What do you think?
Rate this book
Direct Action: An Ethnography
A radical anthropologist studies the global justice movement.
600 pages, ebook
First published September 1, 2009
104 people are currently reading
5756 people want to read
About the author
David Graeber
105 books5,070 followersDavid Rolfe Graeber was an American anthropologist and anarchist.
On June 15, 2007, Graeber accepted the offer of a lectureship in the anthropology department at Goldsmiths College, University of London, where he held the title of Reader in Social Anthropology.
Prior to that position, he was an associate professor of anthropology at Yale University, although Yale controversially declined to rehire him, and his term there ended in June 2007.
Graeber had a history of social and political activism, including his role in protests against the World Economic Forum in New York City (2002) and membership in the labor union Industrial Workers of the World. He was an core participant in the Occupy Movement.
He passed away in 2020, during the Covid-19 pandemic.
On June 15, 2007, Graeber accepted the offer of a lectureship in the anthropology department at Goldsmiths College, University of London, where he held the title of Reader in Social Anthropology.
Prior to that position, he was an associate professor of anthropology at Yale University, although Yale controversially declined to rehire him, and his term there ended in June 2007.
Graeber had a history of social and political activism, including his role in protests against the World Economic Forum in New York City (2002) and membership in the labor union Industrial Workers of the World. He was an core participant in the Occupy Movement.
He passed away in 2020, during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
July 24, 2010
I was thinking of doing an abridged edition of this book for a university press - that way it could be assigned for classes. (I felt it was important to publish the long version first, if only for documentary purposes, because so much history would otherwise be lost. But obviously it cuts down on the book's appeal, even though it was designed so you can skip around in it and don't have to read the whole thing.)
So what do people think: which parts would definitely have to stay, and which are disposable?
So what do people think: which parts would definitely have to stay, and which are disposable?
January 10, 2016
I'm gonna go ahead and call this a great book. Graeber set out to do something huge and he totally did it. So like, first of all, mad props. There is craft, care, and handiwork evident throughout the book; Graeber really attempted to fashion an anarchist ethnography, a story and interpretation for outsiders of a culture to which he belongs, positing theory and conclusions without ever resorting to sweeping generalizations, simplification, or dismissals of diversity. The book itself can be viewed as a direct action, a conscious process of redefining ethnography from patronizing colonial narratives and empty post-colonial relativism to an example of a people's ability to critically define their culture for themselves.
The first 200 pages of Direct Action are a case study in story form of the organizing and action of the Quebec City FTAA protests (a similar narrative can be found in You Are G8, We Are 6 Billion: The Truth Behind the Genoa Protests). A stunning amount of time is devoted to meetings, both in the case study and in the later 70+ page chapter titled "Meetings." I was getting pretty skeptical of Graber's artistic vision as the book began to reflect the exhausting qualities of my own life seemingly trapped in endless collective and organizing meetings-- but that was the point. Graber makes the case that the real magic of direct democracy occurs in meetings when people take the time and energy to enact consensus process. What happens on the street is simply the end result of a much greater and more important direct action project-- meetings are the new world being enacted in the shell of the old, where freedom from hierarchy is consciously brought to life. Graeber's definition of direct action is "insisting on acting as if one is already free" (207). This is something anarchists do a bad job of communicating to the public. Our visibility comes in the form of giant puppets and smashed windows, two images Graeber explores at length, but images that do not convey the practical vision of what a new world could look like, inherent in intentional, mindful meeting process.
Other highlights from this book include the fairly minimal theorizing that Graeber undertakes, always with much hesitation and care to specify his own ideas from that of a more general "anarchist milieu." Graeber posits that anarchist theory derives from its practice, instead of the other way around (for example, Marxists, Leninists, etc base their strategy on realizing the theorizing of some dude). Like his ethnography itself, something cannot be anarchist if it isn't performed using anarchist (non-hierarchical, decentralized, direct) process. The global justice movement's anarchist backbone meant that while the uprising was meant to resist "an unaccountable world neoliberal government that sought to suppress existing democratic rights in the name of corporate power," the movement's participants "were determined to organize the whole action according to directly democratic principles and thus provide a living example of how genuine egalitarian decision making might work" (210).
The chapter on "Direct Action, Anarchism, and Direct Democracy" was a joy to read, because it was obvious how much pleasure Graber finds in the philosophical underpinnings of direct action praxis. I do too. He defines anarchism as a process: "a constant mutual exchange between inspirational visions, anti-authoritarian attitudes, and egalitarian practices" (222). True consensus building is kind of a sacred act... there's a part about the evolution of N. American consensus practice from Quakers, for whom that form of decision making is sacred (cant find the quote). Anarchism is a kind of revolutionary ethics, a moral structure through which to interpret the world.
Graeber pulls a lot from feminist theorists like Patricia Hill Collins, demonstrating that feminism is inseparable from anarchism. He credits the women's liberation movement in the 70s as offering the critique of 60s/70s centralized, hierarchical revolutionary practice that resulted in searching out new forms of decision making and the embracing of Quaker-style consensus, affinity groups, spokescouncils, and facilitation. Moreover, it was feminism that made the crucial leap beyond passive '68 situationism, waiting for the revolutionary moment to happen, to today's continual insurrection, the understanding that revolutionary moments much be actively created by the participants: "action is only genuinely revolutionary when the process of production of situations is just as liberating as the situations themselves" (533). The "domestic" labor of creation, cleaning up, and caring for people must be embraced and understood as an inseparable part of revolution.
The book ends with a chapter devoted to "Imagination," a last part of life that capitalism has separated out into specific roles (the elites imagine new products, the oppressed imagine the needs and desires of the elites so to best cater to them and avoid violence). "Direct action" calls for the embodiment of all forms of labor-- productive, domestic, and imaginative in each person. I couldn't help thinking of
Margaret Killjoy's book on anarchist fiction, Mythmakers and Lawbreakers: Anarchist Writers on Fiction, as an example of Graeber's claims to the power of anarchist imagination in opposition to the mindnumbing, stupid random violence of capitalist policing.
This book was not a final, defining history of a time period, but instead reads like a whirlwind of ideas first gathered and offered out to readers. It's fascinating and inspired a lot of conversations with friends as it inevitably became a huge part of my life for a few weeks, generating questions, disagreements, insights. I've spent a lot of time narrowing down what this book is and isn't about. "Direct action" is a huge name, but this book is specifically about the anarchist, direct action element of the North American global justice movement, centering around the NYC Direct Action Network, DAN. Graeber barely touches on other forms of direct action-- there's nothing on collective living, worker-owned cooperatives, ALF/ELF actions, agriculture, or much of anything outside of East Coast North America summit resistance, diy punks and mostly white urban youth culture. Which is fine; Graeber amply demonstrates that this limited story needed to be told, and he tells it humbly, though with considerable excitement. I believe in this project, and its clear Graeber does too.
The first 200 pages of Direct Action are a case study in story form of the organizing and action of the Quebec City FTAA protests (a similar narrative can be found in You Are G8, We Are 6 Billion: The Truth Behind the Genoa Protests). A stunning amount of time is devoted to meetings, both in the case study and in the later 70+ page chapter titled "Meetings." I was getting pretty skeptical of Graber's artistic vision as the book began to reflect the exhausting qualities of my own life seemingly trapped in endless collective and organizing meetings-- but that was the point. Graber makes the case that the real magic of direct democracy occurs in meetings when people take the time and energy to enact consensus process. What happens on the street is simply the end result of a much greater and more important direct action project-- meetings are the new world being enacted in the shell of the old, where freedom from hierarchy is consciously brought to life. Graeber's definition of direct action is "insisting on acting as if one is already free" (207). This is something anarchists do a bad job of communicating to the public. Our visibility comes in the form of giant puppets and smashed windows, two images Graeber explores at length, but images that do not convey the practical vision of what a new world could look like, inherent in intentional, mindful meeting process.
Other highlights from this book include the fairly minimal theorizing that Graeber undertakes, always with much hesitation and care to specify his own ideas from that of a more general "anarchist milieu." Graeber posits that anarchist theory derives from its practice, instead of the other way around (for example, Marxists, Leninists, etc base their strategy on realizing the theorizing of some dude). Like his ethnography itself, something cannot be anarchist if it isn't performed using anarchist (non-hierarchical, decentralized, direct) process. The global justice movement's anarchist backbone meant that while the uprising was meant to resist "an unaccountable world neoliberal government that sought to suppress existing democratic rights in the name of corporate power," the movement's participants "were determined to organize the whole action according to directly democratic principles and thus provide a living example of how genuine egalitarian decision making might work" (210).
The chapter on "Direct Action, Anarchism, and Direct Democracy" was a joy to read, because it was obvious how much pleasure Graber finds in the philosophical underpinnings of direct action praxis. I do too. He defines anarchism as a process: "a constant mutual exchange between inspirational visions, anti-authoritarian attitudes, and egalitarian practices" (222). True consensus building is kind of a sacred act... there's a part about the evolution of N. American consensus practice from Quakers, for whom that form of decision making is sacred (cant find the quote). Anarchism is a kind of revolutionary ethics, a moral structure through which to interpret the world.
Graeber pulls a lot from feminist theorists like Patricia Hill Collins, demonstrating that feminism is inseparable from anarchism. He credits the women's liberation movement in the 70s as offering the critique of 60s/70s centralized, hierarchical revolutionary practice that resulted in searching out new forms of decision making and the embracing of Quaker-style consensus, affinity groups, spokescouncils, and facilitation. Moreover, it was feminism that made the crucial leap beyond passive '68 situationism, waiting for the revolutionary moment to happen, to today's continual insurrection, the understanding that revolutionary moments much be actively created by the participants: "action is only genuinely revolutionary when the process of production of situations is just as liberating as the situations themselves" (533). The "domestic" labor of creation, cleaning up, and caring for people must be embraced and understood as an inseparable part of revolution.
The book ends with a chapter devoted to "Imagination," a last part of life that capitalism has separated out into specific roles (the elites imagine new products, the oppressed imagine the needs and desires of the elites so to best cater to them and avoid violence). "Direct action" calls for the embodiment of all forms of labor-- productive, domestic, and imaginative in each person. I couldn't help thinking of
Margaret Killjoy's book on anarchist fiction, Mythmakers and Lawbreakers: Anarchist Writers on Fiction, as an example of Graeber's claims to the power of anarchist imagination in opposition to the mindnumbing, stupid random violence of capitalist policing.
This book was not a final, defining history of a time period, but instead reads like a whirlwind of ideas first gathered and offered out to readers. It's fascinating and inspired a lot of conversations with friends as it inevitably became a huge part of my life for a few weeks, generating questions, disagreements, insights. I've spent a lot of time narrowing down what this book is and isn't about. "Direct action" is a huge name, but this book is specifically about the anarchist, direct action element of the North American global justice movement, centering around the NYC Direct Action Network, DAN. Graeber barely touches on other forms of direct action-- there's nothing on collective living, worker-owned cooperatives, ALF/ELF actions, agriculture, or much of anything outside of East Coast North America summit resistance, diy punks and mostly white urban youth culture. Which is fine; Graeber amply demonstrates that this limited story needed to be told, and he tells it humbly, though with considerable excitement. I believe in this project, and its clear Graeber does too.
August 23, 2009
With "Direct Action" David Graeber has written an important and timely book. If, as he argues, the ideology of the global justice movement, is embodied in its practices, then it really doesn't make sense to try and understand it by some generic or superficial description of its stated ideologies. Rather, it would have to begin from an analysis of movement building practices and organizing, and what kinds of collective compositions they create and sustain. In other words, it would necessarily involve something like the ethnographic understanding that Graeber elaborates here. And it is precisely this kind of detailed and imaginative analysis that is valuable now at the point where these movements have been dispersed and it is time to take a step back and learn from these experiences, precisely to appreciate what they made possible and what was inadequate to the situation. This is precisely the book needed for such a task, one that in doing so reveals and elaborates the potentialities both of social movement organizing and the imaginative power of politically engaged scholarship.
December 20, 2016
This is a seriously profound book for understanding the relationships between activism and culture. Graeber's ability to shed light on the power dynamics involved in various elements of civil disobedience and in things like "why do police hate puppets" is absolutely brilliant. This may be one of my favorite anthropology books of the last decade. I very much recommend this book. And I will read it several more times.
August 25, 2016
Having borrowed this door-stopper from a public library, I was afraid I wouldn't be able to finish it before the last allowed renewal but then I got into it. The first half of the book is the "ethnography," which I put in quotes because it didn't feel like the ethnographies I normally read, you know, about indigenous cultures. There is obviously going to be a lot more understanding between Graeber and the members of the direct action tribe than there would be between the anthropologist and the capital O Other. Also for me as a reader, I am not unfamiliar with the tribe he is studying either. So it is not nearly as heavy or weird as a book about the Malagasy would be, for example. Also, it is very exciting. First they plan actions to disrupt the FTAA meeting in Quebec City, they plan how to get there, then the inevitable 'best-laid-plans' stuff, and then three days of direct action in a cloud of tear gas. It did make me angry, though, at police especially but also at the whole system that makes everything such crap. I also thought, "why doesn't someone like Peter Jackson make a CGI blockbuster out of this book instead of tired old Tolkien?" You know, obviously, I know why, but still. The point is, the first nearly 300 pages is an exciting first hand account of insurrectionist anarchists doing their thing. The next 3 chapters are also great, although requiring progressively more brain power. It is a bit ironic that he occasionally takes digs at 'movement celebrities' and people who claim 'to speak for the movement' when that is pretty much what he is up to here, but the idea that this book is meant to be part of a dialogue and not meant as some kind of anarchist "Grundrisse" is pretty clear. These chapters are titled "Meetings," "Actions," and "Representation," and are the bits where in a 'normal' anthropology book the writer would begin to make generalizations or maybe attack someone else's generalizations. I think the "Meetings" chapter would make a great booklet and I like the idea of having all these facilitators and "vibes watchers," at least for those meetings where the process is as likely to lead to a split as it is to consensus. The "Actions" chapter puts us back in the action, which is welcome after all those meetings, right? "Representation" was also great and something I think media majors might want to check out. The last chapter, "Imagination," left me a little cold and reminded me again of why I prefer organizations with a bit more structure and a bit more focus on building and maintaining membership than the more purely insurrectionist groups. Graeber was active more or less in three groups during the period covered in the book: Direct Action Network, Ya Basta! NYC, and the IWW and the one he talks about the least, the one with most "rules," is the IWW and that is the only one that still exists. I know that isn't necessarily the point, the point is to push the boundaries, get us some more freedom and space to live, some more joy... the point isn't to create yet another thing over us... but I guess I would rather experience the concrete if small victories of a labor union than the ephemeral Temporary Autonomous Zone. I would rather be able to say, hey, we won a wage hike or we won paid sick leave, then be able to say, as Graeber often does, hey, we changed the conversation. I am not knocking the successes of the summit hoppers (or Occupy which is looming in the future of this book like the shadowy outline a big friendly paper mache puppet hidden in a tear gas cloud), I am just trying to be clear that I prefer to act locally, I guess, and to try to get some of these ideas out to people who don't yet consider themselves activists. In any case: 5 big stars! Fun to read! Lots to think about! You don't have to agree with everything to be stimulated emotionally and intellectually! Hooray!
March 21, 2016
This was one of the books I was least excited about in my to read pile, but ended up being one of the most interesting books I have read in a long time.
It's a physically daunting book to pick up, perhaps more so than many similar length books I've read lately. Yet that is full dispelled within the first few pages. The first section is highly conversational, and easy to follow. Dropping the reader straight into an activist group, Graeber does a great job of immersing you in the world of the activist with large sections of straight quotation, interspersed with discussion and context. He follows an affinity group from initial discussions through to action on the streets of Quebec, showing the full gamut of anarchist organisation and action.
The second section of the book walks through further analysis of different sections of this story. This section gets a little more theoretical, but still in Graeber's easy conversational style. This touches on aspects from consensus based decision making, to the role of the police, the wider application of bureaucracy, and feminist theory via the notion of interpretive labour. If you've read other of Graeber's work a lot of this will be familiar, and explored from a different angle. It's worth revisiting even if you know it well.
The only aspect I was sad not to see addressed was the potential application of consensus decision making outside of activist circles. It's a fascinating process, and leaves me curious how such processes can be applied in an environment where the participants are not so united in purpose.
This book has opened a bunch of new avenues of reading I need to follow up on. But more than that it's made me want to seek out activist groups, organise, and take to the streets.
It's a physically daunting book to pick up, perhaps more so than many similar length books I've read lately. Yet that is full dispelled within the first few pages. The first section is highly conversational, and easy to follow. Dropping the reader straight into an activist group, Graeber does a great job of immersing you in the world of the activist with large sections of straight quotation, interspersed with discussion and context. He follows an affinity group from initial discussions through to action on the streets of Quebec, showing the full gamut of anarchist organisation and action.
The second section of the book walks through further analysis of different sections of this story. This section gets a little more theoretical, but still in Graeber's easy conversational style. This touches on aspects from consensus based decision making, to the role of the police, the wider application of bureaucracy, and feminist theory via the notion of interpretive labour. If you've read other of Graeber's work a lot of this will be familiar, and explored from a different angle. It's worth revisiting even if you know it well.
The only aspect I was sad not to see addressed was the potential application of consensus decision making outside of activist circles. It's a fascinating process, and leaves me curious how such processes can be applied in an environment where the participants are not so united in purpose.
This book has opened a bunch of new avenues of reading I need to follow up on. But more than that it's made me want to seek out activist groups, organise, and take to the streets.
Read
August 21, 2009I'm currently judging this book by it's f__king beautiful cover...
March 11, 2016
If I didn't read this book, I probably would have dropped out of my master's program, completely disillusioned with anthropology and the state of many current ethnographies which reinforce oppressive hegemonic, racist and oppressive structures. Graeber sets out to achieve a super lofty goal, and I think for the most part he achieved it! which in itself is pretty incredible. The book was captivating and I learned a lot, particularly stylistically how to write a successful auto-ethnography. From my experiences in activist circles he does an impeccable job of describing meetings, networks and inner politics, at the same time providing a solid historical framework to understanding why those things (may) happen. Each chapter could be read on its own but I definitely learned a lot reading it in its entirety.
December 23, 2020
Not gonna finish this one... i liked the idea of this book initially but mentally I was done on page 245 when Graeber said: “Mannheim does have something of a point. Revolutionary movements have always tended to take on much of their temper and direction from those very ‘middle strata.’ At the very least, there has always been something of a gap in this respect between those who suffered the most in an unequal society and those most able to organize effective sustained opposition. In other words, those ‘most affected’--as the current activist catchphrase puts it--by feudal or capitalist structures rarely, if ever, organized openly against it. One can argue, like Jim Scott, that the hidden resistance of the lowly is a great unrecognized force in world history--and surely one would be right. But rarely does this resistance take the form of overt rebellion.” Ok you MIGHT want to double check that and perhaps consider that white activists might not be more revolutionary than the organizers of literal slave revolts and prison uprisings. basically graeber set it up as this dichotomy between “those on the bottom, who have the most reason to want to challenge such inequalities” and “those whose privilege actually allows them to rebel.” obviously it’s true (and graeber does point out) that “those on the bottom” have no resources and face much greater risk when they choose to rebel, but homeboy can’t just gloss over the fact that they do anyway. just because they’re not joining your white activist spaces doesn’t mean they’re not organizing.
it felt like there was a real opportunity for graeber to make a serious point about how white leftists in the anti globalization movement fucked up and what could have been done differently and how we can be better comrades but instead he changed the topic and went on some long winded tangents about other things, like the physical aesthetics of white anarchist spaces (yep). Maybe eventually he got around to this later in the book, and I might go back and finish it later to see if he did. but.... 2020 is not the place for all this.
it felt like there was a real opportunity for graeber to make a serious point about how white leftists in the anti globalization movement fucked up and what could have been done differently and how we can be better comrades but instead he changed the topic and went on some long winded tangents about other things, like the physical aesthetics of white anarchist spaces (yep). Maybe eventually he got around to this later in the book, and I might go back and finish it later to see if he did. but.... 2020 is not the place for all this.
August 10, 2024
It is an interesting book as an ethnography that discusses the dynamics of a vibrant and significant political moment, the anti-capitalist movement—but couching it as this disguises that it's an inherently political book with a pretty silly theory for how to change the world. Graeber is a "radical individualist" and although there are interesting aspects, this perspective leads to idealist and utopian takes on everything. He ends up saying that you can change the world by imagining that you want to change it and comparing the power of puppets and circuses with real social forces that could challenge capitalism. He talks about the structural role of the police in upholding the system while saying that the individual humanity of police is something worth appealing to. I was hoping for a bit of clarity and a theoretical direction at the end, but his whole thing is relativism. Worth reading certian snippits if you're looking for a way to critique anarchist theory, but not a great book as a whole.
November 12, 2025
WOW! Was ein lehrreiches und tiefgreifendes Buch!
August 20, 2011
First of all, I read this book with theory in mind, despite the fact that Graeber sees theory in ethnography as largely irrelevant. Nevertheless, Graeber's main theoretical objective seems to be to reintroduce the idea of alienation, an important idea associated with Marxism that was seemingly banished from social discourse in the wake of the widely ramifying disillusionments of 1968. His argument hinges on what he calls the "politics of imagination" to which he juxtaposes the modern hegemony of a "politics of violence." For the sake of brevity, these are simply fundamentally different conceptions of the "real" as understood by regular people. The politics of violence asserts (implicitly) that the fundamental reality that society is based on is essentially the rule of force. The politics of imagination, on the other hand, always present in art and revolutionary moments, and revived in the contemporary anarchist movements that comprise Graeber's ethnographic subject, acknowledges that imagination underlies all social reality. Even the rule of force requires an underlying imagination of social possibility, however narrow, in order to be realized in practice. When, instead, imagination is free of such restriction, the presumed necessity of the rule of force completely disappears. Popular recognition of this openness of possibility can only come after an acknowledgement of existing alienation, which is the direct outcome of the subordination of imagination to the rule of force. This, Graeber argues, is why art and revolution are so often in close company.
Direct action is distinguished from other forms of political practice by its "pre-figurative" character, its incorporation of the ideals of the revolutionary imagination into the actions we take within the present context which we ultimately seek to change. The implication, I think, is that any revolution worth having must begin, not after the strategy and tactics and aspirations are worked out presumably by the "smart" people, but instead revolution begins in that very process of imagining revolution. This means any egalitarian society can only be created through an egalitarian process, something along the lines of the consensus process that Graeber documents in detail. This is the basic meaning of direct action: acting as if one is already free. The bulk of the book is concerned with this nitty gritty business, as Graeber describes his participant observation experiences with the Direct Action Network in the planning and execution of a massive protest against corporate globalization in Quebec in 2002. A very engaging and informative read.
Direct action is distinguished from other forms of political practice by its "pre-figurative" character, its incorporation of the ideals of the revolutionary imagination into the actions we take within the present context which we ultimately seek to change. The implication, I think, is that any revolution worth having must begin, not after the strategy and tactics and aspirations are worked out presumably by the "smart" people, but instead revolution begins in that very process of imagining revolution. This means any egalitarian society can only be created through an egalitarian process, something along the lines of the consensus process that Graeber documents in detail. This is the basic meaning of direct action: acting as if one is already free. The bulk of the book is concerned with this nitty gritty business, as Graeber describes his participant observation experiences with the Direct Action Network in the planning and execution of a massive protest against corporate globalization in Quebec in 2002. A very engaging and informative read.
July 2, 2014
(8/10) In Direct Action, David Graeber sets out on what is ostensibly an anthropological ethnography of anarchist politics and the anti-globalization movement. As an active participant in these movements, Graeber offers a lot of insight into both the nuts-and-bolts preparation for major protests and the larger understanding of the world that shapes anarchist praxis. For those interested in the movement, this is almost too much detail -- but, as Graeber argues, meaningful action and understanding arises from even the most tedious meetings.
As Graeber readily admits, his perspective is a limited one, mostly focusing on the short-lived New York Direct Action Network and its involvement with the protests against a summit in Quebec City. For people like me who are less interested in the summit-protesting, window-smashing form of activism, this is a bit of a disappointment, and I remain unpersuaded by Graeber's arguments about the efficacy of the actions he describes. But if nothing else, he helps me to understand why summit riots are so important to so many people, and their political ramifications.
My favourite chapters of the books were the later ones, where Graeber moves away from specific examples and talks about broader trends and principles. His description and analysis of the interactions between activists, police and the media is revealing and complex while still having a strong moral urgency. Graeber understands society's institutions as not a monolithic system of oppression but a bunch of barely-functioning bureaucracies taking the easiest road possible -- a description which seems pretty accurate, given my own interactions with the government. Potshots at post-structuralism aside, Graeber makes a number of important interventions that should be taken up by writers and theorists everywhere.
Direct Action is a big baggy book, with a lot of detail that will bore some and entrance others (I was mostly in the latter camp). It's not quite as poetically vibrant and politically essential as some of Graeber's other work, particularly given that the form of activism he describes seems to be on the wane. But if you're looking for a highly readable account of the global justice movement in the early 2000s, look no further
As Graeber readily admits, his perspective is a limited one, mostly focusing on the short-lived New York Direct Action Network and its involvement with the protests against a summit in Quebec City. For people like me who are less interested in the summit-protesting, window-smashing form of activism, this is a bit of a disappointment, and I remain unpersuaded by Graeber's arguments about the efficacy of the actions he describes. But if nothing else, he helps me to understand why summit riots are so important to so many people, and their political ramifications.
My favourite chapters of the books were the later ones, where Graeber moves away from specific examples and talks about broader trends and principles. His description and analysis of the interactions between activists, police and the media is revealing and complex while still having a strong moral urgency. Graeber understands society's institutions as not a monolithic system of oppression but a bunch of barely-functioning bureaucracies taking the easiest road possible -- a description which seems pretty accurate, given my own interactions with the government. Potshots at post-structuralism aside, Graeber makes a number of important interventions that should be taken up by writers and theorists everywhere.
Direct Action is a big baggy book, with a lot of detail that will bore some and entrance others (I was mostly in the latter camp). It's not quite as poetically vibrant and politically essential as some of Graeber's other work, particularly given that the form of activism he describes seems to be on the wane. But if you're looking for a highly readable account of the global justice movement in the early 2000s, look no further
January 12, 2014
Very readable account of Black Bloc / anarchist protest actions in the early 2000s, primarily leading to the Quebec G20 summit of 2000. Consists of Graeber's personal involvement, notes, minutes, and summaries of many public meetings in preparing for the summit; analysis of the nature of non-violence and civil disobedience in America post-1990s (in light of the Zapatistas, Earth First!, and Seattle WTO 1999); detailed thoughts on the consensus decision process as exercised particularly by the Direct Action groups in NYC between Seattle and Montreal and as later seen by most of us in the OWS councils; and the relation of these protest groups to challenges of minority and feminist representation. "The internet is great for disseminating information and useless for making decisions." Absolutely 5+ stars.
May 14, 2010
Jesus Fucking Christ! This was a marathon book for me. Took over a year to read with a 6 month break. BUT what wonder--what treasures--what gold!! I love graeber's writing--detailed, to the point, great analysis, interesting perspectives...gah. And here--direct action and anarchism! With his own experiences to highlight both. AND there's some theory at the end! I liked the end and the beginning. The middle gets mushy but that might be because i took a 6 month break and because I recall him talking a lot about many things i understood.
anyway--definitely worth it. I'm glad i got through it--wonderful yet extremely long.
<3
tea
anyway--definitely worth it. I'm glad i got through it--wonderful yet extremely long.
<3
tea
February 1, 2012
Update: This was one of the main books we recommended at Skylight for folks coming looking for a way to think about and understand the Occupy movement. How awesome was it to be able to hand people something with a blow-by-blow account of consensus process in a direct action context? So awesome that I guess the publisher's out of stock and now we're waiting for a reprint.
[From 2008] It's actually finally out! For real! (year and a half late, I think?) Now I just need to find a copy.
[From 2008] It's actually finally out! For real! (year and a half late, I think?) Now I just need to find a copy.
February 26, 2008
An insightful and invigorating glance at activist culture. I read it before it was even done and I couldn't wait for it to come out. I recommended it to many people before it was even published!!!!
December 9, 2013
Extremely dense but great to have such a detailed description of the inner workings of direct action an radical organizing.
December 31, 2013
One of my favourites, it's not short, but for me at least it had quite an impact on my life.
September 20, 2020
See other's reviews for a more accurate takeaway.
This book is important for me. I have been considering myself as a passive anarchist for a time now. I am more of a bottom-feeder, content to live underground and feast on the scraps than a come above ground to stir up the Spectacle that drove us underground type. I cannot involve myself in any sort of direct action. Though, through this thorough and thoughtful tome, I better understand the movement.
Graeber's book encapsulates the genius, tedium, idiocy and comradery of those involved in direct action. Why would anyone (when viewed from an outsider's perspective) spend their time with direct action, dedicate their lives to planning protests, non-violently combatting police who would like to mow then down to size, forming a culture that seemingly shoots itself in the foot? All of this makes much more sense to me after reading this one. I will continue to strive to understand this perspective while being open to allowing criticism of it when it moves into extreme territory. I feel that direct action limits what the anarchist position is about but this is a personal opinion rather than something based on experience.
I have served as a clerk for a Quaker meeting and been involved with Quaker consensus process for about five years. Graeber's ethnography covers all aspects of the consensus process. Meetings can go on for hours around one very small, very particular item of action. One person can change the direction of a meeting or grind it to a halt. When in the midst of the process it can seem like nothing is accomplished. Take a step back and one can witness progress, see the evolution of the group. If I were to participate in DAN or some similar anarchist movement, I can see myself as a moderator for consensus meetings.
Our current era sees spikes of revolutionary action from all sides. Rather than take the view of "world-gone-down-the-tube" I'd like to think that these revolutions are signs of a movement towards that which emits a deeper life.
This book is important for me. I have been considering myself as a passive anarchist for a time now. I am more of a bottom-feeder, content to live underground and feast on the scraps than a come above ground to stir up the Spectacle that drove us underground type. I cannot involve myself in any sort of direct action. Though, through this thorough and thoughtful tome, I better understand the movement.
Graeber's book encapsulates the genius, tedium, idiocy and comradery of those involved in direct action. Why would anyone (when viewed from an outsider's perspective) spend their time with direct action, dedicate their lives to planning protests, non-violently combatting police who would like to mow then down to size, forming a culture that seemingly shoots itself in the foot? All of this makes much more sense to me after reading this one. I will continue to strive to understand this perspective while being open to allowing criticism of it when it moves into extreme territory. I feel that direct action limits what the anarchist position is about but this is a personal opinion rather than something based on experience.
I have served as a clerk for a Quaker meeting and been involved with Quaker consensus process for about five years. Graeber's ethnography covers all aspects of the consensus process. Meetings can go on for hours around one very small, very particular item of action. One person can change the direction of a meeting or grind it to a halt. When in the midst of the process it can seem like nothing is accomplished. Take a step back and one can witness progress, see the evolution of the group. If I were to participate in DAN or some similar anarchist movement, I can see myself as a moderator for consensus meetings.
Our current era sees spikes of revolutionary action from all sides. Rather than take the view of "world-gone-down-the-tube" I'd like to think that these revolutions are signs of a movement towards that which emits a deeper life.
August 2, 2018
Graeber gives a good sense of what day-to-day anarchist activism in North America looks like, what direct action is, and—probably unintentionally—how anarchist activists reason themselves out of ever doing it. Despite being sympathetic to it, being an anarchist himself, he paints the North American anarchist activist community as an inward-looking circle-jerk that's about as likely to accomplish immediate tiny goals as liberal protesters (whose tactics, big talk on the part of anarchists aside, end up being almost identical in practice), and somewhat less likely than certain species of reformists. However, they will never, ever have a meaningful, lasting impact on the world—not because their lofty on-paper visions aren't attainable, but because attaining them is utterly beside the point: activist culture exists to perpetuate activist culture, and very little more. It's a social scene, not a revolution.
Still, there are a lot of meaningful lessons to be drawn from a book like this, and if nothing else, it will at least disabuse you of any lingering notion that cops are human.
Still, there are a lot of meaningful lessons to be drawn from a book like this, and if nothing else, it will at least disabuse you of any lingering notion that cops are human.
June 4, 2021
I have to admit that I have to skip some of the ethnographic reports. Although it's important and rigorous, besides the build-up to Quebec and information regarding activist's gestures and lingo in direct action and horizontal consensus meeting, the rest of the ethnographic notes are not engaging enough for me (I really like the exposition of tactics in The Democracy Project though). Anyway, the theoretical analysis of practice, organisation, violence, and imagination is superb, especially the analysis of Hollywood-influenced police culture. At the end of the day direct action is all about imagination. Imagining an alternative. I can easily see myself go back to the last chapter on political imagination and structural violence. I really miss David's writing.
February 22, 2022
Another fantastic book by Graeber, this one focusing on the on-the-ground reality of anarchist and so-called "anti-globalization" movements such as the Zapatistas and other members of People's Global Action (PGA). It's a very long and detailed book, but the narratives are absolutely fascinating.
I would skip Chapter 10 because The Dawn of Everything does a better job of explaining modes of domination and letting our imagination once again become an active force in human history.
I would skip Chapter 10 because The Dawn of Everything does a better job of explaining modes of domination and letting our imagination once again become an active force in human history.
May 10, 2020
Indeed vivid and engaging. I was just taking a look and then couldn't help skimming through the whole book. It gives a very good snapshot of the vitality of Graeber's works. He doesn't just debate with dead voices. He's an event-planner for ongoing social movements- talking to, hearing from, and working with so many many people involved in the movements here and there.
December 16, 2022
I've not participated in direct actions other than protests that were more symbolic than designed to directly affect outcomes. However, I've participated in a lot of consensus-based meetings and activist group process, and Graeber did a great job of capturing the texture and feel of those meetings, along with his always-trenchant political analysisi.
March 12, 2023
A very thorough and fascinating account of anarchistic direct action from the point of view of Graeber as a participant observer. A great intro to the social movements that immediately preceded (and in part led to) Occupy.
July 23, 2025
David Graeber is such a loss to the field of Anthropology. He was exactly where we all need to be - combining ethnographic practices with the socio-political movements and forces that determine all of our worlds.
This book is really special.
This book is really special.
November 19, 2019
Not my favorite Graeber book but still worth the time to read.
Read
October 13, 2020Just read Ch 5: Direct Action, Anarchism, Direct Democracy.
Graeber is infinitely engaging. Hope to come back and read the whole book.
Graeber is infinitely engaging. Hope to come back and read the whole book.
May 25, 2011
http://www.politicalmediareview.org/2...
To many anarchists, the idea of an “ethnographic study of the global justice movement” may seem problematic. Whether it be matters of security culture or the question of an outsider coming into a culture and telling the rest of the world about them, people I’ve talked to, without knowing Graeber’s work, often seemed skeptical. In Direct Action: an Ethnography, however, David Graeber blurs the false dichotomy between theory and practice by writing both as a sincere participant in the global justice movement as well as an observer and theorist of it during the protests against the FTAA’s 3rd Summit of the Americas in Quebec City, 2001.
A furtherance of this theme, his book is not only intellectually stimulating and compelling, but activists get a lot of practical material from it too. His detailed reconstructions of consensus-based meetings, meeting structures, street actions, mini histories, revealing conversations and police tactics are of tremendous use to activists who wish to reassess and better their democratic processes, as well as their tactics for direct actions. Describing the platform of egalitarian decision making processes as a springboard for developing anarchist theory, he highlights the “theory-derived-from-practice” theme that anarchists have always had affinity with and the complications of organizing with undemocratic, hierarchically organized groups.
Having participated in similar actions and meetings, many of the issues of privilege, acceptable tactics and police repression ring true to my, and many other’s experiences during large direct action demonstrations against “Globalization” summits, and during the meetings up to and following them. Seeing how, in great detail and context, one particular action unfolds is something that activists would do well to pay attention to, especially because nothing as extensive and specific to one action, to my knowledge, exists. The entirety of the book, however, is not just about one particular action; it is the very idea of direct action, so central to anarchist practice, that is at the center of this study.
Whether it is the hostilities between primitivists, class-struggle anarchists and “small-a” anarchists, the revolutionary implications of blocking a street and throwing a party, or a history of radical community spaces and direct action in new york city, much insider information about this movement gives light to aspects many of its participants may not even be fully aware of.
Although it is touched upon briefly, what could be useful would be a history of direct action that theorizes the transition from direct action and sabotage as tools used by working people (working class, in the narrow sense) to tools used by generally college-educated middle class activists. Graeber does discuss the possibility that actions like the one detailed in this book might not even be classical definitions of direct action.
Graber suggests that revolutionary movements have always taken place at the intersection between upward and downward class and social mobility- as alliances form, both physical (in terms of resources, funding) and theoretical (dissemination, ideas, art) between artists, writers, theorists, and workers.
This case study, as much as the actions he describes, itself has radical implications- that one can be both an ethnographer and a participant who is not a faceless, subjective figure. Graeber has found a crucial intersection between radical politics and scholarship where neither are sacrificed for the sake of the other.
For further reading:
The Battle of the Story of the “Battle of Seattle” by David Solnit (Editor), and Rebecca Solnit (Editor). AK Press
Direct Action & Sabotage: Three Classic IWW Pamphlets from the 1910′s. By Elizabeth Gurly Flynn, Walker C. Smith, & William E. Trautman. Charles H. Kerr labor classics
The Subversion of Politics: European Autonomous Social Movements and the Decolonization of Everyday Life by George Katsiaficas. AK Press
Fragments Of An Anarchist Anthropology by David Graeber. Prickly Paradigm Press
To many anarchists, the idea of an “ethnographic study of the global justice movement” may seem problematic. Whether it be matters of security culture or the question of an outsider coming into a culture and telling the rest of the world about them, people I’ve talked to, without knowing Graeber’s work, often seemed skeptical. In Direct Action: an Ethnography, however, David Graeber blurs the false dichotomy between theory and practice by writing both as a sincere participant in the global justice movement as well as an observer and theorist of it during the protests against the FTAA’s 3rd Summit of the Americas in Quebec City, 2001.
A furtherance of this theme, his book is not only intellectually stimulating and compelling, but activists get a lot of practical material from it too. His detailed reconstructions of consensus-based meetings, meeting structures, street actions, mini histories, revealing conversations and police tactics are of tremendous use to activists who wish to reassess and better their democratic processes, as well as their tactics for direct actions. Describing the platform of egalitarian decision making processes as a springboard for developing anarchist theory, he highlights the “theory-derived-from-practice” theme that anarchists have always had affinity with and the complications of organizing with undemocratic, hierarchically organized groups.
Having participated in similar actions and meetings, many of the issues of privilege, acceptable tactics and police repression ring true to my, and many other’s experiences during large direct action demonstrations against “Globalization” summits, and during the meetings up to and following them. Seeing how, in great detail and context, one particular action unfolds is something that activists would do well to pay attention to, especially because nothing as extensive and specific to one action, to my knowledge, exists. The entirety of the book, however, is not just about one particular action; it is the very idea of direct action, so central to anarchist practice, that is at the center of this study.
Whether it is the hostilities between primitivists, class-struggle anarchists and “small-a” anarchists, the revolutionary implications of blocking a street and throwing a party, or a history of radical community spaces and direct action in new york city, much insider information about this movement gives light to aspects many of its participants may not even be fully aware of.
Although it is touched upon briefly, what could be useful would be a history of direct action that theorizes the transition from direct action and sabotage as tools used by working people (working class, in the narrow sense) to tools used by generally college-educated middle class activists. Graeber does discuss the possibility that actions like the one detailed in this book might not even be classical definitions of direct action.
Graber suggests that revolutionary movements have always taken place at the intersection between upward and downward class and social mobility- as alliances form, both physical (in terms of resources, funding) and theoretical (dissemination, ideas, art) between artists, writers, theorists, and workers.
This case study, as much as the actions he describes, itself has radical implications- that one can be both an ethnographer and a participant who is not a faceless, subjective figure. Graeber has found a crucial intersection between radical politics and scholarship where neither are sacrificed for the sake of the other.
For further reading:
The Battle of the Story of the “Battle of Seattle” by David Solnit (Editor), and Rebecca Solnit (Editor). AK Press
Direct Action & Sabotage: Three Classic IWW Pamphlets from the 1910′s. By Elizabeth Gurly Flynn, Walker C. Smith, & William E. Trautman. Charles H. Kerr labor classics
The Subversion of Politics: European Autonomous Social Movements and the Decolonization of Everyday Life by George Katsiaficas. AK Press
Fragments Of An Anarchist Anthropology by David Graeber. Prickly Paradigm Press
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews