Format

• We’re reading 2-3 chapters a week (some are very short). I’m going to be shooting for 50-60 pages a week, give or take. I’m going to be getting page counts from the libgen ebook, so that’s why readings will be done by chapter.
• Hopefully we’ll be done in 7 or 8 weeks
• Feel free to get whatever copy you wish, I’ll also post onto Perusall for your convenience and highlighting.
• I’ll plan to post on Wednesday each week with the readings we’re discussing and our future schedule as I work it out. I’ll also @ mention anyone who posts in this thread in future weeks.

Resources

• Libgen link to an ebook here
• Here’s Bevins’ appearance on Trueanon, which is part of why I wanted to do this book club
• Perusall – if you want to flag passages for discussion, I’ll do my best to check this before I post my weekly post. If people would prefer, I can also make weekly assignments here, but I’ve opened up the book for access in an assignment or whatever.

Finally, please feel free to drop in at any point. We’re well along, but the old discussions remain open and I’d still love to have anyone who wishes to join.

@MF_COOM@hexbear.net @chicory@hexbear.net @Maoo@hexbear.net @Vampire@hexbear.net

Previous Posts

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Just because we’re almost done doesn’t mean you can’t join in! All previous posts remain open, and since it is a long book, just hop in at any point/place.

This is our last set of chapters on the “events” - 20/21 will be conclusions, from how far I’ve read into 20.

Chapter 18

• The farce here is of course particularly stupid - got to arrest Lula before he can get elected
• It’s kind of insane to think of how Lula’s imprisonment started with a movement that fundamentally his party is/was sympathetic to (hence, I think, Bevins’s immediate turn to Mayara)
• However, as Bevins insists, it wasn’t their fault (indeed, if we take anything from this, I think it’s that protests open up a contingent space where there’s really a lot of potential possibilities, and you have to fight for your desired outcome).
• I also see parallels to America, and the Democrats failure to embrace the energy of the 2020 protests in a meaningful way (gesture to the Nancy-kneeling emoji, lol).
• I can’t imagine getting in the mind of a center-right person or lib reading this book and not seeing how they’re the moderate wing of fascism. The cruelty/accelerating atrocities here really hit home.
• 264 - paying someone for a cigarette – this is peak neoliberalism, and actually fucking with my brain.
• What is to be done when the state imprisons the popular left candidate? Like, what should have been done here? Ironically, I feel like electoralism is an absolute dead end in this case, but I’m curious what y’all think?
• I do feel like returning to protest/electoralism after multiple years of the shit that Bevins has discussed is kind of crazy. Lula won last year or whatever, but was it worth it to have 4 or 5 years of Bolsonaro?
• Rather than tragedy/farce, this is just two different tragedies, and the kind of doomed energy of Mayara’s organizing feels especially bad as there’s clearly some real deep earnestness (naming it after the left wing martyr).
• Also, even if this wasn’t adventurism, it is a good example of why it’s dangerous (266) - you’re consolidating the reactionaries around a martyr.
• I can kind of see why the right wing went so hard on the LGBTQ culture war, since it’s lurid and easily shared by boomers. While the energy is fading, I wouldn’t be surprised to see it again.…
• The distinction between the hardcore and the “voters” of course applies to Trump too, and the real question is, how do you peel off these “voters”? I’m not exactly filled with hope that we find ourselves in this position again.
  • “Let’s see how he does” attitude seems the core of this – is there any way we could grab these voters to a left candidate instead?
• The role of gender does seem relevant to bring up here. I hate to return to a Chapo/Hasan/Citations Needed meme, but how do we get more left-wing “self-help” types to avoid men becoming like this?
  • The Citations beg-a-thon noted, there’s a paradox, since left critique is often systemic, thus self-help hardly gets you the changes that you desire in society.
• Of course, all the corruption reporting is too little too late, and I wonder how useful it is. Lula did get elected though, so perhaps it helped discredit Bolsonarismo among squishy libs?
• “Brazilian agribusiness already quite liked the current setup in the country” (270) this feels very like the DeSantis shit with Disney, etc. Why do we get these right wingers when Capital is already so concentrated/comfortable? Why aren’t they disciplining their petit bourgeoisie better?
• The connections between these right wing movements are important, and I’m glad Bevins notes the Ukraine right beginning to “appear” more. However, I do wonder if having some journalists who were able to “embed” in these movements might have added to the book. I’m not entirely sure on this, btw – maybe not knowing what’s going on in those Telegram channels will keep us sane…
• This shit is just so grim at this point – I do wonder, would left-wing protests of Bolsonaro have done anything? Or is head down the best strategy (especially when they’re trying to ban communism)
• Interesting how Bevins notes that “normally, these figures [of anti-politics] floundered” – is the implication here Zelensky was propped up by western interests? Or was he lucky Putin invaded, allowing him to consolidate power?

Chapter 19

• So, we’re nearing the end here – Bevins suggesting that 2019 allows for us to really evaluate the organizational question that he’s been tracing, so let’s see where this goes.
• What is it that allows for paranoid readings of “unremarkable” legislation (as Bevins describes it)?
• It also might be business interests just trying to protect themselves (the “tycoons” worried about anti-corruption…)
• Polite cops always smacks a bit of copaganda to me…
• Coordinating beforehand to storm the building and disrupt proceedings – this is a classic tactic, and one that doesn’t necessarily require cop clashes either (the UAW did it in California during the TA strike last year).
• So on one level, this does really look like a mass movement (even Bevins acknowledges this)
• Of course, the new generation of protestors can’t remember the historical contexts – I find Finn Lau’s frankness about this interesting, since the Arab Spring was such big news in the west.
• This is really interesting - the total decentralization (yet it’s not, since I’m assuming that polls aren’t just submitted by anyone, I might be wrong though) as a contrast to Leninist organization and discipline.
• “Be Water” is of course smart though, and I think if there’s one thing to take from this, it’s that you need to be agile/adaptable. How to graft that to an organizational discipline/vanguard is, I think, a key question here.
• So, there’s a clear difference from the reactionaries in Brazil (which are more clearly connected to US imperial interests), but I’m curious how many of these youth vanguard on telegram are connected.
  • I don’t think it’s all of them and I do think there were probably earnest actors in this case - maybe it’s just vibes, but it doesn’t feel as “inorganic/counterprogramming” as the Brazil stuff
• I do like that Bevins notes – what do you do if you get “yes”?
  • Would a quick “sure” to the demands have been the way, perhaps? None of these 5 seems particularly depraved/terrible…
• The colonial flag is just absolutely nuts, along with the redbaiting feels very connected to US interests to me.
• And of course, identifying with Imperial Japan is always a terrible choice too. Au Loong-Yu’s perspective is interesting here, since he’s clearly not a huge fan of the PRC/mainland, but yet he recognizes that the movement is crippling itself.
• The horizontalists remaining open to co-option is of course a key issue, and the arrival of the racists really feels like we’re running the same script.
• “The tyranny of structurelessness” is such a good perspective on this issue (283), and I do think this is what I was getting at with the fact that the people running the polls are de-facto leaders.
• The role of organized crime is of course a Blowback classic, and I feel like there’s something deeply sinister about the Triads here.
• Performativity in protests - cringe or useful? I’m legitimately curious, since I wonder if the aesthetics of culture are really helpful here (feels cringe to me).
• “Previously worked for US Naval intelligence” (285) there it is!
• “Imposing meaning” and the right wing attempt to co-opt what Bevins argues is a disparate movement with many different contours – this is, I think, another key takeaway (how do you prevent this imposition on a disorganized movement)
• The protestors getting way out over their skis, of course, is inevitable, and here Leninist discipline, I think, matters a lot.
• I do think that there’s definitely an argument that sometimes you just chill and let these things “Burn out” - how do we prevent this sort of thing? Is this, again, a role for a more central structure (so you don’t bleed chatroom members as things slow down?)
• Switching to Chile and their own transit protests.
• Interestingly, here we see how a mass movement can really work (there are fundamentally too many people to arrest) in response to curfews, etc.
• I do think that there’s something to having these associations/affiliations (i.e. the Abogados Feministas) that can “activate” and join in solidarity.
• Shifts in technology matter - how much do they effect the actual conditions of protest though? Is posting on instagram stories really materially different (except in terms of audience, etc.)
• The specificity in this movement does help - I think it’s important to avoid leaving things totally empty (they don’t have to be perfectly specific though) - having some placeholder “there” I think helps the cooption problem. Make the movement about a specific thing and also a specific goal.
• Mayara thinks this is “better” and I’m inclined to agree.
  • Do we need a right-wing president to gain change? I feel like that’s such a gamble, but I recognize the left-punching tendency otherwise.
  • Accelerationists, would you like to take the floor?
• Having a clear shape matters, it turns out!
• OK, a new thing that I do think really helps - making a local proxy/assembly for the centralized protest. Rather than making people come to the “square” as it were, there’s a way to build solidarity in your community here. Very cool!
  • I do think this is something that was definitely not present in 2020 and perhaps a key reason nothing happened - you’re not actually meeting with your community.
• Obviously it’s a fairly pathetic gesture (vote!), and was rejected by the streets.
  • However, both the “assembly” and the convention seem particularly troubled, since we’ve seen the real weaknesses with the horizontalist approach…
• “Some of the most radical people insisted that a riot itself was the revolution and could be expanded and transformed into a new society” (295) - I feel like the multifaceted motives of the riot mean that it can’t actually do this, but maybe there’s potential?
• Cancelled - this is especially comic. I feel like Marx’s tragedy/farce is vindicated yet again
• What’s especially sad here is that there’s a potential here in committees, etc. but the lack of a larger party structure is really killing the momentum it seems.
  • “The cabildos had never really known what to do with the decisions made by their collectives”
• Also, we can see the ability of the news cycle churn here (Hong Kong and Chile become backburner stories)
• The role of COVID in transforming street movements is also interesting. In particular, the way that the end of hard lockdown let out already simmering tensions (some of which Bevins is noting here).

Next Week’s Reading (3/20) - Chapter 20-21