Tactical dynamics are amoral, arational, particular dynamics of conflict, and effectiveness is the accomplishment of objectives within this dynamic of profound uncertainty and resistance. Fusing ideas and action together is always already impossible: analysis generates a space that becomes inert while tactical dynamics are always in flux in all moments, making both strategy and tactics impossible to think in direct and total ways. The most we can do is try to make sense of these dynamics in increasingly effective ways, ways that facilitate the achievement of material objectives.
In a lot of ways this is full of sloppy language, which seem to argue against the straw men of terms debated within the anarchist discourse that exists on the internet, it is repetitive and thus prone to zoning out from, etc. This should have been much shorter, with more depth, and less language that seemed mostly present to give it the intellectual weight it lacked. Despite this it may be useful to read for a slight shakening of dominant or less critical discourses surrounding insurgency/counter-insurgency/policing. Some important ideas are: 1) policing is a projection of force upon the beings of a territory, an imposition of a unity/relation onto the terrain, 2) the materiality of this projection always entails severe limitations that require other apparatuses that amplify and aid in the diffusion of the appearance of control, 3) all terrain is inherently dynamic/chaotic, which necessitates policing on the part of the forces of order, 4) so the role of the insurgent is to amplify the projection of their force in ways asymetric and at speeds variant of policing, in order to foster disorganization and spread thin organizational capacity past a point of operativity. This all is much more useful if we're thinking of policing as the apparatuses and the general agents and forces of order rather than the idea of the State and police (which are foolishly far too limiting to focus on as the primary forces of order). This really says what should be obvious for anyone thinking momentarily about insurgency/counter-insurgency.
And yet, what is missing most from the book is the immaterial dimension, the metaphysic of policing, of a world ontologically concerned with things being as they should be.
Three excellent essays and accompanying appendices on the nature of US policing and the potential tactical responses to it. There is a lot in here that inspires me to believe "we can win," though I oftentimes don't actually feel that way. Additionally, there is too much of a focus on materiality. Obviously, street demos and actions will have a material effect, but I don't think that insurrection primarily exists within a material sphere. I do hope this book becomes more widespread, because I think it's time to step up our game and see things on the level this book proposes.
A last point of intrigue regards the publishing imprint. I was previously worried that Repartee, as the "critical theory" imprint of LBC Books, would be overwhelmingly full of obscure theory and particular sets of jargon. This book contains little of that and is straightforward and easy to read. It is a critical analysis that we can all understand and should be looking towards.
can't rate this- didn't get most of what I read...too over my head or language mucked in mire... lawyer -talk for philosophy majors...maybe both. I will try it again when the kids version gets published.
An overly dense book on police tactics and policing. Ostensibly designed to further one's understanding of how police operate in order to facilitate more strategic action, unfortunately this book is really weighed down by the author's academic writing style.