What do you think?
Rate this book
What We Are Fighting For: A Radical Collective Manifesto
The age of austerity has brought a new generation of protesters on to the streets across the world. As the economic crisis meets the environmental crisis, millions fear what the future will bring but also dare to dream of a different society.
What We Are Fighting For tries to answer the question that the mainstream media loves to ask the protesters. The first radical, collective manifesto of the new decade, it brings together some of the key theorists and activists from the new networked and creative social movements. Contributors include Owen Jones, David Graeber, John Holloway, Nina Power, Mark Fisher, Franco Berardi Bifo and Marina Sitrin.
Chapters outline the alternative vision that animates the new global movement – from 'new economics' and 'new governance' to ‘new public’ and 'new social imagination'. The book concludes by exploring 'new tactics of struggle’.
What We Are Fighting For tries to answer the question that the mainstream media loves to ask the protesters. The first radical, collective manifesto of the new decade, it brings together some of the key theorists and activists from the new networked and creative social movements. Contributors include Owen Jones, David Graeber, John Holloway, Nina Power, Mark Fisher, Franco Berardi Bifo and Marina Sitrin.
Chapters outline the alternative vision that animates the new global movement – from 'new economics' and 'new governance' to ‘new public’ and 'new social imagination'. The book concludes by exploring 'new tactics of struggle’.
224 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2012
7 people are currently reading
216 people want to read
About the author
Federico Campagna
16 books181 followersFederico Campagna is an Italian philosopher based in London.
He is the author of 'Otherworlds: Mediterranean lessons on escaping history' (Bloomsbury, 2025), 'Prophetic Culture: recreation for adolescents' (Bloomsbury, 2021), and 'Technic and Magic: the reconstruction of reality' (Bloosmbury, 2018), ‘The Last Night: antiwork, atheism, adventure’, (Zero Books, 2013).
He is lecturer in World-building at The Architectural Association (London), Associate Fellow at the Warburg Institute (London), and lecturer in Intellectual History at ECAL (Lausanne).
He works as director of rights at the UK/US radical publisher Verso Books, as editorial consultant for philosophy and anthropology at the Italian publisher Einaudi, and is a co-founder and senior editor at the Italian philosophy publisher Timeo.
He is the author of 'Otherworlds: Mediterranean lessons on escaping history' (Bloomsbury, 2025), 'Prophetic Culture: recreation for adolescents' (Bloomsbury, 2021), and 'Technic and Magic: the reconstruction of reality' (Bloosmbury, 2018), ‘The Last Night: antiwork, atheism, adventure’, (Zero Books, 2013).
He is lecturer in World-building at The Architectural Association (London), Associate Fellow at the Warburg Institute (London), and lecturer in Intellectual History at ECAL (Lausanne).
He works as director of rights at the UK/US radical publisher Verso Books, as editorial consultant for philosophy and anthropology at the Italian publisher Einaudi, and is a co-founder and senior editor at the Italian philosophy publisher Timeo.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
February 1, 2014
One of the charges made against the Occupy movement (if we can go so far as to call it a movement) was that its demands were unclear – or according to some critics, non-existent. Occupiers responded in a range of ways, from the horizontalist ‘we will work out our demands by living, working and talking together’ through the prefigurative ‘the occupation itself is the demand’ to the almost nihilist ‘the system is broken so why would we make any demands of it’, and many other positions along this continuum and elsewhere. One of the consequences of this lack of demand has been an openness of discussion, at least outside the rough and tumble of occupying and of those heightened moments of action. This openness has contributed to what seems to a lessening off sectarian position-taking on the Left (seems because much of the Left still seems to lapse into or fall back on doctrinaire spaces of security when it comes to analysis or action) – but there does seem to be a willingness to discuss, debate and adapt positions and outlooks.
Associated with this sense of openness (and notwithstanding some of the problems of celebrity leftism we’ve seen in the era) there has also been the re-emergence of the manifesto, not of the vacuous set of election ‘promises’ kind we so often see from electoral politics, most seen in their breach, but of a more contemplative kind outlining a set of principles or proposing a direction for the Left. Part of these developments has been what seems to be a set of propositions for discussion. This collection of short essays is one of the better examples of this approach. The editors have an orientation towards autonomist and anarchist (of the libertarian communist kind) outlooks, but have called on a set of some of the more interesting although primarily English language with a few Italian writers on current activist and alternative politics.
The book is organised around four analytical strands – economics, governance, politics and social imagining – with a fifth section exploring tactics. There are many ways that we could approach thinking about this collection in all its diversity, but the thing (for me) that holds it all together is each of the authors, in various ways, explores aspects of a step beyond what Mark Fisher (one of the contributors) has called Capitalist Realism when he suggested, in that book, that there is a "widespread sense that not only is capitalism the only viable political and economic system, but also that it is now impossible even to imagine a coherent alternative to it". One of the strengths of the collection is that each of the essays is fewer than 10 pages and tightly focussed so none try to pose a grand theory or solutions; this is however also a weakness in that each of the essays barely scratches the surface of its complex area. For instance, Michael Albert and others associated with the Z-Net have written widely on participatory economics, reduced here to a 7 page sketch of some aspects of the approach while Dan Hind’s essay on media reform draws on his recently published work on the public sphere. Other essays explore much less well developed approaches to new ways of ordering the world – such as Milford Bateman’s paper on local financial systems or Shaun Chamberlain’s on transition towns.
Whereas Chamberlain’s paper is practice focussed, others are more explicitly conceptual or even theoretical, such as Peter Hallward’s discussion of dictatorship and democracy or Zillah Eisenstein on intersectionality. Some of the essays demand that we rethink some of the takens for granted of much of outlook let alone work on the left – Alberto Toscano’s ‘Reforming the Unreformable’ is provocative while David Graeber’s ‘Revolution at the Level of Common Sense’ is a helpful reminder about the need to focus struggle on the ordinary in an effort to make alternatives seem achievable; it is at the level of ‘common sense’ that we experience the limits of the social and political imagination. I have to confess to a particular soft spot for Owen Jones’ challenge to maintain a sense of class politics without homogenising class and Hilary Wainwright’s argument in favour of close study of the movements of the past to find the foundations of the movements of the now as well as the limits of those of the past; both a marvellously materialist while rejecting doctrinaire notions of materialism.
The collection reminded me the need we have on the left to maintain a nuanced sense of utopia; only one author (Mark J Smith) is all that explicit about utopia but, and here I draw on work by Erik Olin Wright, the notion of ‘real utopias’ is a useful framework. Wright’s distinction between the desirable, the viable and the achievable helped me identify aspects of this eclectic manifesto – what we’d really like, what can survive at the interstices of the existing order and what we can achieve in the current conjuncture. Wright’s approach, or something like it, might have helped give the contributions to this manifesto a little more shape – at present the thematic framing does little more than suggest an aspect of social and political experience that each essay addresses. Some essays have end notes, most don’t; a short list of further reading by each author would also have helped.
Despite these problems, the collection is engaging, provocative and demands revisiting. It is not set up as the answer and should not be read as such, but it contains a bunch of good ideas to help us reconfigure the Left, our work and where we think we’re going. For that alone, this is a valuable and important contribution and introduction to the currently vibrant debates on the Left.
Associated with this sense of openness (and notwithstanding some of the problems of celebrity leftism we’ve seen in the era) there has also been the re-emergence of the manifesto, not of the vacuous set of election ‘promises’ kind we so often see from electoral politics, most seen in their breach, but of a more contemplative kind outlining a set of principles or proposing a direction for the Left. Part of these developments has been what seems to be a set of propositions for discussion. This collection of short essays is one of the better examples of this approach. The editors have an orientation towards autonomist and anarchist (of the libertarian communist kind) outlooks, but have called on a set of some of the more interesting although primarily English language with a few Italian writers on current activist and alternative politics.
The book is organised around four analytical strands – economics, governance, politics and social imagining – with a fifth section exploring tactics. There are many ways that we could approach thinking about this collection in all its diversity, but the thing (for me) that holds it all together is each of the authors, in various ways, explores aspects of a step beyond what Mark Fisher (one of the contributors) has called Capitalist Realism when he suggested, in that book, that there is a "widespread sense that not only is capitalism the only viable political and economic system, but also that it is now impossible even to imagine a coherent alternative to it". One of the strengths of the collection is that each of the essays is fewer than 10 pages and tightly focussed so none try to pose a grand theory or solutions; this is however also a weakness in that each of the essays barely scratches the surface of its complex area. For instance, Michael Albert and others associated with the Z-Net have written widely on participatory economics, reduced here to a 7 page sketch of some aspects of the approach while Dan Hind’s essay on media reform draws on his recently published work on the public sphere. Other essays explore much less well developed approaches to new ways of ordering the world – such as Milford Bateman’s paper on local financial systems or Shaun Chamberlain’s on transition towns.
Whereas Chamberlain’s paper is practice focussed, others are more explicitly conceptual or even theoretical, such as Peter Hallward’s discussion of dictatorship and democracy or Zillah Eisenstein on intersectionality. Some of the essays demand that we rethink some of the takens for granted of much of outlook let alone work on the left – Alberto Toscano’s ‘Reforming the Unreformable’ is provocative while David Graeber’s ‘Revolution at the Level of Common Sense’ is a helpful reminder about the need to focus struggle on the ordinary in an effort to make alternatives seem achievable; it is at the level of ‘common sense’ that we experience the limits of the social and political imagination. I have to confess to a particular soft spot for Owen Jones’ challenge to maintain a sense of class politics without homogenising class and Hilary Wainwright’s argument in favour of close study of the movements of the past to find the foundations of the movements of the now as well as the limits of those of the past; both a marvellously materialist while rejecting doctrinaire notions of materialism.
The collection reminded me the need we have on the left to maintain a nuanced sense of utopia; only one author (Mark J Smith) is all that explicit about utopia but, and here I draw on work by Erik Olin Wright, the notion of ‘real utopias’ is a useful framework. Wright’s distinction between the desirable, the viable and the achievable helped me identify aspects of this eclectic manifesto – what we’d really like, what can survive at the interstices of the existing order and what we can achieve in the current conjuncture. Wright’s approach, or something like it, might have helped give the contributions to this manifesto a little more shape – at present the thematic framing does little more than suggest an aspect of social and political experience that each essay addresses. Some essays have end notes, most don’t; a short list of further reading by each author would also have helped.
Despite these problems, the collection is engaging, provocative and demands revisiting. It is not set up as the answer and should not be read as such, but it contains a bunch of good ideas to help us reconfigure the Left, our work and where we think we’re going. For that alone, this is a valuable and important contribution and introduction to the currently vibrant debates on the Left.
November 23, 2018
It's a very thought provoking book, but there is a wide range of worth that I would ascribe to those provocations. While it can't be denied that aggression, and even some level of violence, is warranted when trying to bring about benevolent revolution, some of the authors in this book are too cavalier about it for my taste. There is lack of consideration, in some of these essays, for the human element that comprises that state/system we are trying to topple or subvert. These authors are very good at trotting out history and philosophy to justify such violence, but they seem to fail to grasp what lies at the core of some of the very philosophies they are citing. Structuralism and postmodernism is largely predicated on the fact that the people participating in these cultural paradigms that envelop our lives are less complicit perpetrators of this culture, and more unwitting products of it. Smashing the windows of businesses during a riot may seem like a blow against capitalism, but it is also a blow against the human element who only see themselves as being personally attacked, and ultimately serves to only entrench themselves deeper in the cultural paradigm that they rely on the protect them and give their lives meaning.
And therein lies a bigger problem than some radicals are often willing to admit. Education and enlistment to the cause are more important than the aggression in the street. A mob of but a handful cannot rise up to make any sort of meaningful change. And as one of the better essays in this book states, and to be clear there were several very good essays, this is a time of rage. Disenfranchisement is becoming universal, and the rage that stems from that disenfranchisement can just as easily become fuel for bigotry and fascism if people are not provided with a reasonable alternative. As we now see with the constant false equivalences propagated by the media, the layman has a very difficult time telling the difference between types of violence. Theory is the true battleground that lays the groundwork for effective aggression.
That's the other real problem with this book. It doesn't care to reach out to the layman. It is very much preaching to the choir. There is no effort to tone down the academic language or to delve into the historical events it references any more than in passing. Granted, there is value in not every book being "leftism 101." Some books you need to come to with a base level knowledge so that you can delve more deeply into complicated theory. And indeed, there are some practical socialist applications discussed here that are absolutely worth reading. But I think one also needs to take the time, just in case this is the first leftist book a person picks up, to at least reference further readings on a topic or elaborate a little deeper on the scaffolding that is taken for granted that the reader is familiar with.
It may seem odd that I'm being so critical of a book that I'm giving three stars, but there are actually some very reasonable and accessible essays that discuss practical leftist theory that I think are absolutely worth reading. A few of them are important reads for everybody. Unfortunately I expect most people would put the book down before ever making it to them.
And therein lies a bigger problem than some radicals are often willing to admit. Education and enlistment to the cause are more important than the aggression in the street. A mob of but a handful cannot rise up to make any sort of meaningful change. And as one of the better essays in this book states, and to be clear there were several very good essays, this is a time of rage. Disenfranchisement is becoming universal, and the rage that stems from that disenfranchisement can just as easily become fuel for bigotry and fascism if people are not provided with a reasonable alternative. As we now see with the constant false equivalences propagated by the media, the layman has a very difficult time telling the difference between types of violence. Theory is the true battleground that lays the groundwork for effective aggression.
That's the other real problem with this book. It doesn't care to reach out to the layman. It is very much preaching to the choir. There is no effort to tone down the academic language or to delve into the historical events it references any more than in passing. Granted, there is value in not every book being "leftism 101." Some books you need to come to with a base level knowledge so that you can delve more deeply into complicated theory. And indeed, there are some practical socialist applications discussed here that are absolutely worth reading. But I think one also needs to take the time, just in case this is the first leftist book a person picks up, to at least reference further readings on a topic or elaborate a little deeper on the scaffolding that is taken for granted that the reader is familiar with.
It may seem odd that I'm being so critical of a book that I'm giving three stars, but there are actually some very reasonable and accessible essays that discuss practical leftist theory that I think are absolutely worth reading. A few of them are important reads for everybody. Unfortunately I expect most people would put the book down before ever making it to them.
December 7, 2012
Some of this went over my head but there are lots of compelling and coherent arguments here that make we want to know more and has sparked the desire to get involved in making the world a bit more fair.
November 3, 2012
A real mix, but well worth dipping in and out of.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews