Revolutions in Reverse: Essays on Politics, Violence, Art, and Imagination by David Graeber

Revolutions in Reverse: Essays on Politics, Violence, Art, and Imagination Reviews

• 
  Paul Ataua

  The revolution begins by asking what sort of promises do free men and women make to one another , and how, by making them, do we begin to make another world.
  
  Six short and very thought provoking essays that stand as an attack on the neoliberal/capitalist camp. In the first three essays, he begins by pointing out that what is often seen as the failure of popular social movements to bring about change over the last 50 years is better seen in terms of their successes. He is also at pains to make it clear that the changes that have occurred are not just the working out of the contradictions of capitalism, but the result of the decisions we make and the actions we take. He then discusses, among other things, state violence, social movements, and how bureaucracy militates against change. The essays in the second half of the book focus on issues related to George Bush winning the election in 2004 with one essay reflecting on Italian philosophers and art history.
  
  It’s a great read for those doubting the real effectiveness of popular social action and also for those believing that we really can change the world . Graeber manages not only to explore and expose, but also to stimulate and enthuse. Sad that we lost that voice last year.
  
• 
  Alexander

  For those who've never really read anything of Graeber's, or at least want to know more about this shining, constellation of a human being, whose writings ought to be permanent lodestars for the left - this, along with
  Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology are great places to get acquainted. They're short, readable essay pieces (about a 100 or so pages all up, and absolutely findable for free with a quick search) and they mark the life of man who never stopped believing - because he was there, because he had a hand in making it - that a better world was already here, if we dared to grasp it.
  
  "Financial elites, having shown the world they were utterly incompetent at the one activity they had claimed they were best able to do – the measurement of value – have responded by joining with their political cronies in a violent attack on anything that even looks like it might possibly provide an alternative way to think about value, from public welfare to the contemplation of art or philosophy (or at least, the contemplation of art or philosophy for any other reason than the purpose of making money). For the moment, at least, capitalism is no longer even thinking about its long-term viability. It is disturbing to know that one is facing a suicidal enemy, but at least it helps us understand what we are fighting for. At the moment: everything."
• 
  Edward Rathke

  Six essays, with three being fairly related, and three being somewhat separate. Though, to be fair, these are all about Graeber's larger intellectual projects: revolution, anticapitalism, organization, debt/capital, and political blindness (sometimes willful blindness).
  
  The first three essays deal with popular movements of the last thirty or so years that have led to mass direct action networks. The first attempts to reframe how we view them and their immense successes. The second and third deal more with the relationship between state violence, social movements, revolutionary action, revolutionary organization, and how to move forward. He spends a great deal of time crediting and referencing the feminist movement of the 60s and 70s and their profound effect on consensus forming.
  
  The final three essays are a bit broader and are primarily challenges to the intellectual class, and are often specific to american issues relating to George Bush winning the 2004 election. Though the penultimate essay is a reflection on Italian philosophers speaking about art history, which is both hilarious and oddly refreshing.
  
  Like all of Graber's work that I've come across, he offers no answers and doesn't attempt ot answer any questions. Rather, he challenges the popular perception of events, especially events relating to capital, labor, anarchism, and organization. His essays are meant to begin discussion or at least lead it in potentially new directions, and I think that's what I enjoy most about his work. That and his ability to give new perspectives in funny and insightfully useful ways.
• 
  Ebru

  Graeber bir sosyal bilimci, ama bu kitapta anti-kapitalist, muhalif örgütlerde mücadele eden insanlara bir politik eylemci olarak sesleniyor.
  
  2000'lerdeki karşı küreselleşme hareketlerindeki deneyimleri üzerinden "devrim mümkün mü, peki nasıl" sorularını tartışıyor.
  
  Graeber mücadelenin egemenlerin üzerinde etkisi olduğunu gösterirken muhaliflerin kendi güçlerinin farkında olmadığını belirtiyor. Bu muhaliflere moral verecek bir yorum ama muhalifleri kendi gücünün farkında olmamakla da eleştiriyor. Burada sorumluluğun bir kısmını muhaliflerin düşünsel arka planını belirleyen İtalyan otonomist düşünürlerine yüklüyor (önemlerini ve muhalifliklerini küçümsemeden). Kendisini bu cenahtan daha çok Midnight Notes'a (Sylvia Federici ve diğerlerinin olduğu bir kolektif) daha yakın olduğunu belirtiyor.
  
  Okuması rahat, referanslara boğulmamış ve samimi bir politik tartışma yaratma amacı taşıyan bir kitap.
• 
  Foppe

  In Revolutions in Reverse, David Graeber explores the relationship between state violence, ideology, the apparent worldwide failure to imagine alternatives to the way in which capitalism is currently developing, the crises of representation that are affecting most 'mature' democracies (or should I say economies?), and the debt crisis we currently find ourselves in. In other words, he explores the relationship between the above-mentioned crises and our mental conceptions of the world. But, differing from most theorists, he he thinks sharing goals far more important than sharing a theoretical background and assessment of what the world is like. And, interestingly, he explores this question not as a largely detached observer (me), but as a member of some of the movements I mentioned above. And because of this, the essays have a very fresh and accessible feel to them.
  
  The collection revolves around the question "What does revolution mean once one no longer expects a single, cataclysmic break with past structures of oppression?" As Graeber points out, revolutions have never happened 'magically', and neither were the revolutions themselves (which have almost always failed) ever instrumental in producing the kind of wide-scale social change that we tend to associate with the word 'revolution.' But this is not to say that those 'failed' revolutions were ineffective, because they often did bring about important changes. As such, he suggests that if we want to bring about change, we need to stop focusing on the question how to bring about some kind of "revolutionary moment," and rather, focus on the question how we might create the broader social movements that those revolutions might (or might not) emerge out of, but which at least stand a chance of changing public discourse.
  
  In his exploration of these issues, what he shows more than anything is how useful it can be to (for a time) try to forget how you would normally think about a situation, and to simply take seriously what it is that you see happening around you. (And, conversely, how strongly misguided beliefs about how we should understand the world can keep us from understanding it better.) Because many of the things he describes are of the 'hiding in plain sight' variety, hidden from view thanks to their utter banality, rather than because of their extreme 'theoretical subtlety.'
  
  What I personally found most interesting about the book, are the following two things. First, the way in which it further confirms a point that has been made repeatedly by Bruno Latour: namely, that theory and abstraction are useful only insofar as they can be related to practice, and to events in the world, and that ignoring reality because your theory tells you it is acceptable to do so is dangerous. This does not mean that practice trumps theory, but rather that theory ignores the intricacies of actual practices only at its own peril, since it is only in practice that theory can prove its usefulness. And secondly, the story it tells about the interaction between violence and the imagination.
• 
  Türkay

  Tersine Devrimler için Everest yayınlarına, özenli çevirinden ötürü Aslı Esen Arslan'a sonsuz teşekkürler...
  Çok sayıda not aldığım kitabın her makalesi ayrı ayrı tartışmayı hak ediyor.
  Kitap Giriş bölümünün ardından, Zafer Şoku (Nükleer Karşıtı-Küresel Adalet hareketleri), Ortaklaşa Umut, Tersine Devrim (Özgeciler Ordusu, İşçilik Sonrasının Hüznü) başlıklı makalelerden oluşuyor...
  Giriş bölümünde Graeber bu derlemenin ilk olarak Yunanca "Hareket, Şiddet, Sanat ve Devrim" (Atina, Black Pepper press, 2009) basıldığını, bu makalelerdeki bir çok savın 2008 krizi sonrasında otorite karşıtı eylemci hareketlerde yaygınlaştığını belirtiyor. Kitaptaki makalelerin tümü, 2004-2010 arasında yazılmış. Graeber bu nedenle yazıları "kafa karışıklığının hüküm sürdüğü, umut beslemek için ipuçları bulmanın çok güç olduğu bir dönemin eseri olduğunu belirtiyor.
  Graeber, öncelikle "başarılı" sonuçlar alınan hareketler sonrasında elde edilen "kazanımların" ne olduğu, yürütülen tartışmalar, "kazanmak ne demek?" sorusu üzerine odaklanan bir makale ile başlamayı seçiyor. Bu bölümü "Gezi tartışmaları"nın ışığında okumakta yarar var.
  Ortaklaşa umut, aynı tartışmaları daha ileriye taşımayı hedefliyor. Neoliberalizmin ekonomik değil, politik bir proje olduğu; hayal gücümüzü mahvetmek, hatta külfetli güvenlik önlemleri, akıl almaz askeri projeleri sayesinde kapitalist düzenin kendisini yok etmek için tasarlandığını vurguluyor. "Yaşadığımız günler"e daha farklı açılardan bakmanızı sağlayacak bir bölüm...
  Tersine Devrim, New Left Review dergisi tarafından reddedilen bir makale... Bu makalede Graeber, insanların özde ne olduğuna, dünyadan ve birbirlerinden ne beklemelerinin makul olacağına dair YENİ BİR DİL, YENİ BİR SAĞDUYU yaratmak için bir anca önce kolları sıvamak " gerektiğini, bunun için uygulanabilcek yol haritasını öneriyor.
  
• 
  Jeremy

  A very thought-provoking collection of essays on a variety of topics by David Graeber. This really inspires me to read his book 'Direct Action: An Ethnography,' which I've been putting off cause it's so damned huge. There are definitely some gems in here, though, and I'm really down for reading more by my fellow wobbly. My one complaint, and I'm not the only one to put this out there, is the horrendous quality of the editing. Some of the pieces have obviously been published elsewhere and seem polished and contain minimal errors. Others, however, contain sentences here and there which are rendered wholly unintelligible by the complete lack of even rudimentary editing and proofreading, to the point it distracts from what is being said. Still, I highly recommend this for anyone interested in modern anarchist thought, direct action, or just a new and unique perspective on the modern left.
• 
  Meg

  Great collection of Graeber's essays, but terribly copy edited. Typos and other errors were distracting enough that I couldn't recommend owning this edition, especially as much of Graeber's short pieces are easy to find and read online.
• 
  Leif

  This is a short but punchy volume of Graeber's essays where you can see the roots of a number of his very popular recent books, from the origins of
  Debt: The First 5,000 Years in "Hope in Common" and "Against Kamikaze Capitalism" to blueprints for
  The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy in the titular essay of this text, "Revolution in Reverse". You'll even find traces of
  Bullshit Jobs: A Theory before the essay of the same name was published in 2013, here in "The Sadness of Post-workerism" and across the text.
  
  What of the essays? The two earliest are trial runs - well, all of these are! - but I found some more polished than others. Most maintain Graeber's talent for introducing sudden, intuitive shifts that feel like lightning bolts, or like revelations. Take this observation on the roots of Trump's popularity, avant la lettre:

  If working-class Bush voters tend to resent intellectuals more than they do the rich, then, the most likely reason is because they can imagine scenarios in which they might become rich, but cannot imagine one in which they, or any of their children, could ever become members of the intelligentsia. If you think about it, this is not an unreasonable assessment.

  The discussion proceeds to evaluate the basis for careers in humanistic pursuits, from journalism to law to drama, and then evaluates the basis of nobility itself that founds the allure of these careers.
  
  Very effective, and very rapid - analysis like this is what makes his books so accessible and challenging at the same time. Nor is Graeber afraid to make well-founded assertions about the processes of value (his academic specialty) and the imagination. Take this one, for example, that will turn up again in Bullshit Jobs, but that crops up here in rough form:

  The things we care most about - our loves, passions, rivalries, obsessions - are always other people; and in most societies that are not capitalist, it's taken for granted that the manufacture of material goods is a subordinate moment in a larger process of fashioning people. In fact, I would argue that one of the most alienating aspects of capitalism is the fact that it forces us to pretend that it is the other way around, and that societies exist primarily to increase their output of things.

  Damning and graceful all at once, this is the kind of argument from which there is no refuge.
• 
  Harsha Gurnani

  3.5 stars on balance (possibly due to my personal preference for deep-dive into long form expositions instead).
  Review later perhaps, but the six essays try to start (rather than actually have) a conversation about revolutionary theory, choices and action that are needed, not just in our current political/financial/climate crisis, but perhaps on a continual quest for more just, egalitarian and non-alienating forms of social organisation. (It was also clear that the author is very much influenced by decolonial and feminist standpoint theory.)
  Above all, he wants to rescue us from feelings of complete despair about a way out.
• 
  Steven Felicelli

  One of the most persuasive attacks on capitalism/neoliberalism I've read - but they need to do another edition and fix the several hundred typos
• 
  Paul

  Very "punk", both in terms of anger and energy and in terms of low quality. "We're already living under communism if only we'd be made to realise it!". "Capitalism will collapse within the decade". Between that and claims of how successful the protesters have been this whole book is delusional and so trite sometimes I can't tell if it's a parody. I'm beginning to think the reason communists speak in incomprehensible language is because they have bugger all to say. I'm sick of listening to this pointless moral critique of capitalism and I'm not reading any more communists unless they have something constructive to say. Yeah, capitalism bad, disease bad, hunger bad - how enlightening. Now piss off back to your squabbling about how to bring upon the revolution (funny no one cares about what comes after, because it's obviously sunshine and flowers).
• 
  brunella

  "The things we care most about — our loves, passions, rivalries, obsessions — are always other people; and in most societies that are not capitalist, it’s taken for granted that the manufacture of material goods is a subordinate moment in a larger process of fashioning people. In fact, I would argue that one of the most alienating aspects of capitalism is the fact that it forces us to pretend that it is the other way around, and that societies exist primarily to increase their output of things."
• 
  Fergus Murray

  Very compelling, insightful and thought-provoking. Recommended for anyone who's interested in how change comes about.
  
  The last essay almost caused me to drop a star - it feels a bit niche, and it's not my niche - but even there, there are bits that make it all worthwhile. The discussion of parallels between politics and magic is particularly fun:
  'Politics is that dimension of social life in which things really do become true if enough people believe them.'
• 
  akemi

  Very powerful and nuanced ideology critiques on both capitalism and poststructuralism. David Graeber and Mark Fisher are a lot more honest than their contemporaries. And a lot more materialist.
• 
  Paige McLoughlin

  short collection of essays, I like the first one that asks "are you an anarchist? the answer may surprise you." Good work. I enjoy Graeber's books and I now got a taste of his essays.
  '
• 
  Jonna Higgins-Freese

  It's David Graeber. What else can I say?
  
• 
  Mark

  "The ultimate, hidden truth of the world is that it is something that we make, and, could just as easily make differently."
  
  A decent introduction to Graeber.
• 
  Xavier Shay

  short, and some doubled up material from Utopia of Rules (I think).
  
  Read Rules first, and if you need more you can find it here.
  
  "Freedom has become the right to share in the proceeds of one’s own permanent enslavement."
  "Debt is the most efficient means ever created to take relations that are fundamentally based on violence and violent inequality and to make them seem right and moral to everyone concerned."
  etc etc
  
  Interesting section was one of why people join the army, boils down to basically: same reason educated liberals go into public service. They want to get paid to help people.
  "Certainly, most people do join the army because they are deprived of opportunities. But the real question to be asking is: opportunities to do what?"
  "in reality, American society is better conceived as a battle over access to the right to behave altruistically."
  "This is precisely what our soldiers are doing when they give free dental examinations to villagers: they are being paid (modestly, but adequately) to do good in the world."
• 
  Andrew

  This is a relevant deconstruction of revolutionary thought. I really enjoyed 90% of this book. It opened my eyes to a lot of tactical and philosophical assumptions that activist tend to make that are actually reactions to the violence of the state and that can and should be relearned. The best part of this book is that, even though these essays were written in 2008, it very accurately predicts what would happen to Occupy Wall St. years later.
  
  There are some grammatical errors and a ton of name dropping at one point which is a real turn off, but he always sums up in an easy to digest maner.
• 
  Monika

  These essays speak to those already familiar with and involved in horizontal, anti-authoritarian, anti-capitalist, leftist principles. Written when morale was especially low (2004-2010), Graeber talks about the loss of hope, how to recognize victories and why we often miss them, and how to pull out of cynicism and find hope again. The ebook desperately needs an editor and better formatting, but the content is important enough to look past that.
• 
  Mike

  I was looking for someone who could give an alternative to capitalism, which in my mind is not sustainable. Some of the essays in this collection answer this well. What is not good is the poor editing of these essays. I actually had to write corrections in my book in case someone else read the book.