not, from my perspective, reflect awareness of those critiques. (The other possibility, of course, is you're familiar with them & simply disagree.)

      Collections that include words which have helped me come to these positions:
      https://annas-archive.org/md5/4f2e311c75ea47bb6a74be0c839a3499
      https://types.mataroa.blog/blog/subcultural/
      https://redlib.freedit.eu/r/Afropessimist/new

      To close for now - whenever someone's criticism is characterized as "unproductive," my question is always - "unproductive of what?" We haven't done anything so ambitious as to agree to try & produce anything.

      Delete
    4. I see what you mean and did not take offense nor mean to take up a bunch of space with self deprivation. "Unproductive" was definitely the wrong choice of word on my part as this has been a productive conversation! In order to balance length with info, I didn't go into a ton of detail about other folks but the book does have profiles of the organizers around Sostre that may offer info you haven't read in other sparse texts available on him.

      I'll check out these links!

      Delete
    5. I decided to attempt a rewrite of the first paragraph in hopes of being more clear and accurate. I hope this doesn't come off as avoiding accountability for mistakes. I considered what you said a lot and decided it was best to adjust things for future readers. I'm sure it's still imperfect but hopefully it's better than before. (No pressure to read unless you really feel like it.)

      Delete