Foreign Rights

Many people are crying out in panic over the alleged assault on academia by feminists and anti-racists, who threaten the whole of society in the name of « political correctness ». To stimulate collective panic, they raise appalling scarecrows – social justice warriors, islamo-leftists, wokes, gender studies – and conjure up the most violent events in history: witch hunts, lynchings, totalitarianism, extermination. Even heads of state are taking up the cause. But not only is this agitation based on exaggerations and lies, it is also part of a manipulative approach that locks up minds and hinders intellectual curiosity, academic freedom and the development of knowledge. To shed some light on the issue, this essay looks at the ancient and recent history of the university. It invites us to consider the real role of gender studies and critical race theory in academia, and points to the forces that are actually leading the charge in the U.S., France, and Quebec. Ultimately, it is an effort to deconstruct reactionary propaganda.

To vote or not to vote, that is the question we do not dare to ask in our parliamentary systems, where elections are considered a sacred ritual. By defending the legitimacy of abstention, this essay confronts the conviction that voting is a duty, and that refusing to vote is a dangerous heresy. Much more than a mere praise for abstention, this book offers a radical critique of the electoral system. In addition to recalling the reasons given by abstainers from all walks of life for not going to vote, the author describes the often amusing strategies devised to subvert the electoral game: calls for boycotts or zero votes, zany and satirical candidacies of anarchist plants, animals, comedians, punks or gnomes. This gallery of figures of resistance to the vote also reveals the many powerful self-defence mechanisms of the electoral system, which always succeeds in imposing its own rules, even on the most rebellious people. Therefore, abstention is only fruitful if it goes hand in hand with autonomous, popular and solidarity-based commitment and mobilization.

“The Black Bloc is dead”, declared the anarchists in 2003. But far from the spotlights, Black Blocs still take part in demonstrations, entering into action to criticize and defy the dominant of the world. Masked up, dressed in black and forcefully attacking the symbols of capitalism, Black Blocs were transformed into an anti-globalisation media spectacle. This fame, associated with the image of the window-smashing thug, hides a complex reality, interesting to those who dare to make the effort to better understand the origin of this phenomenon, its dynamics and its goals. The use of violence always takes place within a balance of force, in an ethical and strategic context; and it cannot be summed up as throwing rocks in street protests. This edition of Les Black Blocs lays out the world’s most complete view of the phenomenon of the Black Bloc tactic and locates it within the anarchist tradition of direct action.

What is anarchy and what do anarchists want? A humanist questions his son, an anarchist activist who has studied the subject. Through their dialogue, the two men explore the roots of anarchy and democracy. They evoke certain figures and the different currents of the anarchist movement, while illustrating their remarks with examples drawn from today’s world. Together, they analyze anarchist critique of the major systems of domination – the state, religion, patriarchy, capitalism and racism – and thus offer an original initiation to anarchy.

While some view popular movements as the perfect embodiment of direct democracy, others only see them as, while sympathetic, essentially insignificant mobilizations. That is, when they are not trying to outright discredit them through accusations of violence. Drawing upon a profound knowledge of the field and of the history of democratic practices, Francis Dupuis-Déri offers an inspired and critical reflection. He dynamically presents the struggle between political agoraphobia and agoraphilia – the hatred and love of direct democracy – revealing the arguments and tactics of both sides. He also discusses the delicate relationship between people gathering in the agora to deliberate (the dêmos) and those who take to the streets to rise up in protest (the plebs).

The word “democracy” has become so popular that all political forces claimto represent it. It therefore comes as a surprise that the “founding fathers” of these “modern democracies” associated the ideawith chaos, violence and tyrannizing the poor! How did such a radical shift in meaning come to occur? Exploring the past discourse of the U.S. and France, the author exposes an amazing political adventure full of confrontation between personalities and social forces seeking to control the political systems founded at the end of the eighteenth century. Based on various tracts, manifestos, public declarations, newspaper articles and personal letters, this narrative reveals the politicalmanipulation of the term“democracy” by the elite, who gradually hijacked the notion and doctored it up to beguile the masses. Two centuries later, while the entire planet seems to think that “democracy” (power of the people) is a synonym for the “electoral system” (delegation of power to a small group of rulers), any manifestation of true popular power (collective deliberations on common affairs) always meets with the contempt of the elite.

As early as the end of the 19th century, anarchists such as the geographers Kropotkin and Élisée Reclus became interested in indigenous peoples, who were also referred to as \"stateless societies\". In the early 2000\'s, indigenous people throughout the Americas coined the notion of \"anarcho-indigenism\" to raise anarchists\' awareness about the history and, more importantly, the current relevance of their struggles. This book is an invitation to listen, to engage in dialogue, solidarity and complicity. In their interviews, Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, Véronique Hébert, Gord Hill, Freda Huson, J. Kēhaulani Kauanui, Clifton Ariwakehte Nicholas, and Toghestiy reveal the common ground between indigenous thought and traditions and anarchism, without denying the legacy of colonialism that has been left behind even in this anti-authoritarian movement. A worldview that combines anti-colonialism, feminism, ecology, anti-capitalism and anti-statism.