Scan barcode
amu_pdf's review against another edition
4.0
This was a very educational read. It talks about the history of looting and puts a lot of major historical events into a different perspective that isn’t taught in schools. I definitely recommend reading this as it is a thorough read.
theol's review
5.0
The author traces the roots of contemporary civil unrest and looting to the history and tactics of the black liberation movement and slave revolts, recontextualizing the self-liberation of slaves in the U.S. South as property theft/destruction due to the objectification and comoditization of black people. She does a fantastic job of illustrating the interconnectedness of racism and capitalism in a very clear and concise way, with a great balance of historical context and analysis.
I don't normally write reviews, but I felt the need to now because I was so surprised by the negative reactions to the book I've seen. Very funny to see people appalled by the defense of illegal actions as protest to an unjust system in reaction to a book that spends so long discussing how the self-liberation of slaves was literally illegal at the time and severely punished by the proto-police force as the theft of plantation owners' property, and would have severely inconvenienced those benefitting off that unjust system as well. One through line of this book is about this culture's valuing of property over human autonomy and quality of life, and I think the overly sanitized versions of history we are constantly being fed leads people to overlook that.
That being said, I personally don't like some of the more casual phrasing the book uses, particularly towards the begining, but that's more of an issue of personal preference and less of an actual issue of the writing itself. Overall a great and engaging quick read for those who are receptive to it.
I don't normally write reviews, but I felt the need to now because I was so surprised by the negative reactions to the book I've seen. Very funny to see people appalled by the defense of illegal actions as protest to an unjust system in reaction to a book that spends so long discussing how the self-liberation of slaves was literally illegal at the time and severely punished by the proto-police force as the theft of plantation owners' property, and would have severely inconvenienced those benefitting off that unjust system as well. One through line of this book is about this culture's valuing of property over human autonomy and quality of life, and I think the overly sanitized versions of history we are constantly being fed leads people to overlook that.
That being said, I personally don't like some of the more casual phrasing the book uses, particularly towards the begining, but that's more of an issue of personal preference and less of an actual issue of the writing itself. Overall a great and engaging quick read for those who are receptive to it.
11corvus11's review
4.0
I've been dealing with some issues since losing internet, changing cellphone carriers who all suck, and blah blah blah so I'm writing on my phone with hands full of tremor and coordination issues and thus not doing a great job with reviews.
The shorter version (than the book deserves) of this is that I liked Osterweil's overall thesis, but I think the title may be more accurate as, "in defense of rioting" or "in defense of property destruction." The looting history including people looting themselves from situations of slavery and imprisonment was an interesting way of putting things. I think the books flaw is that it romanticizes certain things a bit too much and flattens out situations of civil unrest and illegalism as being unified and automatically liberatory when the reality is, it's complicated, messy, and it depends on if the tactics were advantageous for various situations.
With how much people all over the political spectrum rewrite history and pretend all movements have been won by unicorns, puppies, kittens, hugging cops, and voting, maybe a little romanticism for the violent nature of all effective revolution balances it out.
Also, if you didn't already notice, you can ignore the overall rating. The page is polluted by reactionaries and liberals that didn't read the book.
This was also posted to my blog.
The shorter version (than the book deserves) of this is that I liked Osterweil's overall thesis, but I think the title may be more accurate as, "in defense of rioting" or "in defense of property destruction." The looting history including people looting themselves from situations of slavery and imprisonment was an interesting way of putting things. I think the books flaw is that it romanticizes certain things a bit too much and flattens out situations of civil unrest and illegalism as being unified and automatically liberatory when the reality is, it's complicated, messy, and it depends on if the tactics were advantageous for various situations.
With how much people all over the political spectrum rewrite history and pretend all movements have been won by unicorns, puppies, kittens, hugging cops, and voting, maybe a little romanticism for the violent nature of all effective revolution balances it out.
Also, if you didn't already notice, you can ignore the overall rating. The page is polluted by reactionaries and liberals that didn't read the book.
This was also posted to my blog.
mosso's review
5.0
One of my favorite books of the year!
Vicky Osterwell is an effective, clear, and persuasive writer. The first chapter alone, where she systematically refutes many of the arguments against looting, is worth making a PDF of to send to all of your friends and organizations and lays out the arguments more thoroughly examined in the rest of the book. "In Defense of Looting" largely chronicles the history of looting, its origins, and its racialized roots. The connection of whiteness to property is repeatedly highlighted, beginning with slavery and the self-looting of slaves to the dawn of urban riots in the gilded age to the key role of looting and rioting in the civil rights movement. This is worth reading as a history book alone. She managed to give both a broad overview of the approximately 200-year-period covered and, within that, detailed, nuanced movement histories.
This book was started in the wake of Ferguson, and I view it as an act of fate that it came out right before the summer uprisings. Reading the last chapter gave me chills as she wrote about not if, but when, we would see another upsurge of riots and looting. Before reading this book, my analysis was loosely "who gives a fuck about Target when black people are dying?" This book took that so much further in deconstructing the ways property is inherently tied to whiteness and destruction of that property is a direct and non-cooptable attack on said whiteness. Looting itself is a racialized word rooted in anti-blackness. It is a "color-blind" word for black rioters.
Beyond the moral and historic justifications of looting, looting is Effective. We saw that this summer in Minneapolis, one of the cities with the most intense rioting, and also the most radical discussion of dismantling the city police department. Looting works. And throughout the histories detailed in the book, it works over and over and over again, which is why it is one of the most demonized tactics across "all sides of the aisle." It is a threat to liberalism. It is a threat to property and thus to whiteness.
I am so grateful for this book, and Vicky, I'm so sorry your ratings are dominated by reactionaries. Must! Read!
Vicky Osterwell is an effective, clear, and persuasive writer. The first chapter alone, where she systematically refutes many of the arguments against looting, is worth making a PDF of to send to all of your friends and organizations and lays out the arguments more thoroughly examined in the rest of the book. "In Defense of Looting" largely chronicles the history of looting, its origins, and its racialized roots. The connection of whiteness to property is repeatedly highlighted, beginning with slavery and the self-looting of slaves to the dawn of urban riots in the gilded age to the key role of looting and rioting in the civil rights movement. This is worth reading as a history book alone. She managed to give both a broad overview of the approximately 200-year-period covered and, within that, detailed, nuanced movement histories.
This book was started in the wake of Ferguson, and I view it as an act of fate that it came out right before the summer uprisings. Reading the last chapter gave me chills as she wrote about not if, but when, we would see another upsurge of riots and looting. Before reading this book, my analysis was loosely "who gives a fuck about Target when black people are dying?" This book took that so much further in deconstructing the ways property is inherently tied to whiteness and destruction of that property is a direct and non-cooptable attack on said whiteness. Looting itself is a racialized word rooted in anti-blackness. It is a "color-blind" word for black rioters.
Beyond the moral and historic justifications of looting, looting is Effective. We saw that this summer in Minneapolis, one of the cities with the most intense rioting, and also the most radical discussion of dismantling the city police department. Looting works. And throughout the histories detailed in the book, it works over and over and over again, which is why it is one of the most demonized tactics across "all sides of the aisle." It is a threat to liberalism. It is a threat to property and thus to whiteness.
I am so grateful for this book, and Vicky, I'm so sorry your ratings are dominated by reactionaries. Must! Read!
josienaron's review
4.0
lost me a little in the middle with the framing metaphor but damn she really brought it home in the end