Join Our Mailing List

Bookmark and Share

  Home > News > Additional Stories

The Traffic Power Structure: A Review

By Luther Blisset
Freedom News
April 6th, 2017

This is one of my favorite PM Press books. Compact, loaded, an accessible theoretical dynamite exploding US conceptions of identity and liberty based on automobiles. There are lovely indications of how constructions of liberty and freedom, driving fast on the road, are actually complete systems of domination and control.

Authored by the collective and translated by Gabriel Kuhn, this is a great text for anyone interested in spicing up their direct action with a little theory. By resituating and questioning one of the basic premises of modern culture — the automobile — they offer an excellent model for individuals or groups who want to critique and reframe current political and social currents. There are powerful connections to Ivan Illich and autonomy and some good class analysis.

There are several reasons to get this text. One, the writing and translation are efficient, powerful, and persuasive. There are several bumps, but overall it’s quite tight. Second, unlike bloated or self-aggrandizing theory or political screeds, the TPS authors want you to understand what they are saying so that you, too, can challenge automobility. Third, this is theory from a localised situation of enacted resistance and mutual aid. For direct action groups or individuals seeking to increase their theory or explore ways to articulate or frame their positions, TPS offers a great model.

I love this book and have read it a couple times. Yes, you can find it for free as a PDF, but having the hard copy just feels better.

Buy book now | Buy e-Book now | Back to's Author Page

Turning Money into Rebellion A Review

By Timothy Kerswell
Journal of Labor and Society
28 March 2017

Turning Money into Rebellion is a collection of writings which cover the history, philosophy, and activities of the Danish Maoist-Third Worldist movement. In the mainstream press, this group were known as the Blekingegade Street Group, but to themselves they were known as Manifest-Kommunistisk Arbejdsgruppe or M-KA, a group which traces its history to the Kommunistisk Arbejdsgruppe (Communist Working Circle) or KAK which the group had separated from. The KAK itself had split from the Danish Communist Party as a result of its leader, Gotfred Appel being expelled from the party for Maoist tendencies. The book presents a great overall sketch of the currents of the Danish left wing and the debates that would propel a unique group of activists on a remarkable journey.

The group's story is a unique tale of selfless internationalism. Both testimony of former members of M-KA and former party documents explain the group's ideological commitment to the “Parasite State Theory” first developed by Gotfred Appel. This theory suggested that the overwhelming transfer of value from the exploited third world to the imperialist first world meant that there was no social base for revolutionary change in the first world. M-KA and its activists answered the question of what first world communists should do through their praxis.

By day they worked as regular office workers and in their remaining time they would conduct internationalist activities, arranging clothes for refugee camps in Africa run by liberation movements and most famously robbing Danish banks and sending the money to third world liberation movements in Namibia, Angola and Occupied Palestine, before finally being arrested in 1989 and serving long prison sentences.

Whatever the reader's opinion is of Maoism-Third Worldism, the story that is compiled by Kuhn and narrated by Lauesen and Weimann is one of utterly selfless internationalism, and of people who lived their beliefs. The reader cannot help but be inspired by this story of a group who placed themselves at personal risk, amassing enormous amounts of wealth only to donate it to worthy anti-imperialist causes.

There are three basic sections of the book. In the first section, the editor Gabriel Kuhn, presents an introduction to the Blekingegade Group. This is followed by an article from some of the group's members, Niels Jorgensen, Torkil Lauesen, and Jan Weimann. Jorgensen sadly passed away in 2008 but was a key member of the group and contributed significantly to one of the chapters.

Kuhn then proceeds to conduct an interview with Torkil Lauesen and Jan Weimann which allows for a deep exploration of the story of their beginnings as political activists, their days in KAK, contacts with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, political debates over the Sino-Soviet split, the split of M-KA away from the KAK and the associated political debates, and relections on their “illegal practice.”

The book is certainly no nostalgic tour through the past with Lauesen and Weimann often being openly self-critical of aspects of their work and the limits of Leninist “What Is To Be Done?” answers in politics. The anti-imperialist currents of the world, and particularly those in the imperialist countries, would do well to learn from the experiences that Lauesen and Weimann have to share.

The final section of the book is an archive of key documents in the philosophical history of M-KA, starting with the exposition of the parasite state theory by Gotfred Appel and moving into a discussion of the foundation of KAK as well as position papers by M-KA on what they believed communists in imperialist countries should do. The collection of these documents is an important contribution to the history of political ideology and enables a better understanding of one of the earliest forms of Maoism-Third Worldism.

This is a book that should be of interest to all who are interested in anti-imperialist and socialist politics. Gabriel Kuhn has compiled a fascinating account from a group whose contribution to Marxism and internationalism should receive a greater degree of appreciation and recognition than is given to them. In an age of Twitter and Facebook “solidarity,” Turning Money Into Rebellion is a timely reminder that “Solidarity is something you can hold in your hands.”


    •    Timothy Kerswell is Assistant Professor of Government and Public Administration at the University of Macau. Address correspondence to: Timothy Kerswell, E21 Faculty of Social Sciences, Av. da Universidade, Taipa, Macau SAR, China. E-mail:

Buy book now | Download e-book now | Back to Gabriel Kuhn's homepage

Nuclear War? Nah. Massive Fires Haunt the Dystopian Future

Geek’s Guide to Culture
April 8th, 2017

In 2013 author Elizabeth Hand was invited to Washington DC by a think tank that thought her experience writing dystopian science fiction might give her a useful perspective on current climate change challenges. Hand is well-versed in doomsday scenarios, but what she learned at the think tank about the risk of massive fires really startled her.

“We’re not looking at if a mega-fire is going to happen and overtake a major urban area, or a major residential area, it’s a matter of when,” Hand says in Episode 250 of the Geek’s Guide to the Galaxy podcast. “And we are not at all prepared for it.”

Listen to Elizabeth Hand on the Geek's Guide to the Galaxy Podcast HERE.

That knowledge inspired her story “Fire,” about a group of hikers facing certain death in the midst of an apocalyptic forest fire, and also gave her a new appreciation for the scientists and firefighters of the Forest Service.

“These are the good guys, who are working for us—and good gals, the good people,” she says. “And these are the ones whose jobs will be impacted by changes in the current administration.”

Hand says that people tend to be complacent about budget cuts that affect disaster readiness, but that those cuts can easily have dramatic results. Diminished budgets can also mean communities might have to do more to organize preventative measures themselves. “We are not going to be able to depend on the government to help us,” she says. “We’re going to have to learn a certain level of resilience and a certain level of preparedness.”

Listen to our complete interview with Elizabeth Hand in Episode 250 of Geek’s Guide to the Galaxy (above). And check out some highlights from the discussion below.

Elizabeth Hand on optimism:

“My friend Bob Olson had read a novel of mine called Glimmering, which is an extremely dark, dystopic novel that came out in 1997, and opens with things like jihadi terrorists flying an airliner into a lower Manhattan landmark. It was a book where I channeled a lot of my anxiety about the future into it, and then 20 years later found myself living in that future. But anyway, Bob Olson read that book and he called me on it, and he said, ‘You know, this is such a dark novel, and the ending is so dark, and there’s no hope in it at all. Don’t you feel like you have some responsibility as a writer to present—not an optimistic, Pollyannaish vision—but something more hopeful for people to have as a takeaway?’ And actually, I don’t know if I can write that kind of book, so maybe I will leave that to other speculative writers who could maybe come up with things that might have more of an element of optimism in them.”

Elizabeth Hand on science fiction writers:

“I think there are a lot of science fiction writers who are very prescient in writing about various climatological or ecological scenarios, going back to John Wyndham and The Day of the Triffids. There was a whole strain of ecological science fiction in the 1970s—and also very politically astute science fiction. Ursula Le Guin’s work, many people. So I think science fiction writers have done a lot—and are still doing a lot—to popularize notions of change. … But unless the world just completely disappears, like we’re hit by an asteroid and incinerated, it’s not going to end. Nature as we know it will end, species will become extinct, but people will probably survive, for a while. Though they may not want to, in a severely diminished world, a world without polar bears or whales.”

Elizabeth Hand on Obamacare:

“I was miserably underinsured, because I wanted to make sure my kids had insurance, and spent a fortune—I don’t know, $70,000 or something—on insurance that was basically worthless. And then when the Affordable Care Act came around, I immediately signed on, and almost the first thing I did was get a colonoscopy. At the time I was 57. You’re supposed to get one after you’re 50, but I couldn’t afford one. It was $5,000 or something, so I’d gone without one. I got one, and the doctor came back and said, ‘It’s really good that you got this. You’re fine, I’ve taken care of everything, but if you hadn’t done this you would have developed colon cancer probably within a year, and it probably would have progressed very quickly.’ So if I had not been able to afford health insurance through the Affordable Care Act, I might not be talking to you.”

Elizabeth Hand on James Tiptree, Jr. by Julie Phillips:

“It’s one of the few biographies I’ve ever read—if not the only one—that made me cry. She just had such a sad life. I mean, not sad in the sense that she just sat alone in a room. She had a really fascinating life. She worked for the CIA and as a child she traveled to Africa on safaris, but she was just obviously somebody who—she did not identify as a straight woman, and whether or not she would have today been transgender, which maybe she would have been, or she would have come out as being a gay woman or a bisexual woman, she was not able to do any of those things in her lifetime. And she channeled a lot of that rage and grief into her fiction, which is some of the most brilliant fiction of the 20th century.”


Buy Fire. now | Buy e-Book now | Return to Elizabeth Hand's page

Fire. A Review

By Charles deLint
Books to Look For

May 1st, 2017

Fire, by Elizabeth Hand, PM Press, 2017, $13, pb
This is only the third book published by PM Press that I’ve read, the previous ones also being a mix of fiction and non-fiction. One was by Cory Doctorow, the other by Ursula K. Le Guin, both riveting. As is Fire.

In the case of each of these titles, I’ve only happened upon them, somehow remaining oblivi- ous to the rest of the publisher’s large backlist and ongoing publish- ing plans. Given the other titles listed in the publisher’s catalog at the end of this Elizabeth Hand col- lection, and the quality of the three titles I’ve read, that’s something I need to remedy.

Because they’re excellent books, of course, but also because of the publisher’s mission statement, which appeals to the old hippie/anarchist in me:

“We seek to create radical and stimulating fiction and nonfiction books, pamphlets, T-shirts, visual and audio materials to entertain, educate, and inspire you. We aim to distribute these through every avail- able channel with every available technology, whether that means you are seeing anarchist classics at our bookfair stalls; reading our lat- est vegan cookbook at the café; downloading geeky fiction e-books; or digging new music and timely videos from our website.”

Now, while I appreciate a pub- lisher having an ideological slant,  just as I appreciate a writer with something to say, that alone isn’t a reason to support them. The best intentions can sometimes result in a heavy-handed discourse. Excel- lent art can be undermined by a shoddy or unprofessional presenta- tion and/or design. There needs to be substance.

Happily, all three of the titles I’ve read thus far from PM Press provide exactly that. Substance and edge. And they look great. Smartly designed and easy to read in both paper and electronic editions. And a quick glance at the back catalog I mentioned earlier shows that they work with some of the best and most provocative writers in our field. Writers such as Rudy Rucker, Terry Bisson, John Shirley, Joe R. Lansdale, Karen Joy Fowler, Nor- man Spinrad, and Nalo Hopkinson, to name a few. And that’s not even taking into account the non-genre writers, as well as the broad choice of writers from other fields, so they’re certainly doing something right.

It reminds me a little of the latter part of the last century, when publishers had a strong sense of identity and readers would collect work from particular houses — DAW, Ace, Bantam Spectra, Del Rey — because they knew these imprints would deliver the kinds of stories they liked best.
That’s the sense I get with PM Press except, instead of a certain style of book — such as how Del Rey was known for great epic fan- tasy, DAW delivered top notch he- roic fantasy and space opera series, etc. — PM Press appears to be creat- ing a community with the singular aim of making the world a better place.

One of the best ways to do that is to understand where the world stands, where it comes from, and where it might be going, and Elizabeth Hand hits every one of those points with Fire.

The fiction (or at least two of the stories) looks ahead to natural disasters, focusing on the small and personal, which makes the greater problems beyond the confines of the characters’ lives all that more chilling. The third story, “Kronia,” takes us into the confused mind of a time traveler — or perhaps, if we don’t take what we’re told at face value, the narrator is on the spectrum.

For the nonfiction, Hand pro- files Alice Sheldon (James Tiptree, Jr.) and Thomas Disch. A good writer, when writing about the arts, makes you want to experience the work of their subjects, and Hand is very good at what she does, because the whole time I was reading, I wanted to go down to my library and reread books by her subjects while taking in her observations on them.
The lives of both these authors were filled with an unfair amount of tragedy, which makes their artis- tic accomplishments even more astonishing and poignant.

Rounding out the book is an interview with Hand by Terry Bisson, a bibliography, and a very heart-felt and revealing autobiographical essay in which Hand shows us the events in her life that led her to become the author she is today.

I loved everything about this book, just as I did with the Doctorow and Le Guin titles, and can’t wait to explore some more of the PM Press catalog in the months to come. You can have a look for yourself at their website where you’ll find not only some great sf but lots of fascinating titles covering everything from music, politics, and Latin America to gender studies and books on the African American and Native American experience.

Buy Fire. now | Buy e-Book now | Return to Elizabeth Hand's page

Verita$: A Review

By Harry Targ
Socialism and Democracy

About 25 years ago I was listening to one of the premier conservative radio pundits claim that the only institution “we” do not yet control is the university. That statement was prophetic in that a profusion of books and articles today reflect the multiple ways in which colleges and universities are being transformed by the neoliberal economic agenda, the pursuit of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics or so-called STEM-based education, and the seizure of power in higher education by the Koch Brothers.

This new literature, however, is only half correct because as Shin Eun-jung richly documents, the world’s premier university, Harvard, had already established, well before the twenty-first century, the model for a higher education that would serve economic and political ruling classes. Armed with direct childhood experience of state repression of students in Gwangju, South Korea and growing up in a culture that lionized US universities, particularly the image of Harvard, the author provides a detailed narrative of the “model” for the modern university that had its roots as far back as in its participation in the Salem Witch Trials.

Verita$ is a popularly written text that takes the reader through the history of Harvard University addressing most of the issues raised by the burgeoning critical literature on higher education. The author describes in detail the authority structures at Harvard and their very modest evolution since the student protests of the 1960s. The Harvard Corporation and a tiny executive elite have ruled with little regard for faculty, students, or staff input. When protests arose in the 1960s, the Harvard Corporation devolved some measure of authority to separate colleges, but control by the oligarchs remained.

More importantly, in every historical period CEOs at Harvard have been largely handpicked representatives of the economic ruling classes. They have been conscious of the need to train continuing generations of stewards of an oligarchical capitalist system. As one student put it, “it’s hard to say exactly how it happens. But after four years here you feel as though the world has been created to be led by Harvard men” (7).

Verita$ provides a useful historical narrative about the multiple ways in which Harvard CEOs, faculty and students have served the status quo. Harvard graduates and Corporate Board member Cotton Mather served in the 1692 Salem witch trial that convicted George Bur- roughs and sentenced him to death by hanging. Harvard executives, professors, and graduates also figured prominently in the defense of slavery. They actively opposed women workers who went on strike in Lawrence, Massachusetts, in 1912, and Harvard students hit the streets to oppose Boston police who went on strike in 1919. Harvard President Abbott Lawrence Lowell chaired a committee that reviewed and endorsed the judicial ruling to convict and execute Sacco and Van- zetti. Harvard president James Conant welcomed a rich German alum who was a close aide to Adolf Hitler in the 1930s. In the 1950s, while formally opposing McCarthyism, Harvard nonetheless dismissed several radical faculty.

Not only has Harvard been the paradigmatic training ground for generations of young men of the ruling class; it also provides the research and education to cement their class rule. Richard Levins, an idiosyncratic Harvard professor, reported that “Harvard is an organ of the American ruling class whose mission is to do the intellectual labor that class needs” (7).

Harvard scholars were recruited by and had ready access to the White House during the Vietnam War. McGeorge Bundy, Henry Kissinger, Samuel Huntington and others were instrumental in fash- ioning the escalating Vietnam War policy. Kissinger urged President Nixon to launch the brutal Christmas bombing, hitting civilian targets all across North Vietnam in December, 1972, and Samuel Hun- tington, a contract researcher for the CIA in violation of Harvard policy, warned David Rockefeller and other members of the Trilateral Commission in the 1970s of the “excesses of democracy.” Earlier, 1962, he had designed the “Strategic Hamlet Program” that displaced Viet- namese peasants from their homes. Harvard administrators, scholars, and alumni have been involved in virtually every odious movement, policy, and government in modern history, from eugenics to Nazism, to militarism, to the promotion of atomic war, to the development of economic policies referred to as “shock therapy” that impoverished millions of Russians and Eastern Europeans, to sexism, racism, and class exploitation.

To be sure, Harvard has not been the only US university that has served economic ruling classes and imperialism, but it has been the model that most other major institutions follow. And as the author, a South Korean, points out, Harvard has trained the ruling classes of many of the world’s nations and has inspired wealthier families from many of these countries to send their children to Harvard as well.

Verita$ also describes how Harvard financial wizards used its endowment funds for purposes of financial speculation, beginning in the new century, only to experience major losses after the financial crisis of 2008. Researcher and Harvard graduate John Trumpbour cites the observation that “Harvard is a giant financial, stock market, and real estate investment firm that happens to have classes on the side so that it can keep its tax-exempt status” (167).

This case study of the history and political economy of one university, albeit the most prestigious one, adds immeasurably to a knowledge base that can be used by activists who see the need to defend the idea of the university from the neoliberal onslaught. Its contribution could have been even greater if the author added a chapter that explicitly addressed the dominant paradigms influenced by Harvard scholars over major disciplines, particularly since the end of World War II. How did distinguished economists, psychologists, social scientists, and humanists shape what became “legitimate” knowledge in the academy? What approaches to these disciples were shunned by academic researchers? To what extent was the definition of legitimate knowledge shaped to meet the interests of the US and the capitalist system?

Examples are presented as President Conant or Dean Bundy proclaim that Harvard research and teaching must serve the needs of the military/industrial complex. But the question of linking institutional power to knowledge could have been addressed in greater depth.

I am sure Shin Eun-jung would have agreed that academic fields are shaped by paradigms or theories that justify the existing economic and political order. The university is not usually a haven for discussions about the fundamental structures of inequality, racism, patriarchy, the devastation of the environment, or war. In the end, Boards of Trustees, think tanks, university administrators, and federal programs, are committed to a university system that supports the capitalist state. Only limited and circumscribed debate about issues fundamental to economic vitality and political democracy are allowed. Therefore, the university was not created for nor does it prioritize today discussions of fundamental truths.

Verita$, which was written to complement a documentary film of the same name, provides a well informed and historically-based description of America’s premier educational institution. The book demonstrates how Harvard has impacted the world through research, education, and policymaking. Shin Eun-jung, filmmaker, author, and activist, died prematurely at age 40, but her writing and filmmaking leave an important legacy.

# 2017 Harry Targ Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana

Buy the book | Buy the e-Book | Back to Shin Eun-jung's Author Page

The Bonnot Gang: Two Reviews

By Chris Kortright
Briarpatch Magazine
February 10, 2017

The Bonnot Gang: The Story of the French Illegalists 
By Richard Parry
PM Press, 2016

Without a Glimmer of Remorse 
By Pino Cacucci. Illustrated by Flavio Costantini
Black Powder Press, 2016

Class war is usually envisioned as a mass movement, often under the umbrella of formal organizations like revolutionary parties or syndicalist federations. But is that the only articulation of class war? In 2016, two books came out looking at other forms of expropriation. Both books are reprints of classic texts exploring the French illegalists known as the Bonnot Gang, a group of individualist anarchists involved in forgery, counterfeiting, and, most notoriously, bank robberies and burglaries to support their insurrectionary politics.

The first book is The Bonnot Gang: The Story of the French Illegalists by Richard Parry. The second is the novel Without a Glimmer of Remorse written by Pino Cacucci and illustrated by Flavio Costantini. Each of these texts, in different ways – one historical, the other fictive – presents informative, engrossing, and exciting narratives exploring political and personal revolt against society. The texts make you wonder: what if folk heroes like Jesse James, Bonnie and Clyde, or John Dillinger actually had politics behind their actions?

Parry contrasts the Bonnot Gang with “American antiheros” and argues: “[T]he illegalists were consciously political, both on a personal level and in their view of the structure of the state and society. They are far more fascinating as individuals with their vegetarianism, teetotalism and belief in anarchy and free love as well as for their daring exploits.” Their “daring exploits” included the expropriation of wealth from capitalists and other members of the bourgeoisie as a means of personal survival while funding anarchist projects. They also carried out acts of revenge against those responsible for poverty, exploitation, and violence.

Cacucci, meanwhile, explores the ideas of rebellion and action through a fictional monologue by Jules Bonnot: “Hitting the exploiters with their fondness for the guillotine and for champagne in precisely what they cherished most, their purse. Not for the sake of lining one’s pockets, but so as to repay them in kind for a little of the terror they spread, so cocksure that they were unreachable. And not with bombs, but at gunpoint, wresting back a fraction of everything that they were hiding from the millions in despair.” While this passage appears as a fictional representation of Jules’ perspective, it is also a vantage point through which to consider the perspective of many anarchists at the time. Specifically, many European individualist anarchists believed the act of expropriation was a legitimate form of revolt against the social order (capitalists, politicians, and the church). Expropriative anarchism, or “expropriations on the bourgeoisie,” has been a practice of anarchist affinity groups – most famously in Argentina and Spain by Buenaventura Durruti, Severino Di Giovanni, Miguel Arcángel Roscigna, and Lucio Urtubia – that has involved theft, robbery, scams, and counterfeiting currency. The French illegalists expropriated not only to finance anarchist activities; for them, it became a way to live.

Parry situates the Bonnot Gang’s philosophies within a larger individualist anarchist milieu that was thriving in France in the interwar period. Founded by Octave Garnier, Raymond la Science (Raymond Callemin), and René Valet, the cornerstone of the Bonnot Gang’s philosophy was the liberation of an individual’s desires (that is, following one’s desires rather than being crushed by the laws and morality of the church, state, family, and so on) and the drive to live a free life outside of or in contrast to the forced labour of the masses. Members of the Bonnot Gang were influenced by earlier anarchists: La Science was inspired by Mikhail Bakunin and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, and others were also influenced by Max Stirner’s egoism. Cacucci explores these ideas through Jules Bonnot’s meditations on Stirner: “Revolution has its sights set on a new organization; rebellion on the other hand prompts us to reject being organized any longer, but rather to look to self-organization and places no great hopes in institutions.”

When the gang started out, the press referred to them as the “Auto Bandits” because they were the first gang to utilize an automobile for their getaways. Because of this, the gang had an edge over the French police, who didn’t have access to the repeating rifles and automobiles used by the gang. The gang was later referred to as the Bonnot Gang after Bonnot – worker, soldier, chauffeur to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and primary character in Cacucci’s novel – walked into the offices of the popular daily newspaper Le Petit Parisien and, in an act of bravado, set his semi-automatic gun on a desk and complained to the journalists about stories they had been running about the gang.

It was also around that time that Garnier published a letter in Le Matin mocking the police, challenging their “intelligence,” and taunting them for their inability “to pick up my trail again.” In the letter, he wrote, “Don’t think I’m going to run away from your police; on my word, I believe they’re the ones who are afraid.” Addressing the police, he closed the letter: “Awaiting the pleasure of meeting you.” These acts of defiance led to an increase in police funding of 800,000 francs; a bounty of 100,000 francs was charged as a reward for the gang’s capture.

Eventually the police rounded up the gang’s supporters and other anarchists, and the Bonnot Gang’s spree of bank robberies, burglaries, and shootouts with police came to an end. André Soudy was arrested on March 30, 1912. According to Parry, “On his person they found the, now standard, loaded Browning, six bullets, a thousand francs in cash and a phial of potassium cyanide.” Shortly after, in early April, Édouard Carouy and la Science were arrested. Cacucci describes the arrest: “Raymond was unable to draw any of the three pistols he had in his pocket because Sevestre brought the butt of his own pistol down on his head. At the Sûreté, Raymond retreated into absolute silence. Screams, threats and kicks proved useless. There was no way that he was about to talk.” As April closed, the police had arrested or detained 28 gang members and supporters, but Bonnot, Garnier, and Valet remained at large.

“The walls of the old house bore the scars of gunfire and there wasn’t a single pane of glass left intact in the window-frames,” writes Cacucci, illustrating the famous shootout between police and Jules Bonnot on April 28, 1912. The police had tracked Bonnot to Choisy-le-Roi, a suburb of Paris. For some time, he kept the 500 armed police officers and soldiers at bay despite the Hotchkiss machine gun in their possession. Finally, the police chief sent three officers to place dynamite charges under the house, blowing up the entire front portion of the residence. Bonnot took cover in a rolled-up mattress and continued to shoot back at the police. Ultimately, he was shot in the head. Roughly two weeks later, 300 police and 800 soldiers surrounded Garnier and Valet in an eastern suburb of Paris, Nogent-sur-Marne; the skirmish resulted in another dynamite explosion that killed Garnier and wounded Valet.

When the gang’s survivors were put on trial, Victor Serge was sentenced to five years for robbery, and Eugène Dieudonné to life imprisonment. Carouy and Marius Metge also got life in prison, with hard labour. Metge was sent to a penal colony, while la Science, Étienne Monier and Soudy were executed by guillotine because they refused to plead for clemency. Like many classic anti-hero tales, these ones end with shootouts and guillotines … but these rebels had an articulate anarchist politics of defiance as they looked into their executioner’s eyes.

Both books are great individually, but when read together, they fill gaps created by the other’s genre. Where Parry gives a detailed and documented history, Cacucci articulates emotion and subjectivity through his narrative. The only thing I found wanting in the texts was their treatment of the women involved as background subjects. These women were writers, journal co-editors, and active proponents of free love. They were also, importantly, involved in clandestine activities, and these two books would be richer if they engaged with the strong history of individualist-anarchist women. That said, both authors have a deep understanding of and sympathy for the philosophies and desires of the individuals involved in the Bonnot Gang, bringing out powerful accounts of this too-often ignored group in anarchist history.

Chris Kortright is an independent researcher and writer and has been involved in the anarchist milieu for many years. He is a collective member of the new anti-authoritarian publishing project Changing Suns Press and writes a blog called Firebrand Dictionary.

Buy The Bonnot Gang: The Story of the French Illegalists | Buy The Bonnot Gang: The Story of the French Illegalists e-book | Back to Richard Parry's Author Page

Interview: The Clash biographer Randal Doane

March 28th, 2017

A Californian expat living in Oberlin, Ohio, Randal is a huge fan of The Clash and is the author of Stealing All Transmissions: A Secret History of The Clash

Who is Randal Doane?

I grew up in the suburbs of Northern California and played what your lot calls ‘football’ through my teens. I trashed my knee on the eve of my 16th birthday—which is lucky, I suspect, for Clash fans and myself. If I had played soccer in college, I probably wouldn’t have had the marks to go to graduate school – an experience that certainly shaped my approach to this book.

Tell us about your book
In 2003, while working as a college professor, I was writing an article on illegal file-sharing for an academic journal. While gathering data – all done in the name of science, I assure you – I found a 77-minute long track called “Clash-Palladium-WNEW-Sept21-1979.mp3.” (You can find the audio on YouTube.)

A couple years went by, and the title of the track gnawed at me. The Palladium was in New York, and I knew The Clash loved it there. But the second half of the title proved enigmatic. What were The Clash doing on WNEW-FM, a station staffed with veteran deejays from the days of free-form FM radio – the two rules of free-form then were: no disco, no punk? Also, how did two concerts take place on September 20-21, 1979, in a theatre with more than 3,000 seats, less than a year after their American debut, Give ‘Em Enough Rope, which peaked at #126 on the Billboard charts, and just two months after the release of the Americanized version of their first LP, The Clash?


So I started my detective work and learned that The Clash (UK) was, by July 1979, the best-selling import LP in the US. I also found out that New York-based rock journalists such as Lester Bangs and Robert Christgau were Clash devotees – even proselytizers.

Next, I learned that bass player Paul Simonon’s impersonation of Paul Bunyan (Google him), which served of course as the cover image for London Calling, took place at the Palladium, and that the historical record indicated that the famous moment happened that same night. (That’s false, actually, as my book confirms. Also: search youtube for “Dave Marin Clash” for the definitive account.)

I then talked to WNEW deejays Richard Neer and the delightful Meg Griffin, now at Sirius XM Radio. Griffin recalled how she sought to expand the symbolic boundaries of free-form radio, and how she and her colleagues met considerable resistance, from management and fellow deejays alike. The project continued to gain steam and, after imagining the piece as a lengthy article, I expanded it into the book you have before you – or should! Ha!

How do you think punk ‘evangelicals’ see London Calling today?

As you may recall, UK critics savaged Give ‘Em Enough Rope. I swear, looking back, it’s as if critics, at NME especially, were just waiting to pounce on any sophomore effort: “How dare you release a second album? We shall destroy you!”

Joe Strummer and Mick Jones were like sharks, with a keep moving or die ethos. They didn’t want to be The Ramones, and said as much later, I believe. I think of that bar scene in Repo Man, when Otto checks out The Circle Jerks onstage, as a lounge act, basically, and says, “I can’t believe I used to like these guys.” The Ramones are great, of course, but lots of great bands mellow – The Replacements, Husker Du, The Flaming Lips even – and that mellowing can lead to something totally amazing.

Finally, tell us your top five albums of all time

Oh, must we? Ha! All right, here we go, alphabetically:

The Clash: London Calling
Enough said.

Hamell on Trial
Hamell on Trial: Rant’n’Roll
A live album, actually. Think The Clash meet Louis C.K., and throw in a battered ’37 Gibson. Great songs about politics, race, parenting, drugs, and redemption.

Prince Sign o the Times
Prince: Sign O’ the Times
The best guitar player of his generation, and one of the best songwriters. Gotta have a little bit of ecstasy in this collection

The Specials
The Specials: The Specials
It’s where it all started for me, I suppose. I hope to be as dignified as bassist – and painter – Horace Panter someday

Amy Winehouse
Amy Winehouse: Back to Black
Such a talent, such a voice, and with the Dap Kings behind her, she was at the absolute peak of her game. Great production work throughout

Stealing_all_transmissions copy-1



Buy book now | Buy e-Book now | Back to Randal Doane's Author Page

A Singer/Songwriter You May Never Have Heard Of, But Should

The Fifth Estate
April 2017

 At a time when independent publishers and record labels are going out of business at a rapid rate, PM Press keeps on putting out books, pamphlets, videos, and various other things – including CDs.

One of their most recent releases is a 5-CD box set retrospective containing close to 100 songs by singer/songwriter, Robb Johnson, titled “A Reasonable History of Impossible Demands.”

If you are a Robb Johnson fan, you’d immediately recognize the box set’s title from one of Robb’s songs, the chorus of which echoes the Situationist slogan from the revolutionary May/June days of Paris 1968.

But, you have probably never heard of Robb Johnson unless you happen to have grown up on the fringes of the punk and/or folk music scene somewhere in England, Scotland or Wales, sometime between 1986 and the present.

Robb Johnson is the quintes- sential great songwriter you’ve never heard of. The one that proves the whole record indus- try is full of shit, among other industries.

Why was “Anarchy in Hack- ney” not on the Billboard charts? Why doesn’t “At the Siege of Madrid” appear in all the high school textbooks as a teaching aid for that lesson on the Spanish Civil War? ( You know, that one.) Well, you know why.
But now, at least, Robb’s music will not only be known on the fringes of the British punk and folk scenes, but on the fringes of the anarchist scene in the US, as well. And, who knows what’s next.

To put Robb into some kind of warped, personal context, as a teenager I liked Bob Dylan a lot.

I still do. But I just assumed the media hype I grew up with must be true, that Dylan was the best politically-oriented (at least for a few records) songwriter the English lan- guage managed to produce.
Then, at the age of 19, I hitch-hiked from San Francisco to Seattle, went to the Pike Place Market, and was com- pletely blown away by a guy named Jim Page, who was busking there.
That was in the 1980s. It wasn’t until more than a decade later, on my first tour of England, that I discovered Robb.

It was one of those inevitable dis- coveries for a politically-oriented songwriter touring the folk clubs of England to make. Probably one in three people I stayed with, after attending my show, asked me if I had heard of Robb.

And, regularly subjected to Robb’s CDs as I was on that tour, I was happy to discover that this was far from an un- pleasant experience. On the contrary, I was hooked. Like Jim Page, Robb writes at least as well as Dylan, but with more authentic emotion and much better politics.

Robb has documented his life and times from the 1980s to the present, always with chilling insight, often with humor, sometimes with an old-school punk band, oftentimes with just voice and guitar.

He is a master of the instrument, particularly with his intricate fingerstyle playing, reminiscent of other masters of the technique like Jim Page or Alistair Hulett.

In addition to songs about his times, from Thatcher’s reign to Thatcher’s death (“Ding Dong Thatch”), to the fall of the Soviet Union (“Breakfast In Chemnitz”) to Blair and Cameron’s foreign wars and the resistance to them (“I Am Not At War”), the box set includes a whole CD’s worth of Robb’s gorgeous songs about love, childhood (“Real Cool Purple Shirt”), and parenthood – some of which also manage to include World War I history in them, among other things (“When Harry Took Me To See Ypres”).

Taken as a whole, you’ll get an excel- lent primer on some of the more notable events of the 20th century from this collection.

OK, now go look him up on You- Tube. But if you still have a CD player and you got an extra $45, the full-on Robb Johnson binge via PM Press is way better.

David Rovics is a Portland, Oregon- based singer/songwriter and anarchist. His many songs and albums, and his cur- rent touring schedule for the U.S. and Eu- rope is at

Buy CDs now  | Back to artist homepage

Anti-Fascist Sports, Autonomen, and PhDs: An Interview with Gabriel Kuhn

By Gregory Zobel
Freedom News
March 2nd, 2017

Gabriel Kuhn has been writing political books from the late ’90s on topics ranging from women pirates to football and the State. In this interview Freedom reviewer Luther Blisset talks to him about the Autonomen, workers’ councils and the history of anti-fascism in sport.

LB: You graduated with a PhD at a young age, at least for the US. Did you know that you wanted to do philosophy for a long time? How did you get interested in philosophy and radical politics? And why go for a PhD instead of just an undergraduate degree?

GK: I knew that I wanted to study philosophy already in high school. It was simply a fascination with questions that seemed central to our existence: is there a God or not? What is good and what is evil? What is the meaning of life? Why does something exist and not nothing?

The interest in politics developed a little later, but it quickly became very strong and, inevitably, influenced my take on philosophy. Political philosophy and ethics became the fields I was mostly interested in. During the early 1990s, when I did my studies, there was a bit of an upheaval in the humanities, at least in Europe. For many, the fall of the Soviet Union had discredited Marxism, which was still the leading ideology among left-wing academics. Interest in poststructuralist leftists — such as Michel Foucault, Jean-François Lyotard, Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari — soared. I remember the period as exciting, even though much of poststructuralist-inspired work today has degenerated into nonsensical gibberish.

The reason I did a PhD was because it was an easy thing to do in Austria. It didn’t cost you anything (university education was free and still is for the most part) and I hardly had to do any courses. All I needed to do — so to speak — was to write a thesis, which wasn’t a big sacrifice since I always enjoyed writing. That’s why I saw the project through, although I had no interest in an academic career. I’ve never had a job in academia.

LB: I remember reading that you were involved with the Autonomen for several years. How would you describe your activities? Demos? Publishing? Outreach? Could you share several of the lessons you learned from the experience?

GK: The autonomous milieu was pretty much where all radical leftists in the German-speaking world found themselves in if they didn’t want to be involved in party politics. It was very diverse and ideologically quite open. For some years, I was part of a collective in a smaller Austrian town that contributed to and distributed the country’s biggest autonomous newspaper; I guess in more modern language you’d call it an affinity group. We also went to demonstrations together and were involved in different protests — against the first Gulf War, the rise of the FPÖ (a right-wing party, today one of the country’s biggest), real estate speculation, Austria joining the European Union (at the time, opposition to the EU was a mainly leftist issue — today, it has been taken over by the nationalists). We also were involved in starting a pirate radio station, which opened the path for legal non-commercial radio projects that still exist. In 1994, I left Austria and I can’t really claim that I have been active in the German-speaking autonomous movement since, although I’ve always been following the developments and discussions and it’s still the milieu I move in when I go visit. A few years ago, I was involved in a German publishing project that tried to reevaluate the autonomous movement in the new century.

What did I learn from those experiences? Interesting question, I have never given that much thought. Obviously, it introduced me to autonomous organising, for better or worse. I learned about militant protest and direct action, security and legal issues, the publishing and distributing of literature, the dynamics of radical collectives, and about building broader alliances or at least trying to. Plus, there were many debates about goals, strategies, and tactics. I think I mainly gathered impressions for a few years and had in no way reached any particular conclusion when I left the country to travel and then live abroad. I guess what I took me with me was the feeling that you can have an impact even as a small group, as long as you’re connected to a broader movement through regular discussion and common action. If that connection is lost, however — as I feel is increasingly the case for radical collectives, at least in Western and Northern Europe — it’s easy to fit the image of an isolated social club with radical pretensions.

LB: Given your background, reading, and networks, have you seen any phenomenon or organising in the US that resembles any of the iterations of the European Autonomen? If so, could you elaborate or discuss a bit?

GK: I think that the anarchist subculture I experienced studying and travelling in the U.S. between 1994 and 2005 in many ways resembled that of the Autonomen. This concerned everything from what people wore to what they ate to the music they listened to and to the way their homes and social centres looked. All of that was very familiar. And despite certain differences in focus, the main political topics were also the same: gender, racism, anti-capitalism, and so on. Add to that the shared enthusiasm for direct action, Black Blocs, and related forms of protest and you have very similar scenes.

The strongest differences probably concerned ideology. The Autonomen were still fairly influenced by Marxism — even if it was a Marxism of the “left communist” or “operaist” variety — and I didn’t see much of that in the U.S. I hate to employ overused stereotypes, but I felt there were fairly strong anti-intellectual strains in the radical circles I encountered there. All of this might have changed, however. I haven’t been able to travel to the country since 2005 due to immigration issues.

LB: You edited a book of key source documents on Workers Councils. How did you first run into the material? And how did you decide which documents to translate into English — that must have been incredibly hard! I’m very curious about what relevance you see in getting these documents published. What have you specifically learned from working with this body of documents?

GK: The book came about in roundabout ways. Originally, I was interested in the role of the anarchists Gustav Landauer and Erich Mühsam in the Bavarian Council Republic, which existed for a couple of months in the spring of 1919. Mühsam had written a personal account of the period, and an American friend, who wanted to publish it as a pamphlet, had asked me to translate it. The pamphlet never appeared, but talking about the project with other English-speaking friends, it seemed there was a more general interest in the German Revolution of 1918–1919, especially in the radical, that is, the anarchist, syndicalist, and communist currents. The folks at PM Press were among those I talked to, and this is how the book was conceived.

The material wasn’t difficult to find. The period is well covered in German literature. I chose the texts for the English edition according to their overall importance and to how representative they were for the currents I wanted to focus on. Of course I wanted to include the most influential texts, but I also wanted to tell a story. Anthologies — in particular academic ones — all too often consist of individual texts that might be of great quality but are only loosely connected; it can be hard to identify a thread that runs through them all. For me, it seemed important to tie the individual parts together and create a narrative. So that’s what I tried to do.

As far as the relevance of publishing historical material is concerned, there is a standard answer: we need to learn from history to make the future better. More specifically in this case, the question of revolution remains unresolved. Fortunately enough, there are still a lot of people who want a socialist society; but few of us know how to even begin the discussion about how to get there. Looking at earlier attempts seems like a good starting point.

LB: How many languages are you able to translate with/across?

GK: Basically, I translate between German, English, and Swedish, although the translations into Swedish require more time and editorial help. I can also translate from French (albeit slowly) and — by default, as they are so close to Swedish — from Danish and Norwegian. I cannot translate into those languages, my active command of them is simply too poor.

I enjoy translating. It’s like writing, only that you can fully focus on the technical aspects of it, since someone else already has done the thinking for you. If you like writing and have an interest in language, it’s a great thing to do.

LB: When I saw your work about sports and anti-fascism, I was a bit surprised, honestly. Normally, in the US, sports is run by and with nationalism. Often other ugly forms of chauvinism appear. Anti-fascist sports strikes me in many ways like anti-racist or communist skinheads: a rare exception or novel idea. What motivated you to work on and write about this? How has the work been received? Do you play sports yourself?

GK: I play a lot of sports and have always done so. Next to family and politics (which includes the work I do), sport is the most important part of my everyday life. This is also what motivates me to write about it.

Of course you are right, there is plenty of ugliness in sports, especially in the professionalised and commercialised varieties: competition, chauvinism, exploitation, unhealthy body norms, you name it. But sport is not only a big part of my life, it’s a big part of many people’s lives, and it won’t go anywhere in a liberated society, and neither should it, because there is plenty of beauty in it as well.

Essentially, sport is the combination of physical activity and play, which are both essential for our well-being. If the environment is right, sports can be great fun, they bring people together, and they teach us social values. The challenge for radicals is to create an environment that brings out the best in sports instead of the worst.

It is true that good examples are not always easy to find, but they exist: from the workers’ sports movement of the early twentieth century to sport’s role in the civil rights struggles of the 1960s to antifascist organising among sports fans today. Sport has tremendous political significance and the struggle for liberation needs to happen there as much as everywhere else.

The reception of the work I have done on the subject has largely been positive. Mostly, it’s read by radicals who share an interest in sports and find the stories inspiring. But I’ve also got nice feedback from people with no particular interest in sports who felt they had discovered new aspects of it.

Of course, there is the occasional critic who lambastes me for “misusing sports for political purposes”, but that has to be expected. For some people, addressing injustice is a distraction from having a good time, which they associate with sports. Sometimes, these people generally don’t want to hear about injustice, maybe because they themselves don’t experience much of it. But even for the exploited and the oppressed, sport can function as an escape and they don’t want to hear about politics in that zone. That needs to be respected, but in the long run, it’s not going to break the cycle where escape is the only way of dealing with injustice, which is never sustainable. I suppose the goal is having sports and politics being based on the same values, so that mixing the two will appear natural rather than contradictory. This, I believe, would be great progress.

Buy book now | Download e-Book now | Back to the Author's Page

Antifascism, Sports, Sobriety: A Review in Freedom News

By Gregory Zobel
Freedom News
March 2nd, 2017

This book is too short. All the content is of high and tight quality. Read Kuhn’s introduction and mini-bio of Deutsch and you’ll want to know much, much more about Red Vienna. It’s a crack incisive introduction to the vital, visceral intersectionality of anti-fascism, sports, and sobriety.

Kuhn’s volume offers a detailed, readable, well-sourced, and accessible entry into health-centred anti-fascism. Veracity and believability stem from his refusal to present Red Vienna as an idyllic time. No. They made mistakes. Knowing this, it’s inviting and more honest in approach than many traditional narratives surrounding revolutionary utopian efforts and projects.

This is not a “back in the good ole days of state smashing” sales pitch. Instead, Kuhn helps readers understand more of the strengths and weaknesses from the era. He works to free the era from sole control and historical representation by communist party loyalists and historians. Just as reading about the 1936 Spanish Revolution would be problematic if only read from a communist or Stalinist perspective, so, too, with Red Vienna. With this book, Kuhn adds an important work to the relatively limited number of English works about Red Vienna.

If you’ve read Kuhn’s work on Straight Edge, you will find a number of connections between the volumes. Whether Kuhn read some of Deutsch’s work and the related authors first, and those moved him to Straight Edge, or the other way around, doesn’t really matter. What is interesting are the shared concerns: remaining sober, healthy and strong so that you can see the lies of governing forces, retain clarity, maintain strength, and build capacity to resist.

Kuhn makes the point that, unlike many socialist groups and parties throughout the German-speaking world, Vienna was different. They fought back. They lost, but they resisted. They had armed militias, they had training programs, and they knew the importance of providing access to the natural world, physical training, and sports leagues — management and operation were not trusted to petty bourgeois or ruling classes. Instead, resources were run by and provided to, for, and by the people where they lived and worked.

This is absolutely one of my favourite books. I sat down and read it in an evening.

Buy book now | Download e-Book now | Back to the Author's Page


Quick Access to:



New Releases

Featured Releases

The Unknown Revolution: 1917-1921

The Road Through San Judas