Scan barcode
nicolemillo's review against another edition
informative
fast-paced
This book offers a lot to think about. It addresses things like self-defence, when it is appropriate to use violence, double-standards for who can use violence and what actions (and by whom) are even considered violence at all, pacifist hypocrisy, Uncle Toms, gains made because the dominant force (white racists) didn’t find denying those gains inconvenient, how some victories can become detrimental to the cause by mollifying activists, taking for granted Black people’s patience and “willingness” to endure abuse and so on.
I really love how measured Williams is. His arguments follow a very plain logic and he does not seem like a violent man so much as simply a reasonable, pragmatic man who sees the need to employ all methods available to protect the dignity of his community which was regularly put in mortal danger. I remain very strongly anti-guns, but as far as the place of violence in the Black liberation movement goes, there is a lot of room for nuance in what could be made into a black and white argument (pun unintended) where one is expected to be abused until the abuser decides to stop. I think this book explains that well and, even though the ideal would be non-violence, I see where the use of violence has been effective in liberation struggles where all other non-violent methods have been exhausted. When you are forced into a corner and your life and those in your community (or other vulnerable people) are in danger, what other choice do you have?
Something that jumped out at me was that Williams’ NAACP chapter seemed to be one of the few that white racists were wary of because they were willing to fight back and had driven the KKK away on one(?) occasion. It’s interesting too that some of the white, pacifist freedom riders said in a written statement (to the NAACP which was denouncing Williams’ stance of armed self-defence if necessary) that they supported/understood the need sometimes for violent retaliation.
I’m reading this one for a leftist/anarchist/Black liberation book club and we should be meeting to discuss it tomorrow so I’m interested to hear what everyone else has to say about it.
I really love how measured Williams is. His arguments follow a very plain logic and he does not seem like a violent man so much as simply a reasonable, pragmatic man who sees the need to employ all methods available to protect the dignity of his community which was regularly put in mortal danger. I remain very strongly anti-guns, but as far as the place of violence in the Black liberation movement goes, there is a lot of room for nuance in what could be made into a black and white argument (pun unintended) where one is expected to be abused until the abuser decides to stop. I think this book explains that well and, even though the ideal would be non-violence, I see where the use of violence has been effective in liberation struggles where all other non-violent methods have been exhausted. When you are forced into a corner and your life and those in your community (or other vulnerable people) are in danger, what other choice do you have?
Something that jumped out at me was that Williams’ NAACP chapter seemed to be one of the few that white racists were wary of because they were willing to fight back and had driven the KKK away on one(?) occasion. It’s interesting too that some of the white, pacifist freedom riders said in a written statement (to the NAACP which was denouncing Williams’ stance of armed self-defence if necessary) that they supported/understood the need sometimes for violent retaliation.
I’m reading this one for a leftist/anarchist/Black liberation book club and we should be meeting to discuss it tomorrow so I’m interested to hear what everyone else has to say about it.
wjg36's review against another edition
4.0
Very interesting book though I wish it gave a wider history of black Americans and guns, not just in one specific instance