Scan barcode
nb_leftist's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
reflective
fast-paced
3.75
Overall, well-written and comprehensive. I don’t have too much to say, it is quite similar to “In Defense of Looting” by Vicky Osterweil. I would recommend reading them together as they touch on different sides of the argument and can form a much more comprehensive understanding than reading just one would create.
11corvus11's review against another edition
4.0
I read this when it came out and thought it was great then but have no idea if I would like it as much now? Lent it to someone and never got it back lol
zgreyz's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
inspiring
medium-paced
5.0
great read for anyone serious about activism
Content Warnings
Minor: War, Violence, and Police brutality
raccoongremlin's review against another edition
2.0
This book voiced so many feelings and what I've been thinking about Non-Violence in so many ways. However there were also lots of things I didn't agree with about the book and overall I didn't particularly like it and I'm not sure that I'm a fan of Peter Gelderloos' writing though perhaps he has better work.
Many other reviews spoke better and voiced how I felt far better then I ever could such as the way he spoke about the Patriarchy and "women and Transgender people" as if it's some monolithic group and the only marginalised and oppressed group that would benefit from self defense. It feels very obvious that this is written by a man and not someone who has experience of the oppression of patriarchy or even being marginalised in any other way. It lacked a lot of nuance and made quite broad sweeping statements about Non-violence which I simply felt were untrue. He seems to believe in a diversity of tactics yet it seems Non-Violent Direct Action (NVDA)is not included in that which seems odd.
A definition of what he considers Violent Direct Action and what is NVDA would have also been helpful, I personally wouldn't consider smashing the windows of an Arms Factory Building or blowing up a pipeline as violent as its against a building and in retaliation of something far more dangerous (bombing civilians and climate change) which are obviously inherently violent, but it seems that perhaps Gelderloos thinks this is part of Violent Direct Action ?
It seems perhaps that Gelderloos think only vigils, little marches and hand holding count as NVDA? Whereas I have personally seen quite a mixture, from smashing, gluing and locking on, occuping spaces, blocking, shouting at arms dealers and more covert sabotage. Many Non-violent Direct Actionists may not all be pacifists that fully believe in non-violence but are using it as a current tactic and acknowledge when things get to a certain point NVDA will no longer be a possibility.
Also part of my irritation to this book may be because I listened to it as an audio-book and found the readers voice highly irritating (sorry AudibleAnarchist on YouTube)
Many other reviews spoke better and voiced how I felt far better then I ever could such as the way he spoke about the Patriarchy and "women and Transgender people" as if it's some monolithic group and the only marginalised and oppressed group that would benefit from self defense. It feels very obvious that this is written by a man and not someone who has experience of the oppression of patriarchy or even being marginalised in any other way. It lacked a lot of nuance and made quite broad sweeping statements about Non-violence which I simply felt were untrue. He seems to believe in a diversity of tactics yet it seems Non-Violent Direct Action (NVDA)is not included in that which seems odd.
A definition of what he considers Violent Direct Action and what is NVDA would have also been helpful, I personally wouldn't consider smashing the windows of an Arms Factory Building or blowing up a pipeline as violent as its against a building and in retaliation of something far more dangerous (bombing civilians and climate change) which are obviously inherently violent, but it seems that perhaps Gelderloos thinks this is part of Violent Direct Action ?
It seems perhaps that Gelderloos think only vigils, little marches and hand holding count as NVDA? Whereas I have personally seen quite a mixture, from smashing, gluing and locking on, occuping spaces, blocking, shouting at arms dealers and more covert sabotage. Many Non-violent Direct Actionists may not all be pacifists that fully believe in non-violence but are using it as a current tactic and acknowledge when things get to a certain point NVDA will no longer be a possibility.
Also part of my irritation to this book may be because I listened to it as an audio-book and found the readers voice highly irritating (sorry AudibleAnarchist on YouTube)
pink_distro's review against another edition
4.0
Gelderloos tears apart pacifism very well, from an anarchist perspective. he does this by discussing the racialized, gendered, and classed nature of violence (structural, interpersonal, and revolutionary), and generally showing how pacifists play pretty loose with their history, strategizing, and general political analysis. instead he gives a brief, more realistic picture of what revolution is, how states respond to it, and uses various historical cases to back it up.
he shows that pacifism isn't equipped to win anything beyond reformist wins, is a needless constraint on our struggles, is largely a white/western ideology that's wildly condescending to oppressed peoples' movements and experiences, and is based on a vague ass idea of "violence" that de-emphasizes structural violence of imperialism, colonialism, capitalism, and the state. occasionally he has tangents or stylistic things that i don't care for, but the core of the book is pretty much right on.
he shows that pacifism isn't equipped to win anything beyond reformist wins, is a needless constraint on our struggles, is largely a white/western ideology that's wildly condescending to oppressed peoples' movements and experiences, and is based on a vague ass idea of "violence" that de-emphasizes structural violence of imperialism, colonialism, capitalism, and the state. occasionally he has tangents or stylistic things that i don't care for, but the core of the book is pretty much right on.
imaginisme's review against another edition
challenging
informative
3.75
trop descriptif mais intéressant
jershkat's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
inspiring
reflective
tense
medium-paced
5.0