Scan barcode
artemisevrenstardust's review
4.0
This book is a must-read for anyone who sees a need for change.
It is very well-researched and presents relevant and important ideas about what it means to oppose the State. Jeriah examines popular examples of nonviolence and points out that they weren't successful, and suggests that violence isn't always wrong. The argument is complex but almost all of my questions about Jeriah's views were answered in this little book. The writing kept me intrigued, and the ideas were challenging - like the concept of the Privileged Pacifist, someone who looks down on people and says violence is never the answer.
For me, it falls short of five stars for a few reasons. Though it's well-constructed, the argument fails to address one major question: if the State shouldn't be violent, what justifies violent resistance to the State? When I interviewed him, Jeriah clarified that the State's violence is sanctioned. I would have liked to see this argument more fleshed out in the book. Jeriah's idea about four stages of freedom is remarkable, but he avoids condemning unsanctioned violence by saying it's not his place to judge which stage any given person may be in. This seems to dodge the responsibility of making an absolute statement about when violence is justified, and when it's not. The book also contains quite a few typos and distracting formatting errors.
If you're interested in questioning authority, understanding how the status quo is incredibly violent and must be changed, and a concise historical perspective on effective resistance, I highly recommend this book.
It is very well-researched and presents relevant and important ideas about what it means to oppose the State. Jeriah examines popular examples of nonviolence and points out that they weren't successful, and suggests that violence isn't always wrong. The argument is complex but almost all of my questions about Jeriah's views were answered in this little book. The writing kept me intrigued, and the ideas were challenging - like the concept of the Privileged Pacifist, someone who looks down on people and says violence is never the answer.
For me, it falls short of five stars for a few reasons. Though it's well-constructed, the argument fails to address one major question: if the State shouldn't be violent, what justifies violent resistance to the State? When I interviewed him, Jeriah clarified that the State's violence is sanctioned. I would have liked to see this argument more fleshed out in the book. Jeriah's idea about four stages of freedom is remarkable, but he avoids condemning unsanctioned violence by saying it's not his place to judge which stage any given person may be in. This seems to dodge the responsibility of making an absolute statement about when violence is justified, and when it's not. The book also contains quite a few typos and distracting formatting errors.
If you're interested in questioning authority, understanding how the status quo is incredibly violent and must be changed, and a concise historical perspective on effective resistance, I highly recommend this book.
More...