What do you think?
Rate this book
Hegemony How-To: A Roadmap for Radicals
Hegemony How-To is a practical guide to political struggle for a generation that is deeply ambivalent about questions of power, leadership, and strategy. Hopeful about the potential of today’s burgeoning movements, long-time grassroots organizer Jonathan Smucker nonetheless pulls no punches when confronting their internal dysfunction. Drawing from personal experience, he provides deep theoretical insight into the all-too-familiar radical tendency toward self-defeating insularity and paralyzing purism. At the same time, he offers tools to bridge the divide between anti-authoritarian values and hegemonic strategies, tools that might just help today’s movements to navigate their obstacles—and change the world.
290 pages, Paperback
First published January 3, 2017
119 people are currently reading
1885 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 67 reviews
September 15, 2017
The comrade who recommended this to me warned "the author might be too conservative for you", but as someone involved in political organizing I was curious to see what I could learn from this book and tried hard to keep an open mind. While I did garner some useful insights from it, though, I ultimately came away disappointed.
At the core of the book's argument is a dichotomy between movements primarily geared toward making a righteous but doomed stand and ones that seek to acquire power in order to change society - as the author notes, the use of the word "hegemony" in the title isn't just for show. Much of the left, he argues, is squeamish about power because of a justifiable reaction to its oppressive use by the ruling class, but if we seek to alter the intolerable status quo then we need to move beyond the LARPing of resistance by a self-selecting, insular "activist" class. To succeed we need to bring more than the "usual suspects" into our movements, yet we must contend with the reality that many of our potential allies in the general public are effectively inoculated against us - not just because of the ruling class' propaganda, but also to some extent by self-sabotaging behaviors of our own. The author uses his experience in Occupy Wall Street to illustrate many of these points, seeking to explain how it failed to become a sustainable political force despite a promising start. I think he understates the role of the state's ferocity in crushing the movement through a coordinated nationwide crackdown, but his points about the lack of strategic thinking in the movement that kept it from growing or from resisting repression are entirely valid.
The book's great and possibly fatal weakness was its reluctance to offer firm conclusions - a pretty big failure in something that advertises itself as "a practical guide to political struggle". As I implied above, it is clear that the author is significantly more liberal reform-minded than many in his intended audience, and it seemed as if he feared alienating more radical readers. As persuasively as he argues the need for radicals to seek actual power and to think strategically, he remained curiously vague about what he thinks this entails in practice. For just one example, at several points he urges readers to engage with existing institutions and groups, an idea likely to be controversial with his audience, yet fails to expand on this idea.
Thus the book seemed limited in what it could offer to those further left than Bernie Sanders, yet the author seeks to hide this behind "I'm not saying... I'm just saying..." passages, which feels dishonest. It feels very much as if the author wants to say "you're going to scare people off by talking about honestly about capitalism or endorsing socialist revolution, so rein in your aspirations", but for whatever reason was unwilling to own the implications of his arguments. So, while the book certainly gave me food for thought, I wouldn't recommend it to others enthusiastically.
At the core of the book's argument is a dichotomy between movements primarily geared toward making a righteous but doomed stand and ones that seek to acquire power in order to change society - as the author notes, the use of the word "hegemony" in the title isn't just for show. Much of the left, he argues, is squeamish about power because of a justifiable reaction to its oppressive use by the ruling class, but if we seek to alter the intolerable status quo then we need to move beyond the LARPing of resistance by a self-selecting, insular "activist" class. To succeed we need to bring more than the "usual suspects" into our movements, yet we must contend with the reality that many of our potential allies in the general public are effectively inoculated against us - not just because of the ruling class' propaganda, but also to some extent by self-sabotaging behaviors of our own. The author uses his experience in Occupy Wall Street to illustrate many of these points, seeking to explain how it failed to become a sustainable political force despite a promising start. I think he understates the role of the state's ferocity in crushing the movement through a coordinated nationwide crackdown, but his points about the lack of strategic thinking in the movement that kept it from growing or from resisting repression are entirely valid.
The book's great and possibly fatal weakness was its reluctance to offer firm conclusions - a pretty big failure in something that advertises itself as "a practical guide to political struggle". As I implied above, it is clear that the author is significantly more liberal reform-minded than many in his intended audience, and it seemed as if he feared alienating more radical readers. As persuasively as he argues the need for radicals to seek actual power and to think strategically, he remained curiously vague about what he thinks this entails in practice. For just one example, at several points he urges readers to engage with existing institutions and groups, an idea likely to be controversial with his audience, yet fails to expand on this idea.
Thus the book seemed limited in what it could offer to those further left than Bernie Sanders, yet the author seeks to hide this behind "I'm not saying... I'm just saying..." passages, which feels dishonest. It feels very much as if the author wants to say "you're going to scare people off by talking about honestly about capitalism or endorsing socialist revolution, so rein in your aspirations", but for whatever reason was unwilling to own the implications of his arguments. So, while the book certainly gave me food for thought, I wouldn't recommend it to others enthusiastically.
February 6, 2017
The book opens with a vivid emotional anecdote from the author about his childhood growing up in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania (after a great forward by Janice Fine). It is the perfect hook. I found myself drawn in from the first page, relating to the author and his experience growing up in a rural area, and also savoring stories of experiences I could only dream of (hitchhiking across the country at the tender age of 17).
Decades of the author's rich personal and political experience shape this roadmap for radicals. From the author's time in the antiwar movement, to international solidarity work, to his often behind-the-scenes leadership in the Occupy Wall Street movement, I felt like I had a one-on-one conversation with the author about his life, best lessons learned, and how to deploy them to shape my own work in Wisconsin.
A large chunk of the book is focused on meaningful advice (including actual tactics!) on how to get larger swaths of society involved in building the Left in America. That's probably what I found most helpful as someone who is working with an organization that needs to get more people involved. It is sandwiched between definitions of terms that are very academic and were mostly foreign to me. That said, I am VERY glad, indebted indeed, that the author did not dumb down the book and leave out these important terms and concepts. Now, I have a better understanding of them and how they play out in American politics.
Smucker's elucidation of the political identity paradox is quite interesting. When groups form and develop a sense of solidarity, their practice and rituals often pull them away from mainstream culture, and push others away from joining. Very important to be aware of in our work! The idea of prefiguring our movement as we want it to be, instead of operating in institutions that exist, and coercing them with a show of real power to do the bidding of "we the people," is also very meaningful and real in my work.
It ends on a positive note, with a nod to an America for "all of us." Reading this book inspired me to not lose hope, even in such a trying time, as it is written in such an intelligent, hopeful, and thoughtful voice, despite the real setbacks Smucker has faced in his own work, and in the work of broader organizations and movements.
I'll be buying copies for friends.
Job well done. A+!
Decades of the author's rich personal and political experience shape this roadmap for radicals. From the author's time in the antiwar movement, to international solidarity work, to his often behind-the-scenes leadership in the Occupy Wall Street movement, I felt like I had a one-on-one conversation with the author about his life, best lessons learned, and how to deploy them to shape my own work in Wisconsin.
A large chunk of the book is focused on meaningful advice (including actual tactics!) on how to get larger swaths of society involved in building the Left in America. That's probably what I found most helpful as someone who is working with an organization that needs to get more people involved. It is sandwiched between definitions of terms that are very academic and were mostly foreign to me. That said, I am VERY glad, indebted indeed, that the author did not dumb down the book and leave out these important terms and concepts. Now, I have a better understanding of them and how they play out in American politics.
Smucker's elucidation of the political identity paradox is quite interesting. When groups form and develop a sense of solidarity, their practice and rituals often pull them away from mainstream culture, and push others away from joining. Very important to be aware of in our work! The idea of prefiguring our movement as we want it to be, instead of operating in institutions that exist, and coercing them with a show of real power to do the bidding of "we the people," is also very meaningful and real in my work.
It ends on a positive note, with a nod to an America for "all of us." Reading this book inspired me to not lose hope, even in such a trying time, as it is written in such an intelligent, hopeful, and thoughtful voice, despite the real setbacks Smucker has faced in his own work, and in the work of broader organizations and movements.
I'll be buying copies for friends.
Job well done. A+!
March 3, 2017
Jonathan Smucker does a great job of threading the needle: being both theoretical and readable. He holds onto nuance and dives into the realms of politics and power analysis, and all the while he speaks with clarity, never getting lost in the insular activist lexicon that he critiques.
I learned a lot from this book. I am a better organizer for having read this book. Smucker shares a number of concrete ways in which we can be better leaders in social movements (being outward facing, crafting messaging that defines he greatest possible "we", etc.). Beyond bulletpoint best practices though, Smucker challenges us to think of how we can move past our small activist circles, "the narrative of the righteous few," and push for hegemonic change.
Thoughtful, challenging, maybe not 'hopeful' in any simple way, but I'm sure as hell glad he's on our side as we do the hard work ahead.
I learned a lot from this book. I am a better organizer for having read this book. Smucker shares a number of concrete ways in which we can be better leaders in social movements (being outward facing, crafting messaging that defines he greatest possible "we", etc.). Beyond bulletpoint best practices though, Smucker challenges us to think of how we can move past our small activist circles, "the narrative of the righteous few," and push for hegemonic change.
Thoughtful, challenging, maybe not 'hopeful' in any simple way, but I'm sure as hell glad he's on our side as we do the hard work ahead.
April 17, 2017
Very good, useful, manual for people serious about creating progessive political change. Smucker's roots are in Occupy Wall Street (actually even farther back, but that's the primary point of reference) and he does a good job reflecting on both the strengths and failures of that movement. He's adamant that the left has to stop thinking of itself as "activist," a term that serves mostly to isolate it from the broad coalition that would be needed for real change. Written prior to the 2016 election, the book feels a bit "dated" in specifics, but if you can read past those, it's about as useful a political organizing manual as I've read since Alinksy's Rules for Radicals.
July 1, 2024
Some of the ideas repeat which in some ways is good - better to have a few core ideas than try to do too much; and at the it could have been tightened up a bit. However, with that said, the way it bounces between theoretical concepts and real-world examples is fantastic, and overall remains extremely accessible. I feel like this will definitely be one of my go-to books to give to both new organizers, and also to friends/comrades that aren't engaged in serious strategic power-building (although the other main contradiction I think is present in this book is that there is more room for productive tension with those whose project in the world is visioning the world we're building for - just because it's not contesting for state power doesn't mean it's not important work, necessarily.) Feeling conflicted even days after finishing it now!
August 7, 2017
Loved this book. Essential reading for building a non-sectarian movement to reclaim the country. Great organizing framework and fascinating sociological research woven into clear reflections on the pitfalls and potential for political work.
August 17, 2017
Parts of this book were 5-star, and parts of it were meh. Smucker has some very important observations, but also a few oversimplified points. I recommend reading it together with No Shortcuts (McAlevey). Their arguments complement each other nicely.
April 9, 2021
Sometimes I make the mistake of assuming leftists have a certain baseline understanding of grassroots organizing and strategy. But that's not something innate—it has to be learned somewhere. Smucker does an excellent job laying out foundational lessons and thinking behind them. To bait you along are stories from behind the scenes at Occupy Wall Street, anti-war organizing in Lancaster PA, and great reflections from groups like Iraq Veterans Against the War. The book can get a little too intellectual for me at times, but might be the best thing we have to build a common foundation for all-things community organizing. While other organizing 101 books tend to focus on skills specific to working as an employed union organizer, this book is a lot less about how-to-get-one-person-to-do-one-thing and more about the constant challenges of community organizations: how do we get more people, and how to we translate that into power?
October 4, 2018
By an Occupy Wall Street activist and progressive organizational specialist. Pertinent critique of OWS (too focused on the symbolic, not enough focused on building an infrastructure that could continue and build on the powerful beginning). Argues that the left must get better at fighting for power as opposed to being a self-righteous social club. There are many people who could agree with us, or who pretty much already agree with us but haven't been activated, and it's up to us to give them a means and a motivation to get engaged. Not so much a how to, more of a why to, or a what to. Really worth reading for people who are into building left political power.
March 14, 2017
An extremely useful, practical book. Smucker pretty skillfully combines experience with theory. He's certainly made theory generally accessible. But, he does have a deep ambivalence towards "identity" politics and has created a clear hierarchy between class politics and all others. Fortunately, this doesn't detract much from the strategies he proposes, although it does undercut his final chapter.
June 29, 2025
On October 7th, 2011, a friend and I decided to head down to Minneapolis' Government Plaza to take part in the first local event of the spreading Occupy Wall Street protests. Though disaffected with the shortcomings of the Obama presidency and interested to find some way to advance positive social change, the form that Occupy took quickly soured us on it as a vehicle for effecting such. Jonathan Smucker, on the other hand, quickly jumped into New York's protest in Zuccotti Park and played a role through to the end. A lifelong radical activist, Smucker was inspired by the message and far more tolerant of the movement's flaws, but ultimately came away with an impression that something had to change to empower real progressive change. Hegemony How-To: A Roadmap for Radicals makes his case for those changes.
Smucker sees OWS as a potent symbolic power which the movement ultimately failed to translate into institutional power. Unlike many in radical spaces, he refuses to assign blame purely to external forces like a hostile media or political elite: his main message is that those of us who wish to bring about the world we wish to see must critically reflect and address those points where our movements fall short. Chief among these: a prevailing tendency toward self-limiting insularity.
Radicals since the 1960s have, Smucker argues, confused activism as primarily an expression of identity rather than a mechanism to effect change. While fostering a place for expression, particularly expression that exposes that the status quo is unpopular, is a key element in bringing people out onto the streets and into a movement, those activated quickly fall away if those who emerge as leaders (whether they call themselves this or not) adopt tactics and messaging which eject would-be allies—or simply fail to offer the hooks that will allow varying strains of allies to find their own place in the movement.
The book is not without its shortcomings. Retroactively, we might see Smucker as far too sanguine about the lasting resonance of OWS' message. "We are the 99%" has long since faded as a slogan and, though it objectively possesses the broadly inclusive quality Smucker recommends, it's social evolution has degraded it into one more overreaching shibboleth of the capital-A Activist. The book's influence also seems poor, making more waves in spaces which might be decried as "liberal" in Smucker's intended audience. If anything, tendencies toward insularity and puritanism seem louder than ever, even as the threat facing American democracy is orders of magnitude greater.
Regardless, it's a must-read for anyone who thinks change is necessary and that it will not come about through sheer force of will or righteousness of our causes alone.
Smucker sees OWS as a potent symbolic power which the movement ultimately failed to translate into institutional power. Unlike many in radical spaces, he refuses to assign blame purely to external forces like a hostile media or political elite: his main message is that those of us who wish to bring about the world we wish to see must critically reflect and address those points where our movements fall short. Chief among these: a prevailing tendency toward self-limiting insularity.
Radicals since the 1960s have, Smucker argues, confused activism as primarily an expression of identity rather than a mechanism to effect change. While fostering a place for expression, particularly expression that exposes that the status quo is unpopular, is a key element in bringing people out onto the streets and into a movement, those activated quickly fall away if those who emerge as leaders (whether they call themselves this or not) adopt tactics and messaging which eject would-be allies—or simply fail to offer the hooks that will allow varying strains of allies to find their own place in the movement.
The book is not without its shortcomings. Retroactively, we might see Smucker as far too sanguine about the lasting resonance of OWS' message. "We are the 99%" has long since faded as a slogan and, though it objectively possesses the broadly inclusive quality Smucker recommends, it's social evolution has degraded it into one more overreaching shibboleth of the capital-A Activist. The book's influence also seems poor, making more waves in spaces which might be decried as "liberal" in Smucker's intended audience. If anything, tendencies toward insularity and puritanism seem louder than ever, even as the threat facing American democracy is orders of magnitude greater.
Regardless, it's a must-read for anyone who thinks change is necessary and that it will not come about through sheer force of will or righteousness of our causes alone.
November 29, 2024
I appreciated many things about this book, especially the insider reflections/assessments of Occupy Wall Street, the clarifying differentiation between (and the need for both) symbolic/narrative and material shifts, and the encouragement for left/progressive organizers to reach beyond the "choir" through engaging people where they are (e.g. community institutions, faith orgs, workplaces). While some of the dynamics Smucker writes about have shifted since 2017, there's also a lot that feels resonant and relevant reading this in 2024 as we near another Trump presidency (e.g. the failure of establishment liberal politics to capture people's imagination, the challenges of left insularity). That said, I felt like he spent too much of the book criticizing tendencies on the left rather than offering a path forward, and some of those critiques felt overly reliant on the Occupy examples.
July 12, 2023
Slightly generous 4 stars, but ideological warfare is so underdeveloped in social change theory and it’s so hard to write an activism self-help book that’s actually helpful and he does both well.
Really appreciate the rigorous discussion of symbolic battles and the way social movements can leverage narrative to build a real *movement* and combat political logics upheld by the establishment. Too many people focus on structural change without acknowledging that change at scale is impossible without dislodging neoliberal ideology.
One question this inspired in me but doesn’t answer is how to think about symbolic battles simultaneously with structural ones. Since both affect societal political landscapes, how should a strategy balance resources toward narrative work vs resources toward structural changes?
The writing isn’t stupendous and he talks down a little too much, plus chapters 2-4 are quite repetitive.
Really appreciate the rigorous discussion of symbolic battles and the way social movements can leverage narrative to build a real *movement* and combat political logics upheld by the establishment. Too many people focus on structural change without acknowledging that change at scale is impossible without dislodging neoliberal ideology.
One question this inspired in me but doesn’t answer is how to think about symbolic battles simultaneously with structural ones. Since both affect societal political landscapes, how should a strategy balance resources toward narrative work vs resources toward structural changes?
The writing isn’t stupendous and he talks down a little too much, plus chapters 2-4 are quite repetitive.
February 26, 2021
At times a little too abstract for me, but overall appreciated the advice for social justice movements from a long-time organizer on how to actually build power and win rather than remaining in insular, radical clubhouses.
July 4, 2024
Impossible to rate because I started this two years ago for my thesis and never finished it. Hayden started reading it immediately after I finished and turns out I do not remember the first chapter AT ALL. but, it’s good stuff.
November 8, 2020
Lots of good points about how to inspire people here. However, I'm a little curious about what Smuckers theory of power here is. He seems to confuse discourse power with material power, and cites things that didnt truly do what they set out to do. Aside from giving some people some work. The Sanders 2016 campaign had ended by the time he wrote this book, so I wonder why there is less content from that.
Using social justice and economic justice interchangeably is quite odd to me. I think that would also relate to his Theory of Power, which I would say Smucker doesnt quite outline.
And I of course will never think that the spirit fingers from Occupy were a good idea. Smucker has a weird thing -as I and many others do- of not being able to see that his premise could apply to him as well.
As I do with my readings, I seek out interviews from the authors. Watched one with Nomiki Konst, and it turns out that Smucker is someone who thought that Joe Biden, the man with bureaucracy and market backing, was a man who needed the help of Left-minded people to become President. Also seemed to think that he and a bunch of his friends could hold his feet to the fire. He will keep Biden's feet warm.
Not an awful book, ultimately. Realizing what some could call ambiguity and limitations, you could mine for some good points.
Using social justice and economic justice interchangeably is quite odd to me. I think that would also relate to his Theory of Power, which I would say Smucker doesnt quite outline.
And I of course will never think that the spirit fingers from Occupy were a good idea. Smucker has a weird thing -as I and many others do- of not being able to see that his premise could apply to him as well.
As I do with my readings, I seek out interviews from the authors. Watched one with Nomiki Konst, and it turns out that Smucker is someone who thought that Joe Biden, the man with bureaucracy and market backing, was a man who needed the help of Left-minded people to become President. Also seemed to think that he and a bunch of his friends could hold his feet to the fire. He will keep Biden's feet warm.
Not an awful book, ultimately. Realizing what some could call ambiguity and limitations, you could mine for some good points.
November 24, 2018
there's a lot to like about Smucker's approach here. Hegemony How-To is grounded in a critique of left politics and activism as the terrain of cool kids clubhouse, and a proposition of tactics for winning power by opening to disaffected everyday people. Smucker is totally done with the prefigurative anarchism, the idea that we can win without seizing power. if we really want to win, this isn't good enough. I agree. there are a decent amount of practical steps offered here for organizing popular power, including some of those that make regular leftists shudder (branding!!). aesthetics and language matter, it turns out! this is good. this is a helpful book, clearly written, for an audience it can truly help.
but there's something here that is just a little bit off here, and i can't quite place my finger on it. is it the formal language (a la Laclau and Mouffe) that lacks any political content? is it the absence of a strategic analysis of state power, or party politics? is the account of identity and subjectivity a bit too fluid? i dunno. anyway. good book.
but there's something here that is just a little bit off here, and i can't quite place my finger on it. is it the formal language (a la Laclau and Mouffe) that lacks any political content? is it the absence of a strategic analysis of state power, or party politics? is the account of identity and subjectivity a bit too fluid? i dunno. anyway. good book.
February 4, 2018
Smucker provides a provocative and compelling argument for building powerful movements on the left in this current political moment. Using the successes and failures of Occupy Wall Street as a backdrop to analyze the sociological basis of strong movements, it becomes possible to imagine a world in which our movements do not relegate ourselves to the marginalized, righteous sidelines, but actually to build enough power replace the current hegemonic system. Regardless of political perspective or strategic preferences, it is critical to reflect on and integrate the wisdom and learnings of our movement ancestors as we build tomorrow's movements.
August 5, 2019
An interesting book. It put words to a lot of stuff that has been swirling around in my head. I never did like the label "activist" as it's very disempowering and exclusionary for others while self-aggrandizing for the one identifying as such. The book also questions the efficacy of one-off events like protests or marches by asking if these things are actually going to be useful. I'm sure many have avoided these events as they've rightly assumed that it would be a waste of time and energy. We need an achievable goal and a plausible strategy and tactics to get there. Here's hoping the ideas in this book become widely practiced.
July 11, 2019
Honestly didn't care for this. It's not that I disagree, I just don't think the author's style of writing works for me at all. It feels so unnecessarily wordy for the amount of actual information conveyed.
Read
May 12, 2017Reviewed here.
November 13, 2018
It's alright. I appreciated the commentary on insularity in countercultural activist circles but his whole concept of a new "hegemony" of social justice seems undeveloped and just weird to me.
February 11, 2018
Outstanding: engagingly written, well-organized, comprehensive, and relentlessly focused on how we actually do this in practice. Smucker's general thesis: it's not enough to be right. We (progressives interested in social justice) need to win.
Writing of Gramsci, the great theorist of hegemony and the impetus for the book's deliberately provocative title: "He dismisses utopianists not for the content of their vision of their vision of the future, but for their lack of a vision or plan for how to move from Point A to Point B, from present reality to realized vision."
Aye, there's the rub, and a familiar frustration for any progressive watching the circular firing squad behavior of the social justice left.
As someone interested in the dual challenge of both building an effective social movement and linking that movement to already existing social movement infrastructure, the latter half of the book is especially good. Pragmatic, hard-hitting, grounded in his extensive personal experience and the best available theory.
On moving along the "spectrum of allies" to build a larger base of support: "Leaders have to provide newcomers with things to do that actually add to the capacity of the burgeoning collective force." (Pg 159) A welcome reminder: it's the job of the movement to attract adherents.
Another passage is worth quoting at length:
"If the kinds of progressive changes we imagine are ever to be realized, it will be through the active participation of large numbers of teachers, nurses, factory workers, barbers, artists, service workers, students, religious communities, civic organizations, unions, allies within the existing power establishment, and, especially, soldiers, veterans and their families.
These participants will come as they are, and as such we must welcome them. They will give what they are willing to give, and we must affirm the smallest contributions (while also constructing 'ladders of engagement' for those who are eager to do more). Social movements that want to attract everyday folks cannot afford to have a high bar for entry. If we are to build a popular movement, we must accommodate a continuum of levels of involvement, as well as levels of political analysis." (Pg. 167)
Smucker also does a good job addressing the importance of storytelling and narrative, and of how to construct an effective and inclusive "we."
The core message of the book is one we progressives would do well to heed. His call for refocusing on movement-building infrastructure, on organization, leadership, strategy, and development is all to the good. Ultimately, however, I found myself wanting more. If the book is after all pitched (at least tongue-in-cheek) to "radicals", then many of us who read it are already in the choir, not just on content but on prescriptions. The key questions in my mind: what is that unifying frame? What is the content of an inclusive we? We've tried appeals based on race (Civil Rights Movement, Black Lives Matter), on class (Poor People's Campaign, Occupy, others), on human rights (the broader anti-war movement), on various forms of group identity (unions, environmentalists, etc). None have proven particularly effective at galvanizing a broad cross-section of our populace. So what else might work? A new initiative is trying beauty (https://www.andbeautyforall.org)... I'm not wildly optimistic. An element of the left is focusing on the notion of a "just transition" (http://www.movementgeneration.org/wp-...) but it remains far from mainstream.
And what of the "we"? Nationalism rubs many of us the wrong way, so too do narrow appeals to any particular aspect of our identities (gender, race, etc). So where does that leave us? Is it possible to conjure an "us" without a "them"? Many of us don't believe there is a personified enemy so much as a harmful system. But it's hard to fight a system.
Anyway, great as far as it goes. But the real work remains: how to build this thing?
Writing of Gramsci, the great theorist of hegemony and the impetus for the book's deliberately provocative title: "He dismisses utopianists not for the content of their vision of their vision of the future, but for their lack of a vision or plan for how to move from Point A to Point B, from present reality to realized vision."
Aye, there's the rub, and a familiar frustration for any progressive watching the circular firing squad behavior of the social justice left.
As someone interested in the dual challenge of both building an effective social movement and linking that movement to already existing social movement infrastructure, the latter half of the book is especially good. Pragmatic, hard-hitting, grounded in his extensive personal experience and the best available theory.
On moving along the "spectrum of allies" to build a larger base of support: "Leaders have to provide newcomers with things to do that actually add to the capacity of the burgeoning collective force." (Pg 159) A welcome reminder: it's the job of the movement to attract adherents.
Another passage is worth quoting at length:
"If the kinds of progressive changes we imagine are ever to be realized, it will be through the active participation of large numbers of teachers, nurses, factory workers, barbers, artists, service workers, students, religious communities, civic organizations, unions, allies within the existing power establishment, and, especially, soldiers, veterans and their families.
These participants will come as they are, and as such we must welcome them. They will give what they are willing to give, and we must affirm the smallest contributions (while also constructing 'ladders of engagement' for those who are eager to do more). Social movements that want to attract everyday folks cannot afford to have a high bar for entry. If we are to build a popular movement, we must accommodate a continuum of levels of involvement, as well as levels of political analysis." (Pg. 167)
Smucker also does a good job addressing the importance of storytelling and narrative, and of how to construct an effective and inclusive "we."
The core message of the book is one we progressives would do well to heed. His call for refocusing on movement-building infrastructure, on organization, leadership, strategy, and development is all to the good. Ultimately, however, I found myself wanting more. If the book is after all pitched (at least tongue-in-cheek) to "radicals", then many of us who read it are already in the choir, not just on content but on prescriptions. The key questions in my mind: what is that unifying frame? What is the content of an inclusive we? We've tried appeals based on race (Civil Rights Movement, Black Lives Matter), on class (Poor People's Campaign, Occupy, others), on human rights (the broader anti-war movement), on various forms of group identity (unions, environmentalists, etc). None have proven particularly effective at galvanizing a broad cross-section of our populace. So what else might work? A new initiative is trying beauty (https://www.andbeautyforall.org)... I'm not wildly optimistic. An element of the left is focusing on the notion of a "just transition" (http://www.movementgeneration.org/wp-...) but it remains far from mainstream.
And what of the "we"? Nationalism rubs many of us the wrong way, so too do narrow appeals to any particular aspect of our identities (gender, race, etc). So where does that leave us? Is it possible to conjure an "us" without a "them"? Many of us don't believe there is a personified enemy so much as a harmful system. But it's hard to fight a system.
Anyway, great as far as it goes. But the real work remains: how to build this thing?
Read
May 27, 2025"The groups that I was working hard to get to play nice with each other were often very small, lacking a social base. I wondered what difference it made if they worked together or not. It felt like the difference between one of two drops in an otherwise empty bucket" (p.26)
"Occupy Proper also saw itself distinctly individuated in the mirror. And it sometimes mistook itself and its bounds for the whole community of concern, rather than seeing itself as a symbol and special agent in the service of a much larger social unification" (p.64)
"More than any one particular practice, though, good leaders can play a critically important role in shaping a strategic and outwardly oriented culture within highly cohesive groups. One way that good leaders do this is by themselves modelling an orientation towards the periphery, rather than towards the centre of the group" (p.99)
This book is quickly gaining 'required reading' status within our ACORN branch, for good reason, and it has convinced me to begin identifying existing social 'blocs' within the city to focus our organising efforts, and explore using roleplay sessions where participants have to convey the efficacy of what we do.
In addition to the above quotes, Smucker's description of how "activist" groups can become preoccupied with fostering a 'lifeworld' for group participants — to meet like-minded people and 'perform' politics collectively in a safe environment — and how this often comes at the expense of material gains (which require drawing support from less radicalised sections of society) has helped explain a lot of the issues hamstringing the "left" where we live.
However, when reading something you so obviously agree with, it's far more useful to make note of its weaknesses than its strengths. First among these is the fact that Jonathan Matthew Smucker did not stop the Iraq War. Smucker correctly diagnoses the problems which prevented Occupy from capitalising on its popularity to win material gains, but it is unclear what material gains Smucker's own anti-war organising in Lancaster achieved. Despite the conclusions of the book focusing on the need to be more "strategic" and "tactical", Smucker's definitions of success regarding his own activities — I avoid the word activism on purpose — remain largely focused on language, perception, and the need to convince people. The question is, to what end? An Occupy Wall Street anarchist reading this book could turn around and say "you achieved the same amount as we did".
Ultimately, these issues arise because Smucker fails to contend with the elephant in the room — violence. Politics is a physical contest, not just a linguistic one, and in the end, victory can only be achieved by mobilising the people you've "convinced" to participate in physical struggle — whether that be standing on a picket line, resisting an eviction, blockading an arms factory, or more.
"Occupy Proper also saw itself distinctly individuated in the mirror. And it sometimes mistook itself and its bounds for the whole community of concern, rather than seeing itself as a symbol and special agent in the service of a much larger social unification" (p.64)
"More than any one particular practice, though, good leaders can play a critically important role in shaping a strategic and outwardly oriented culture within highly cohesive groups. One way that good leaders do this is by themselves modelling an orientation towards the periphery, rather than towards the centre of the group" (p.99)
This book is quickly gaining 'required reading' status within our ACORN branch, for good reason, and it has convinced me to begin identifying existing social 'blocs' within the city to focus our organising efforts, and explore using roleplay sessions where participants have to convey the efficacy of what we do.
In addition to the above quotes, Smucker's description of how "activist" groups can become preoccupied with fostering a 'lifeworld' for group participants — to meet like-minded people and 'perform' politics collectively in a safe environment — and how this often comes at the expense of material gains (which require drawing support from less radicalised sections of society) has helped explain a lot of the issues hamstringing the "left" where we live.
However, when reading something you so obviously agree with, it's far more useful to make note of its weaknesses than its strengths. First among these is the fact that Jonathan Matthew Smucker did not stop the Iraq War. Smucker correctly diagnoses the problems which prevented Occupy from capitalising on its popularity to win material gains, but it is unclear what material gains Smucker's own anti-war organising in Lancaster achieved. Despite the conclusions of the book focusing on the need to be more "strategic" and "tactical", Smucker's definitions of success regarding his own activities — I avoid the word activism on purpose — remain largely focused on language, perception, and the need to convince people. The question is, to what end? An Occupy Wall Street anarchist reading this book could turn around and say "you achieved the same amount as we did".
Ultimately, these issues arise because Smucker fails to contend with the elephant in the room — violence. Politics is a physical contest, not just a linguistic one, and in the end, victory can only be achieved by mobilising the people you've "convinced" to participate in physical struggle — whether that be standing on a picket line, resisting an eviction, blockading an arms factory, or more.
April 22, 2020
Ah, just saw this that I never ended up reviewing this book. I read this book when it came out three years ago, it's been a while and now I am quickly writing this short review without checking and my memory might be getting stuff wrong. Anyway, I love this book. It really spoke to me as his experiences and frustrations around Occupy closely mirror my experiences around a wave of student occupations some years ago. I could think of personal examples of pretty much all the anecdotes he gave. What I really like is that it put words to a very recognizable movement dynamic; that one of newly radicalized people creating their own insular culture with jargon and codes, which cuts off a lot potential for seriously growing as a movement or making successful political interventions. But Smucker recognizes that the life of the group is also important, political work isn't just being strategic and using everything as an instrument towards achieving political goals. People are driven to movements because they are looking for community, for like-minded people that think similarly. That is completely valid and should be giving space for. The goal then is to create a group-culture that is open towards the outside world, that is open to reflection and collective strategy discussion.
Besides that it very usefully introduces some social theory concepts (Laclau, Mouffe, Gramsci etc) in a relatively simple way that are very useful for a movement audience.
This is not the book of all books by the way. It's definitely not a definitive guide to social change and the word 'roadmap' is perhaps a bit off. Like just about everyone on the Left, Jonathan Smucker obviously also doesn't know exactly 'what's to be done'. He seems a bit split between having decided to engage with electoral politics but at the same time not wanting to fully embrace that for this book, knowing that his audience people would stop listening and he is probably not completely sure of it himself either. Anyway - do read this this if you are in engaged with radical politics. Especially when you're relatively new to it. It excited me quite a bit to find out that people here that got politicized of the last year through Extinction Rebellion are reading this now. And I think this will prevent unnecessary mistakes and splits in the future.
Besides that it very usefully introduces some social theory concepts (Laclau, Mouffe, Gramsci etc) in a relatively simple way that are very useful for a movement audience.
This is not the book of all books by the way. It's definitely not a definitive guide to social change and the word 'roadmap' is perhaps a bit off. Like just about everyone on the Left, Jonathan Smucker obviously also doesn't know exactly 'what's to be done'. He seems a bit split between having decided to engage with electoral politics but at the same time not wanting to fully embrace that for this book, knowing that his audience people would stop listening and he is probably not completely sure of it himself either. Anyway - do read this this if you are in engaged with radical politics. Especially when you're relatively new to it. It excited me quite a bit to find out that people here that got politicized of the last year through Extinction Rebellion are reading this now. And I think this will prevent unnecessary mistakes and splits in the future.
March 15, 2021
In Hegemony How-To: A Roadmap for Radicals, Jonathan Matthew Smucker discusses the best ways to extend an invitation to those we wish to organize. He mentions inefficacy of a narrative attack, wherein an activist might undermine a potential recruit’s worldview and instead suggests a narrative insurgency, wherein the activist plants seeds of their goal in the framework of the potential recruit’s worldview by first finding middle ground rather than engaging in debate. If an activist goes for the throat of a potential recruit’s core belief system, the potential recruit “is more likely to double down on their existing beliefs than to open themselves to considering new ideas” (Smucker, pg. 192). He further suggests that we find common ground in order to appeal to people who might be on the fence.
Smucker’s advice includes gems such as: do not insult someone you are trying to persuade, do not steamroll people, and “listen to people and attempt to understand where they’re coming from” (Smucker, pg. 193). All these points seem so basic that I might feel condescended to if I did not remember that there are people on the left who absolutely need to hear it. Personally, I do not think debating ever results in anything positive, so I agree with Smucker’s point that “social change work is not a debate club” (Smucker, pg. 191). However, I have met many (usually white, cis, straight) men on the left who are all too excited to get into a debate.
Smucker’s book was highly influenced by both Paolo Freire’s Pedagogy of Hope and Pedagogy of the Oppressed, specifically the most well-known section from that book on the banking model of education. The banking model of education is when a teacher simply recites information to a student and the student is not active in the learning process. Freire argues that this hinders “critical consciousness” (Freire, pg. 73) and stunts the creativity of students. Smucker synthesizes this idea with that of his own pedagogical practices as an activist. The two vary, though, in that Freire offers dialogue as an alternative to the banking education model, contending that dialogue creates a “mutual trust” (Freire, pg. 91) between dialoguers. Smucker offers, as stated previously, the notion of finding common ground with those you are trying to educate. Freire says that it is not enough to simply have a dialogue. Praxis, or action, also must take place. Hegemony How-To is a guide to effective praxis.
Smucker’s advice includes gems such as: do not insult someone you are trying to persuade, do not steamroll people, and “listen to people and attempt to understand where they’re coming from” (Smucker, pg. 193). All these points seem so basic that I might feel condescended to if I did not remember that there are people on the left who absolutely need to hear it. Personally, I do not think debating ever results in anything positive, so I agree with Smucker’s point that “social change work is not a debate club” (Smucker, pg. 191). However, I have met many (usually white, cis, straight) men on the left who are all too excited to get into a debate.
Smucker’s book was highly influenced by both Paolo Freire’s Pedagogy of Hope and Pedagogy of the Oppressed, specifically the most well-known section from that book on the banking model of education. The banking model of education is when a teacher simply recites information to a student and the student is not active in the learning process. Freire argues that this hinders “critical consciousness” (Freire, pg. 73) and stunts the creativity of students. Smucker synthesizes this idea with that of his own pedagogical practices as an activist. The two vary, though, in that Freire offers dialogue as an alternative to the banking education model, contending that dialogue creates a “mutual trust” (Freire, pg. 91) between dialoguers. Smucker offers, as stated previously, the notion of finding common ground with those you are trying to educate. Freire says that it is not enough to simply have a dialogue. Praxis, or action, also must take place. Hegemony How-To is a guide to effective praxis.
May 27, 2022
A veteran of organizing and a key player in the Occupy movement, Smucker realizes all too well the follies to which activists can fall in failing to achieve their goals. (In fact, Smucker rejects the "activist" label as a modern construct that serves no useful purpose and alienates the communities with which organizers are trying to connect). Using sophisticated theory like Gramsci and practical stories from his own experience, Smucker makes the case for actually getting things done as well as strengthening the 'in-group' experience of dedicated social justice makers. Drawing on his childhood as a conservative Mennonite, Smucker seeks to build bridges between those folks who are passionate about making the world better and the folks who live in that world every day. He is kindly but critical about the left's tendency to turn upon itself for not being ideologically pure and therefore failing to effect meaningful change. Both seasoned activists ("Don't call me that," Smucker says, "it lets other people off the hook) and critiques of those activists will find much here to affirm, and even more to do to make our world a better place.
Read
October 7, 2022Relooks at collective action and its oft-ineffectiveness, which could be because of activism insularity, insular quibbles, and a tendency to focus on developing a walled-up self-identity rather than a willingness to be open to sharing and flexibility of ideas.
Evaluates various strategies and gives ideas. Points out that we cannot merely critique or try to eliminate "common sense" (even if it isn't common or based on false assumptions) because people have a natural tendency to fill the void left from the debunked assumptions. So, for example, if you are an academic who sees their role merely as one of destroying or explaining away mythology, if you do not want an equally objectionable "common sense" replacement then you need to have your own ideas ready as replacements. Mere critique (for example, "postmodernism") is inadequate and may even be harmful. Much of this book was a critique of progressives' reluctance to be actual influencers and hegemons.
Often readable, but sometimes strays into obscure academia lingo.
[Iowa mention]
Evaluates various strategies and gives ideas. Points out that we cannot merely critique or try to eliminate "common sense" (even if it isn't common or based on false assumptions) because people have a natural tendency to fill the void left from the debunked assumptions. So, for example, if you are an academic who sees their role merely as one of destroying or explaining away mythology, if you do not want an equally objectionable "common sense" replacement then you need to have your own ideas ready as replacements. Mere critique (for example, "postmodernism") is inadequate and may even be harmful. Much of this book was a critique of progressives' reluctance to be actual influencers and hegemons.
Often readable, but sometimes strays into obscure academia lingo.
[Iowa mention]
August 9, 2018
Pretty good set of arguments and analysis on how progressive/leftist groups need to be less insular and self-satisfied, and take seriously the question of things like building real power (as opposed to always holding symbolic protests) and winning more people to your side and meeting people where they are at, and in general questions of strategy (rather than just developing the Correct Moral Position). Its probably a sign of how rapidly things are changing today, in the summer of 2018, that some of this stuff feels kinda obvious or even out-dated, with the rise of more institutionalized left-wing movements like the Democratic Socialists of America. But even then, much of the advice and analysis in this book is definitely timeless.
The only thing I would have liked to see is more empirical examples and examination of history, although the anecdotes and observations that are present in the book are excellent and weaved in nicely with the more abstract theory.
The only thing I would have liked to see is more empirical examples and examination of history, although the anecdotes and observations that are present in the book are excellent and weaved in nicely with the more abstract theory.
September 19, 2017
Smucker gives us a lot to chew on, but along side a fairly sober autopsy of the left his proposed solutions are a little uneven. The idea that it is possible to simply construct a new metanarrative (which Smucker rests his vision for the future on) is truly fantastic. More complicated visions for winning coalitions have been articulated by post-Marxism, but Smucker's engagement with these is limited (while he draws from Chantal Mouffe extensively his engagement with her concepts is both selective and limited, and no mention whatsoever is made of her and Ernesto Laclau's Hegemony and Socialist Strategy which would seem to be a natural touch-point for this volume; virtually no other theorists of this school are engaged with--neither Gorz nor Young, Mohanty or Fraser).
A worthy--if limited-- read for folks who are interested in building a winning left in the contemporary USA.
A worthy--if limited-- read for folks who are interested in building a winning left in the contemporary USA.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 67 reviews