CrimethInc. : Categories : How To

Eight Things You Can Do to Stop ICE

2025-02-11T23:09:24Z

The Trump administration is paving the way for mass deportations by building new prison camps and invoking the Alien Enemies Act, which was used to justify the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. Motivated by nativism and white nationalism, Steven Miller and other officials are attempting to ethnically cleanse the United States, while tech and prison companies profit on lucrative government contracts and corporations continue to exploit immigrant labor. Knowing that mass deportations will inflict devastating costs, Trump has chiefly been concentrating his efforts in cities like Chicago and Denver that are governed by his political adversaries.

Nonetheless, people are getting organized. Communities across the US are mobilizing rapid response networks that can respond to raids and support those targeted by state violence. Students across the US are staging walkouts; people are holding mass demonstrations and fighting back against deportations.

If we fail to stand in solidarity with those targeted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) today, the same infrastructure of repression will eventually be turned against others, as well. An injury to one is an injury to all!

Do your part to melt the ICE.

Eight Things You Can Do to Stop ICE

Click on the image to download the PDF. Please print these out and distribute them in your community!

Know Your Rights—Educate Your Community

Learn your rights in interactions with ICE and law enforcement. Trump officials have complained that people knowing their rights makes it “very difficult” to carry out raids. Asserting our rights can disrupt their plans, delay their efforts, and shift the power dynamics in encounters with law enforcement. Distribute “Know Your Rights” cards and fliers in your community. Organize teams to get them into schools and workplaces. Host a training at your local community center, church, or union hall. Publicizing this information is an chance to get people together to strategize about how to accomplish the other tasks on this list.

Vet Information—Stop Rumors

Disinformation spreads quickly when people are afraid. Set up hotlines, Signal loops, and social media accounts that can vet information, verify reports of ICE activity, and circulate reliable updates. If your area already has a hotline, volunteer to help keep it running. Don’t amplify rumors; when you see them spreading, debunk them. Reports about ICE activity should include the exact time, date, and location of the sighting, the number of agents, and a visual description of their uniforms, vehicles, and badges—or better still, photographic evidence.

For more information, continue reading here.

Organize Rapid Response Networks

Organize a rapid response network to mobilize against ICE raids by recording their activity, providing support to the targeted, and organizing an immediate response. Documenting ICE activity has proven useful for understanding how they behave; it has also helped people in court. Wherever possible, block or slow their actions. In the past, crowds mobilized by rapid response networks have blockaded ICE deportation vans and protested outside ICE facilities.

You can read about some rapid response networks here and here.

Organize Mutual Aid—Support Bail Funds

ICE raids disrupt lives and break families apart. Many people are afraid to attend school or go to work for fear of being kidnapped by ICE. Organize mutual aid programs to provide support to those in hiding and to families whose breadwinners have been abducted. Start a free grocery program. Deliver meals. Connect with existing support networks and organizations to expand their efforts. Support bail funds to get arrestees out of the system as soon as possible.

Fight Criminalization—Shut out the Police

Ordinary interactions with police are one of the chief risks to those targeted by ICE. A single false criminal charge could ruin a person’s life, even if it would never hold up in court. Encourage neighbors and coworkers not to call the police. Organize neighborhood networks, conflict resolution projects, and other ways to address community needs without involving the criminal “justice” industry. Debunk false narratives about rising crime rates—these are just excuses to increase the scope of repression and the profits of those who invest in it. Explain what everyone has to gain by standing in solidarity with those who are on the receiving end of criminalization. Publicly shame police officers and other mercenaries who sell their capacity to inflict harm to the highest bidder.

Stand In Solidarity with ICE Detainees—Fight to Abolish ICE

Stand in solidarity with those locked inside ICE facilities. Support their efforts to organize. Prisoners in many ICE facilities organize hunger strikes and labor stoppages demanding better food, better conditions, access to healthcare, and legal representation. Organize to prevent the construction of new ICE facilities. Mobilize against contractors that work with ICE or supply technology to ICE. Connect the struggle against ICE to other organizing within and against prisons.

Connect Communities

These tactics will be most effective if you pursue them in community with those who are immediately at risk. For example, if you maintain a platform sharing verified sightings of ICE in your community, this will do little good unless it reaches those who need that information most. Strengthen the ties between those who are targeted by ICE and the rest of your community.

Build a Culture of Resistance against ICE and State Repression

Build a culture of resistance in your neighborhood, school, or workplace. Make the walls of your community speak with stickers and posters. Encourage non-cooperation with ICE. Strategize with others in your community about how to support those facing repression and take the offensive against those who are scapegoating the undocumented.

Every time ICE wants to attack your community, they should know that their activity will be recorded and reported, that people will converge on them wherever they show up, that there will be consequences for their actions. Every operation should cost them more resources than the last. If all of us do what we can, the accumulation of our efforts will save lives and preserve communities.

For More Information

Know Your Rights:

You have constitutional rights!

DO NOT OPEN THE DOOR if an immigration agent is knocking on the door.
DO NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS from an immigration agent if they try to talk to you. You have the right to remain silent.
DO NOT SIGN ANYTHING without speaking to a lawyer first. You have the right to speak with a lawyer.
If you are outside of your home, ask the agent if you are free to leave. If they say yes, leave.
GIVE THIS TEXT TO THE AGENT. If you are inside of your home, show the text through the window or slide a card with this text under the door:

I do not wish to speak with you, answer your questions, or sign or hand you any documents based on my 5th Amendment rights under the United States Constitution. I do not give you permission to enter my home based on my 4th Amendment rights under the United States Constitution unless you have a warrant to enter, signed by a judge or magistrate with my name on it that you slide under the door. I do not give you permission to search any of my belongings based on my 4th Amendment rights. I choose to exercise my constitutional rights.

ICE agents often carry administrative rather than judicial warrants. They would like you to think that these are the same, but they are not. If the agent does not have a judicial warrant with all the correct information for the specific person they are looking to detain, they do not have authority to enter private areas without consent, including private areas at a workplace. Talk with your coworkers so that everyone understands which areas are public and private; put up signs and keep doors closed. Create a policy on how to respond if ICE comes to your place of work. You can learn more about how to deal with workplace raids here.

Insurgent Survival : Reflections on the Fight Against Sweeps Targeting the Homeless in Austin, Texas

2024-11-26T11:02:30Z

In 2019, militants in Austin, Texas started an organization with the aim of defending homeless camps against sweeps—forced removals disguised as “cleanups” carried out by cops and work crews. This organization, Stop the Sweeps, intervened in a cycle of struggles that included the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the George Floyd uprising, and the winter storm of 2021 while attempting to consolidate a pole for confrontational activity and strategic thinking. Here, we explore the history of this movement in detail, seeking to distill lessons about autonomous organization that can aid revolutionaries in future struggles against dispossession.

In June 2019, Austin City Council passed a reform legalizing “camping,” taking away the tool of misdemeanor ticketing from the Austin Police Department, which had used it for two decades to push homeless encampments into the deep woods and routinely dispossess the residents. The NGO left promoted this as a dramatic advance in the civil rights of houseless people, while NextDoor reactionaries decried it as a sign of the debasement of the once great city of Austin. In the news and on Twitter, Texas’s Republican Governor Greg Abbott exchanged barbs with Democratic Austin Mayor Steve Adler, each taking one of these sides.

The following November, friends and comrades formed Stop the Sweeps Austin (STS), a political intervention intended to undermine both of those positions. The core aim of STS was to show that both the progressive city and the reactionary state used similar techniques, rationales, and low-wage contractors guarded by police to systematically dispossess the poorest and most marginalized people in Austin—and that in doing so, they were continuing policies of displacement that had begun more than a century earlier with colonization and the policing of enslaved and formerly enslaved populations. Confronting the sweeps was both materially and discursively strategic. The idea was to cut away at the foundation of the post-decriminalization strategy for displacement, heightening antagonism towards both of the political factions that depended upon it.

To do this, Stop the Sweeps Austin rallied sympathizers to intervene against weekly encampment sweeps by city and state forces while building parallel networks of mutual aid and political support. STS drew on existing solidarity networks descended from decades-running projects, informed by the living memory of the social movements of the homeless in the 1980s. We also benefitted from historical research and movement elder storytelling to extend our understanding of local history to the founding of Austin.

The sweeps are intended to destroy what little stability and sense of home the houseless are able to establish.

We now recognize that we were a part of a national movement against sweeps that peaked early in the COVID-19 pandemic, drawing on the momentum of the George Floyd Uprising. Autonomous groups in California, including the Sacramento Homeless Union and Where Do We Go in Berkeley, had been organizing against sweeps through 2019. In an early phase of STS organizing, we were roped into coalition building and national legal work by the Western Regional Advocacy Project; yet these projects did not offer meaningful coordination between groups to advance an autonomous vision grounded in direct action. There were efforts in Los Angeles to build out anti-sweep programs that seemed similar to ours from afar, though they started from a stronger orientation towards social democratic city politics. Fiercer resistance in Minneapolis built to flashpoints in 2020 including the occupation of an empty hotel and militant encampment defense. The circulation of the insurrectionary framework “You Sweep, We Strike” saw attacks on contractors and city infrastructure in Seattle, Santa Cruz, and Minneapolis. It was difficult to connect with these projects to learn from them directly, but easy to boost each other’s content from afar.

Five years after the founding of Stop the Sweeps Austin and two years after its quiet dissolution, we are writing this piece in hopes of refining the lessons of this recent high point of movement activity. We will begin by painting a picture of the moment in 2019 when Stop the Sweeps emerged, then situate that moment in a longer history of colonization, development, and homeless resistance. Having done so, we will distill the strategic frameworks that guided our organizing, then follow the trajectory of the movement to the limits it encountered. In each section, we will present our hypotheses and the lessons we learned along the way, illustrated via specific practical experiences.

We offer these as reflections both for the local movement—to remind it of its history, its victories and defeats—and for revolutionaries everywhere seeking to think through crucial questions about autonomous organization. Today, we are preparing to confront a new phase of camp repression in the wake of the Supreme Court’s “Grants Pass” decision, which green-lights criminalization and displacement in California and elsewhere.

A sign on a tent in downtown Austin.

1000 Tents Bloom

Before 2019, most encampments lasted about three months before police evicted them—a cycle of temporary inhabitation and dispersal. This constant motion is essential to the cycle of development, as it opens up land and keeps bodies moving through the various infrastructures built to profit on them—shelters, social services, housing, prisons, hotels, and stores, all of which increasingly resemble each other.

Though “camping” was formally legalized in June 2019, enforcement had actually ceased during the winter of 2018-2019. Citing a paucity of funds due to the consequences of the catastrophic Hurricane Harvey in southeast Texas, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) paused its contracts providing camp removal, attempting to hand them off to the City of Austin. The city government did not immediately pick up the contracts at the same pace. At the same time, informal directives were given to APD to slow the pace at which they inflicted tickets for camping, fearing court rulings enforcing an expansion of the Martin v. Boise circuit court ruling, which had slowed camping ban enforcement on the West Coast. This occurred alongside a soft strike by organized Austin Police officers who had significantly slowed their response times to minor crimes, aiming thereby to press their demands for more power.

The repeal of the camping ban created a political opening, enabling the camps to survive indefinitely on public land. Tent cities blossomed in January and February, mainly under state-owned freeways, and grew more elaborate. Shanty towns and shelters made from wooden pallets, political signs, and tarps as well as more modest tents and cardboard populated the city north to south and east to west, dotting the parks and the underpasses of major highways and appearing beside libraries and around the social services buildings downtown. This offered new forms of collective stability and security for the unhoused: the camps served as points of connection, stable locations at which to receive social services, and places for those new to life on the streets to get oriented and find support. They represented a strategy for mutual safety against harassment by reactionaries and police, providing a sense of collective life and care.

An encampment below the I-35 overpass in the heart of downtown Austin.

This occupation of space shocked liberals and conservatives alike, many of whom saw it as a display of public disorder or an embodiment of the ever-intensifying crisis in affordable housing. In Stop the Sweeps, for our part, we saw the expansion of the camps as a sign of the self-organizing capacity of the homeless and a demonstration of the power of land occupation—indeed, a signal of disorder for those invested in the property system. STS sought to build connections centering this sense of self-organization to build a defense network against the waves of displacement that were the cause and consequence of life in the camps.

At that time, the displacement of the housed poor had continued unabated across Austin for decades, in keeping with national trends and local plans to develop and gentrify first West Austin and then East Austin, which was historically home to Black and brown Austinites following a century of segregation. Recent statistics show that most homeless Austinites were displaced from the zip codes that they currently reside in, often in areas suffering intense gentrification. While most recent literature on rising rents in Austin focuses on the spike following the pandemic, money had been pouring into Austin neighborhoods long before that, aided by historically low interest rates intended to flip houses and entire blocks into money makers. Projects that had been paused since the previous real estate bubble burst in 2008 were resumed during the 2010s with towers and “luxury” apartment blocks mushrooming from the mycelial networks of capital and property that had accumulated and expanded during the “bust” period.

In the late 2010s, the local Maoist movement (now mostly disbanded and critiqued as a cult by former members) waged a years-long struggle against a development slated along East Riverside, an effort to reinvent a low-income area as a luxury new-urbanist hotspot: the Domain on Riverside. The developers ultimately succeeded in evicting low-income renters from multiple high-density apartment complexes, which consequently remained boarded up for years just a short walk away from one of the largest encampments on that avenue.

These Maoists represented a political pole in 2019 Austin, offering a mixture of public and secretive activity that prioritized direct action and confrontation with a diffuse array of enemies that they saw as aligned with the interests of capital. On the one hand, this meant that developers were confronted in public meetings and at their homes, and on the other, that former allies were castigated online and in person after political breaks. The Maoists also confronted other minor political figures, including DSA-oriented candidates, and disrupted their meetings. At the time, the Maoists had developed a reputation for being arrested, both at marches and in their homes, and facing elevated charges. Their former leader, Jared Roark, who went by the name Dallas, was arrested in his home for weapons possession after a tragicomic confrontation with an expelled former member of the Maoist’s armed unit.

The DSA and an array of activist non-profits oriented towards electoral and council-level reforms represented another pole of activity. While less active in the streets, this alliance fused respectable political activity—rallies, press conferences, and testimony at City Council—with flirtations with abolitionist frameworks. The Homes Not Handcuffs coalition emerged out of this scene; they won the 2019 camping ban rollback, spawned the autonomous mutual aid organization Street Forum, and recomposed briefly to defend the camping ban at the polls in 2021. Their organizing relied heavily on personal relationships with City Council “progressive” heavyweight and current Texas Representative Greg Casar and on a progressive political machine comprised of organizations like Grassroots Leadership and Workers Defense Project, which had won reforms at similar scales through the City Council in the 2010s.

STS oriented ourselves by drawing from political traditions and organizations that overlapped with these but were distinct from them. Many of the initial organizers were drawn from the local anarchist milieu, which had been working to draw links between different tendencies and organizations. One was the Peaceful Streets Project, which had emerged from right libertarian circles amidst the Occupy Wall Street cycle at the end of 2011, but had split left in the course of a decade of anti-police struggle. PSP served as the local Copwatch, filming police interactions and developing an aggressive interventionist style in which they named and shamed local cops, occasionally becoming personally known to the police themselves.

Another influence were members of the Autonomous Student Network, who had cut their teeth organizing at the University of Texas and had gone on to participate in the Peaceful Streets Project and the Occupy ICE movement that established an occupation outside a detention center in San Antonio; they also helped to start Street Forum. These organizers brought an experimental streak to organizing, with a willingness to take risks and say what only anarchists can say.

Contributing historical memory and serving an organic link to Austin’s homeless movement were members of The Challenger Street Newspaper, also born in 2011 out of the ashes of The Advocate, a long-running more traditionally NGO-style paper. From its beginnings, The Challenger was smaller and scrappier than the Advocate, with more will to participate politically in social movements. The Challenger published monthly issues with articles written mainly by homeless people in Austin, focusing on life on the streets of Austin, political commentary, poetry, and art. The Challenger had resuscitated the memory of Homer the Homeless Goose, the mascot of the Street People’s Advisory Council—a direct action organization of homeless Austinites in the 1980s who led occupations of vacant buildings and, famously, the downtown lake.

Along with contributions from other early members involved in anti-prison struggles and the Libertarian Socialist Caucus of the DSA (which was focused on mutual aid), these organizations helped build the political framework that STS used as we attempted to build an alternative pole, intervening in the fight to defend the camps. This enabled us to synthesize tactics and strategic insights from a variety of experiences. Coupled with insatiable demands and a hostile attitude to the state, that equipped us to punch above our weight.

The shelters were full.

A History of Displacement and Contestation

Now that we have set the stage in 2019, let’s back up to explore the history of homelessness in Austin and the movements combating it.

The City of Austin was established as a military maneuver intended to project burgeoning Anglophone power westward after Texan independence from Mexico in 1836. Settlers established a semicircle of forts to the west to defend the new capital from raiding Comanches and other Indigenous people. Austin’s famed Barton Springs are part of a chain of springs in Central Texas that had been in continuous use by Indigenous peoples for over 10,000 years; they appear in some Texas rock art. Military campaigns and raiding and surveying parties sought to drive Indigenous peoples from their lands throughout Texas. The city’s first camping ban excluded Indigenous peoples from camping inside city limits.

Slavery was an integral part of the economy of early Austin, with up to a third of its earliest recorded population comprised of enslaved Black people. White people who enslaved twenty people or more were known as “planters” and held special status. As a consequence of the boom-and-bust cycles of for-profit agriculture, planters often enslaved more people than they could put to work on the plantations that ringed the city. Consequently, many enslaved people worked and lived in the city instead of on plantations. They provided various urban services, remitting a percentage of their income to their enslavers.

Some elements of the ruling classes sought to target these Black people who were enslaved but living somewhat independently. They formed Vigilance Committees of private citizens to maintain white power in the districts where these people lived. Later, they demanded the establishment of a municipal police force so that the public would have to pay for the policing of Black people. This was one of the origins of what became the APD.

A continuing history of white supremacist violence: troopers playing a role in the sweeps targeting the houseless.

Another famously followed the Civil War some years later. With slavery abolished and the fighting over, freedmen and former Confederate soldiers arrived in the city alongside other poor whites. Black freedmen established communities—sometimes permitted on private land, but often squatting near creeks and in other undesirable or far-flung areas of town. To discipline these surplus populations, the city government proposed a police force. The Black Codes forced Black people who did not find employment to labor in conditions resembling slavery. Black work crews assembled that way played a major role in constructing Austin’s State Capitol.

Alongside the police, a series of city plans served to structure the racial order of the city. Following the official decree of segregation in 1928, slums comprising over ten percent of the town’s area were evicted. People who were renting or who did not have clear title to the land where they resided were displaced en masse through these “Slum Clearance Plans” and federally funded Urban Renewal programs, and the land was often turned over to state use (including the sites of the University of Texas, the state government, and the hospitals between Congress and the I-35 Freeway). These displacements served to impose a line between a Black and brown East Austin and a white West Austin. This segregationist project shaped the messy post-emancipation reality of scattered Freedmen’s towns and Mexican enclaves over the following 80 years.

According to Gus Bova, in the 1970s and 1980s, subsidized housing fell out of favor alongside a generalized crisis in manufacturing work. Across the country, people were being thrown out of industrial work while cheap housing was disappearing, and Austin was no exception. The local booms and busts in the housing construction market, which employed low-wage labor, contributed to this. Federal policy also began to support housing as a collateralized asset, both for big banks and consumers, seeing a hot real estate market as a sign of a healthy economy that bolsters consumer spending and debt. Periodically, this policy gets ahead of itself, spawning crises like the one in 2008—but even at the best of times, it inexorably raises housing costs for everyone while concentrating property in the hands of fewer and fewer landlords.

The city’s “Innovation Team” traces the beginning of NGO work intended to benefit the homeless to 1966, citing a charity’s pamphlet offering services to “transients” and “non-residents.” Bova and the “Innovation Team” both point to 1985 as a watershed year in which the city set up the first of many task forces to fight homelessness. Bova concludes that by 1985, the accumulation of crises in employment and housing had produced considerable homelessness in Austin.

Not long after, the Street People’s Advisory Council (SPAC) formed, bringing together rebels from the Task Force with politicized homeless people. Drawing lessons from actions against the Vietnam War, these activists purchased a goose which they publicly threatened to kill and eat, after first considering a swan donated to the city by a member of the local elite. After the goose drew the attention of an outrage-hungry press, they pardoned the goose and named him Homer. Homer and his human compatriots went on to lead occupation marches on abandoned buildings and the flotilla occupation of Town Lake.

Activist Molly Ivins, who camped out in protest of Austin’s 1996 Camping Ban, meets Homer the Homeless Goose.

The SPAC and Homer captured headlines, hearts, and minds for several years, helping to generate an activist milieu that included the Mad Housers (a collective of builders that constructed mobile shelters and the flotilla rafts that were used to occupy the lake) and the Blackland CDC (a neighborhood organization which co-organized the occupation of vacant houses being demolished by the University of Texas in east Austin). They operated as a part of nationwide movements, joining organizations like the National Homeless Union, the Houston Homeless Union, and others in coordinated campaigns, including one dedicated to takeovers of vacant housing.

They won some reforms, including increased shelter funding, the dedication of vacant housing to serve as transitional housing, and a decades-long detente on UT development of the Eastside; but the SPAC campaign was ultimately repressed. The APD consistently hounded the organizers; allegedly, so did other homeless people, and “animal rights” activists concerned for the well-being of the adventurous Homer. City officials played a role in repressing the flotilla protest, changing a “night-fishing” ordinance that allowed the legal occupation of the lake to create new restrictions that made it possible to seize the boats. Nonetheless, the story of Homer and the SPAC and their direct action served as inspiration for activists from the Challenger Street Newspaper to launch several efforts of their own throughout the 2010s.

The next major cycle of struggle emerged in response to Austin’s camping ban in the mid-1990s. Research by Gus Bova locates the impetus for the camping ban in activism by the Downtown Austin Alliance (DAA), a consortium of downtown business and land owners. According to Bova, the DAA was incorporated as a Business Improvement District, a quasi-governmental organization to which businesses pay special taxes to fund private security and political activity. Their first move was to organize “Downtown Rangers” who biked around downtown harassing homeless people and acting as the DAA’s private arm of the Austin Police Department, which supervised them.

Austinites protest the camping ban proposal at City Hall in 1996.

The DAA also began to organize for a camping ban, picking up model legislation from the American Association for Rights and Responsibilities—which shared white nationalist co-founder John Tanton with the anti-immigrant group Federation for American Immigration Reform. Though the ban passed easily in 1996, its passage led to a brief wave of campouts by housed people in protest. A year later, the city council was preparing to repeal it, as it had only served to shuffle people from place to place in the city and deeper into the woods. Amid pressure from the DAA, the council led by then Mayor Kirk Watson “compromised,” keeping the ban but establishing homeless services in downtown Austin. This led to the establishment of the Austin Resource Center for the Homeless (ARCH), which served as an anchor for similar services in the area. It also illustrates the connection between homeless services and policies that police and harm their clientele.

In addition to the camping ban, city police and administrators used their powers to harass homeless people and encampment communities. One example is captured vividly in the 1995 documentary Bouldin Creek Greenbelt Family, filmed by camp residents themselves as well as housed cable access volunteers. The film chronicles the daily life and communal practices of the camp, including a scene in which the residents grill burgers for more than a dozen people for dinner time. This pastoral peace is disrupted by cops on horseback who bark orders at the residents to vacate before sending heavy machinery to destroy their property and territory. The family is scattered about town with whatever possessions they can carry.

The Bouldin Greenbelt Family.

These practices of harassment and disruption met an opponent in the late 1990s in Leslie Cochran, a gender-defying homeless resident who, encountering repression upon moving to town, became a one-man army agitating against the police. Leslie’s crusade—which included city council appearances, elaborately painted signs protesting his treatment by APD, and a run for mayor—put him front and center in the popular imagination of Austin in the late 1990s and early 2000s. His legacy is complicated. His nonlinear, playful relationship with gender made him the butt of jokes about trans people and a celebrated spectacle of the Austin Weird. Many people forget that around his much gawked-at thong, his ass was often painted “Kiss this, APD.”

Alongside Leslie and the camping ban campout, other homeless organizing lacked the thread of direct action and independence that had characterized the SPAC. One such campaign was House the Homeless, established by legal aid worker Richard Troxell. Troxell took credit for creating the concept of the police Winnebago in Philly, and for the one-hour health exemption to the no-sit no-lie ordinance that followed the DAA’s campaign for the camping ban. Troxell, to his credit, acknowledged the roles of both the wage system and the police in creating and perpetuating homelessness, but followed these ideas into increasingly wonkish policy proposals. Also on the scene was the Austin Advocate, which successfully organized the first street newspaper with homeless vendors, including Leslie, staged prominently around Austin. While the Advocate relied heavily on these vendors, the vendors had little role in the writing or publishing process.

A split in the last months of the Advocate led Val Romness, a longtime producer of homeless media involved in the Austin Cable Access scene that released “Bouldin Creek Greenbelt Family,” to establish the Challenger in early 2011 with Advocate vendor Fred Pettit after the Advocate had ceased meaningful production. The Challenger began operations without nonprofit status or funding, operating more horizontally, though helmed consistently by Romness. This openness, along with creative participation by local anarchists, led to increased ties between the paper and radical milieus, with early collaborations with Monkeywrench Books, Austin Anarchist Study Group members, Treasure City Thrift, and remnants of the then-dissipating Rhizome Collective. In late 2011, these relationships helped to foster the Challenger’s intervention in the local iteration of the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement.

When the revolutionary wave that took shape in Tunisia and spread to Tahrir Square in Egypt reached Austin in the form of the Occupy Wall Street movement, the results were mixed. The first General Assemblies were announced by a distinctly Austin mixture of white yogis and libertarians, who hoped for a non-confrontational interpretation of “Occupy.” In contrast to the tent encampments popping up in other cities, they proposed a 24-hour protest at Austin City Hall with sleeping quarters in an electric taxi warehouse several miles away. The ad-hoc leaders cited the camping ban as the main reason they chose this tack, not wanting to break the law and burn bridges with the police, whom they regarded as part of the “99%.”

Challenger Newspaper members saw themselves as a part of this eclectic upswell of the downwardly mobile and called for an alternative encampment called Tent City across the river from City Hall to bring attention to their own issues, including the 1%-driven camping ban. Organizers attempted to rally support from Occupy Austin (OA) participants for a sunset confrontation with police, but APD moved in early, dispersing the camp before it could gather steam. Tent City organizers and anarchists relocated the tents to City Hall and set them up, confronting several more conservative members of OA. Tent City and the Challenger made a bold claim for autonomous action early on with the support of an OWS founder, the late, great David Graeber, who was in town visiting his girlfriend and happened to save a toddler occupant from an overzealous opponent of the tents.

Through shrewd maneuvering and the opposition of a roused crowd, the ones with the tents won a standoff with APD, establishing precedent for a more robust occupation and the participation of the homeless movement. As the occupation wore on, more and more of those in the occupation at City Hall were homeless, sleeping at the site overnight, though usually on the limestone stairs rather than setting up more tents. This led to tensions within the Occupy Austin movement, as some participants grumbled that their movement had been “coopted” by the poor. Against this tendency, and alongside organizing by participants of color, a more radical streak emerged, making space for a diverse array of voices and actions. The “anniversary” event in 2012 was led by Challenger/Tent City-oriented occupiers. The Challenger had moved its weekly meetings to the occupation and was organizing within it through the Ending Homelessness Working Group (EHWG). On the first birthday of Occupy Austin, the EHWG, the OA General Assembly, and the Challenger called for a march on the City-owned vacant Home Depot building with the intention of occupying it, taking inspiration from OWS and Occupy Oakland.

The march on the Home Depot was unsuccessful, but led to several other attempts to occupy other vacant lots around Austin. Homeless occupiers established a camp, also called Tent City, in South Austin, which focused mostly on recreating daily camp life rather than advancing political conflict. Though it was intended as an experiment, the camp hosted a small group of members mostly focused on avoiding the cops, not unlike other camps. It gradually disbanded after several evictions, without the sort of flashpoint of camp defense that might have re-politicized it. Its fizzling led to questions about what sort of organizational capacity successful camp defense would require, questions later consciously taken up by Stop the Sweeps Austin.

Tents line the trail along the Colorado River on the south edge of downtown Austin.

Surrounding the City from Below

From 2019-2022, the camps that surrounded and besieged the Capitol practiced an ungoverned and unregulated form of life that violated the order of capital. Recognizing the camps as forms of insurgent self-organization on the part of the dispossessed, we sought to defend them and expand their potential in the face of attacks from a wide array of political forces. This runs counter to the logic of specialization and legibility that typically characterizes activist campaigns, which often aim to represent the dispossessed as a distinct constituency (“the homeless”) through demands and negotiation on the terrain of policy, recruiting to an organization to negotiate on their behalf, and cultivating a specialized minority of “directly-impacted” activists. Instead, we emphasized the defense, generalization, and expansion of forms of insurgent self-organization that are illegible to politicians, social service providers, and activists alike. Where much of the NGO left saw a lack of organization, demands, interests, and representatives, we saw an abundance of potential in the camps themselves.

We did not romanticize camps as the revolutionary communes-to-come. Different camps had different cultures and different levels of cohesion. In some camps, people took lots of responsibility for each other, checking in to ensure others were fed, warm, and healthy, with those taking responsibility for assisting others and mediating conflicts forming an organic leadership. In other cases, big personalities declared themselves leaders, with mixed reactions from other residents ranging from dismissiveness to outright hostility. Some camps’ internal dynamics were defined by competition and hostility, with fights and thefts common as people merely tolerated living alongside each other. People would often move between camps as a consequence of conflicts with other residents or as a means to seek different conditions in regards to drug use, fights, noise, pests, or other issues. Recognizing the camps as self-organized phenomena means taking all these contradictory realities into account while still affirming the self-activity at their core as a response to a shared condition of dispossession.

Whatever the internal dynamics of each camp, their occupation of public space constituted an attack on the logic of property and capitalist development. Land belonging to the city or state government was taken over by forms of organization beyond their control and put to unauthorized and unregulated uses. While privately held property was never directly taken over, the public presence of the dispossessed rendered class conflict explicit and impeded development. The proliferation of camps in close proximity to sites of commerce or luxury apartments made these places less appealing to the comparatively wealthy, who complained about the numerous signs of the dispossessed living their lives in public—including accumulated survival supplies, the buildup of waste from humans living without infrastructure, and public expressions of mental and emotional crisis and other things that those with houses have the luxury of doing in private. A public homeless population coming into contact with students, tourists, consumers, and investors threatened to make Austin an unattractive location for new festivals, conferences, companies, and residents.

The proliferation of camps from 2019 to 2022 was an impediment to development and gentrification in Austin, alongside and overlapping with system-wide shocks including the COVID-19 pandemic, the economic downturn, and the George Floyd Rebellion. While the camps are sources of power that impact the political and economic terrain around them, they are not properly political: they do not make demands, they are not legible forms of organization or constituents that can be represented. In recent years, others have used the term ante-political to refer to forces that precede or exceed the traditional sphere of politics. This framework helps us understand the power of the camps and the nature of the political attack on them.

The attack on the camps and on the unhoused in general was carried out according to two distinct logics of governance. One is outright exterminationist, its aim being to socially cleanse undesirable populations by dispersing the camps and driving people out of town or into jail cells. The other is managerial, the aim being to regulate the homeless and precarious through services and facilities administered by the state, social service providers, or private and non-profit landlords. The former attacks the camps for simply existing; the latter aims to subjugate their ungoverned activity to managed and profitable social services. Both attack them for violating capitalist order. The same institutions can make use of both logics, like when Governor Greg Abbott opened a Texas Department of Transportation parking lot—now known as Camp Esperanza—as a “shelter” to regulate the homeless and legitimize his sweeps, or when the city government used sweeps to enforce the newly reinstated camping ban in 2022.

A hole in the fence at the sanctioned camp opened by Governor Greg Abbot on a Texas Department of Transportation lot in 2019.

The mainstream movement to repeal the camping ban framed the struggle as a conflict between conservatives and progressives: Greg Abbott and the reactionaries of Take Back Austin on one side, Austin’s social movements, city council, and social service providers on the other. This battle was encapsulated in the ongoing Twitter war between Abbott and Adler over the camping ban repeal. In reality, both the state and city governments depended on the sweeps to manage homelessness, only according to distinct logics. Before the repeal of the camping ban, the city government had been sporadically using sweeps to clear camps, and they kept their own sweep schedule parallel to the state government’s sweeps under the highways. When sweeps resumed after pausing for the pandemic, the city government had taken over all of the sweeps from the State. This shared dependence was most explicitly laid bare when the city government swept the ARCH camp the same day the state government began its sweeps of the highways.

Re-framing the camps as an ante-political insurgent force can give us a clearer picture of the competing forces that aim to attack this form of insurgency, enabling us to move away from some of the limitations of activist frameworks. Reformist activist approaches can lead us into the trap of allying with the managerial logic of governance in the name of pragmatism, as seen in groups like The Other Ones Foundation (TOOF), Austin Mutual Aid (AMA), and Little Petal Alliance (LPA). More radical activist approaches can end up fetishizing the thinking and activity of the activists themselves, creating organizations that exist for no sake but to reproduce themselves or insular scenes that become disconnected from any material force. Rejecting both of these errors, we believe that focusing on our relationship to existing forms of insurgent self-organization can provide a counterweight to both reformist managerialism and radical impotence.

While Stop the Sweeps used activist tactics, we did so while understanding the insurgency of the camps as primary, rather than our own activity. Faced with the practical question of how to join forces with the camps and mount a defense against sweeps, we recruited and mobilized from within activist milieus, and we used activist tactics such as creating media, pushing limited demands (but not policy), rallies, home and office demos, and call-ins as part of campaigns against specific targets. Similarly, after Abbott opened what eventually became Camp Esperanza, we maintained an early presence to build relationships, trace the fault lines, and conspire with the residents to undermine this new form of management. When the COVID-19 pandemic created a crisis, we participated in shaping the camp support infrastructure that filled this gap, temporarily helping sustain the camps while developing new forms of collaboration with them. But we did so with a determination to bolster the defense of the camps, not seeing these things as ends in themselves, nor claiming to “organize” the homeless or integrate the camps or their residents into the terrain of political representation.

Now, on the other side of this movement arc, we feel it is important to re-articulate this position, which may have been forgotten amid the frenzy of service-oriented mutual aid, activist infighting, and reacting to our enemies’ offensives.

Governor Greg Abbott, scumbag.

Asymmetrical Conflict against the Infrastructure of Oppression

Informed by the tactical sensibility emerging through the last two decades of struggle—the port shutdowns during Occupy, the highway takeovers during Black Lives Matter protests, the targeting of ICE and prison contractors, and other struggles that we have participated in or learned from—Stop the Sweeps understood power as a question of infrastructure and logistics. Decision-making bodies are largely empty political theaters carrying out the will of dominant social forces—be those reactionary populist movements or factions of capitalists, non-profits, or police. Their emptiness makes demonstrations at the well-guarded halls of power ineffectual. The real power in this world is in the infrastructure that is used to administer and maintain this civilization; a decision to carry out sweeps can only be enforced if there are workers, trucks, and money that can be mobilized to that purpose. Infrastructures can be vulnerable to pressure, and this makes it a strategic site for potential pressure and direct action.

We understood that City Hall and Abbott would never willingly stop the sweeps. Instead, once the state government started conducting sweeps in November 2019, we paid attention to who was conducting them. The sweeps were carried out by a work crew driving a few contractor trucks and overseen by a couple supervisors directly from the Texas Department of Transportation. The police were not actively removing people’s belongings; they served as a passive backup force that intervened only to suppress unrest or resistance. They were largely hands-off with us, allowing us to be in the camps as we filmed, harassed the work crew, and talked to residents. We noticed the same dynamic when the Austin Public Works Department carried out sweeps in November 2019 along other public easements with a different contractor’s name on the truck.

A group of contract workers throw away belongings at a sweep under a highway overpass.

Digging through city and state contracts, we traced a whole web of contractors. We discovered that the city and state both contracted through WorkQuest, a central contracting agency offering services and products and employing disabled people. WorkQuest, in turn, contracted out to other agencies: EPSI for the state sweeps and Relief Enterprises for the city sweeps. Sometimes these subcontractors also recruited labor from temporary staffing agencies like Pacesetters or received people doing “community service” through Downtown Austin Community Court. Sometimes the work crews themselves consisted of other homeless people, though some we met ended up leaving because they couldn’t stand to participate in oppressing other people in the same position as them.

Once we uncovered the contractors, we saw the WorkQuest contract as a strategic vulnerability. Our theory was that if there was enough pressure to make contractors back out or make the sweeps more costly, it would diminish the political will to carry them out. We hoped that if WorkQuest dropped out, it would impair both the City and State from doing sweeps. We identified the phone numbers of WorkQuest employees, the locations of offices, and the addresses of executives; we used these for targeted phone zaps, a home demo, and a guerrilla fliering action at the WorkQuest store. This strategy draws a lot from the “tertiary targeting” model used in the Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty campaign and more recently in the Stop Cop City movement. While the COVID-19 pandemic interrupted our focus on WorkQuest, we learned months afterwards that they had dropped the contract in March 2020 due to our pressure.

A home demo.

Unfortunately, WorkQuest dropping the contract did not stop the sweeps. As the city government took over the sweeps in the fall of 2020, WorkQuest passed off the contract directly to Relief Enterprises; we had only removed the middleman. Relief Enterprises had fewer physical sites to target; we had little luck finding a truck lot where we could mobilize a blockade or some other collective action. The few locations we did find appeared to be shared with other businesses in industrial parks, and the vehicles appeared to be dispersed between a few sites rather than concentrated in a single lot. Much of our energy targeting them was directed into call-in campaigns to City Hall when their contract came up for renewal, or car demos targeting the Mayor and City Council members. Beyond the car demos, we lacked effective ways to mobilize groups of people offensively during the height of the pandemic, and our energy was tied up in other initiatives like the camp support network.

From 2020 to 2022, we succeeded in using these methods to win concessions that softened the sweeps. The authorities let people keep their tents and belongings, permitting them to name what was and was not trash and to remain in their camps during the sweeps; the City tried to frame them as progressive “clean-ups” to appease critics. While they continued throw away furniture, mattresses, structures, and temporarily unattended belongings—and we continued to push back on each of those fronts—these sweeps were a far cry from the early Texas Department of Transportation sweeps that forced people to move all their belongings across the highway or lose everything.

All these advances were undone when Prop B, a reactionary referendum initiative spearheaded by local anti-homeless forces with Save Austin Now, reinstated the camping ban and the sweeps returned as a force of devastating displacement. Since we had tied up so much of our energy in pressuring City Council alongside initiatives like the camp support network, we had not built up the forces we needed to take the fight directly to the sweeps infrastructure once the political terrain was closed off to us. By the time Prop B came down, the movement was already declining, and it was too late to reorient towards a new strategic framework. When we got started, we had been critical of Homes Not Handcuffs for only pushing the policy front without building the capacity to defend that victory against the inevitable reactionary backlash. In our pursuit of political leverage on the sweeps contract, we fell into a similar trap: we had not built up the power to defend the gains we had made against an inevitable reaction in the political terrain.

In our experience, an infrastructural understanding of power also opened offensive paths for us to avoid getting locked into head-on, symmetrical conflicts with better-resourced adversaries. It does not usually make sense to attempt to meet our enemy’s repressive forces head on with greater numbers or force—whether in a defensive attempt to hold a space against a siege or an offensive attempt to besiege the guarded fortresses of our enemies (City Hall, the Capitol, downtown). While there are conditions under which such confrontations are strategic, in general, we have found that if a movement’s strategy is defined around pursuing those, this will exhaust the movement, incur defeats, and reduce it to largely reactive activity. An asymmetrical approach instead considers where our adversaries are weak, how to stretch them thin by going where they are unprepared, and finding pressure points that maximize impact—such as the infrastructure undergirding a project. This enables a movement to take the initiative, forces its adversaries to respond from a position of weakness, and creates the conditions to win victories and mobilize greater forces.

We learned some of these lessons the hard way in camp defense. While the initial defense of the ARCH was inspiring for stopping a sweep head on, it also illustrated the difficult of repeating such a victory: our adversaries could come back at any time, and being ready to stop them on short notice would have required an unsustainable level of vigilance and capacity for rapid response. Similarly, the weekly schedule of the highway sweeps meant that one day’s victory could be swept away by the work crew’s return the next week. By pivoting to an asymmetrical conflict model, targeting WorkQuest with pressure at places we weren’t expected, we opened up new fronts and took the initiative, acting on our own schedule rather than responding to the sweeps schedule.

The camp outside of the Austin Resource Center for the Homeless (right) and its late-night removal by city workers armed with a mechanical claw (left).

This does not mean that movements should abandon defensive fights, but that we should shift our approach to them. Asymmetrical approaches de-emphasize holding terrain at all costs, while recognizing it as essential. Rather than an all-or-nothing fight, defending terrain becomes a question of maximizing the costs for our opponents, minimizing our own losses, increasing combativeness and offensive opportunities, and rebuilding or seizing new terrain after the siege. Even when our movement was smaller, our efforts were strongest when they balanced tactical, defensive retreats with counteroffensives against the infrastructure of the sweeps.

We continued to maintain a presence at sweeps, where we aimed to maximize delays, build connections and courage to support resistance in the camps, and help people rebuild afterwards. We knew that the sweeps operated according to a tight schedule, and that substantial delays along their route would either force them to come back another day, delay a sweep until the following week, or impact their obligations to other contracts. We reasoned that any delays we could force might give some relief to those further down the schedule who would get passed over that week, and that delays would drain more money and labor out of the contract. We also helped people to replace the tents and other survival gear that they had lost in sweeps in order to minimize the impact on people’s lives and ensure that the camps could persist.

Employing this strategy, we achieved a couple major victories when entire camps resisted the sweeps, refusing to move or harassing the sweeps crews to slow them down. Some of these moments of resistance emerged spontaneously; others only after sustained efforts building direct relationships that gave us a basis of trust and courage to act alongside camp residents. Based on internal emails from Public Works, we know that our presence was a major nuisance for them. Eventually, they cracked down on our ability to mess with the sweeps from within the camps by enforcing a “work zone” rule allowing them to arrest people for trespassing while a sweep was ongoing.

An early graphic used by Stop the Sweeps to orient new volunteers to the wide range of ways to engage a sweep.

By the end of the sweeps defense movement cycle, many of these lessons had been forgotten or had not spread widely enough, or we simply lacked the capacity to act on them. We had lost the ability to put pressure on the infrastructure of the sweeps or to turn the conflict into an asymmetrical one rather than a head-on clash. By 2022, due to the enforcement of the work zone rules, sweeps watch crews were unable to do much more than bear witness to the suffering of others or help them move their belongings. At a moment when the movement was declining, some tried to mobilize larger groups to resist each sweep head on, but these groups never really materialized. Actions like the City Hall occupation, while politically important in other ways, remained focused on targeting the symbolic halls of power rather than the material infrastructure of the sweeps. There was one small appearance at the home of the Relief Enterprises CEO, but it was far less forceful than the 2020 home demo against WorkQuest.

While it likely would not have stopped the post-Prop B sweeps, it remains an open question how returning to an understanding of the infrastructural nature of power and a strategy of asymmetrical conflict might have opened new avenues for the movement when it was facing decline. What if sweeps watch didn’t just invite people to bear witness to devastation, but converted camp defense into highway blockades that stopped the circulatory system of the city? Such a strategy could have employed the car demo tactic as well. What if the occupation of City Hall had targeted the offices and homes of sweeps contractors, or other politically and economically important parts of the city beyond the trap of downtown?

There are no guarantees, only possibilities and questions to bear in mind in future fights. But it is essential to recognize that for now, our enemies are much bigger and better equipped than us, and we are strongest when we target their weak points rather than being drawn into direct clashes.

Posters left behind after a small 2021 home demo at the home of the CEO of Relief Enterprises, the contractor responsible for the sweeps since 2020.

Movement Polarities

One of our hypotheses, tested and refined through our experience in Stop the Sweeps, is that what we call social movements can be better understood as an open field of forces, each engaged with others to various degrees in relationships of collaboration and contestation, affinity and hostility, coalition and competition. What we describe as a “movement” is an emergent culmination of the interplay of these forces, irreducible to any sum of its component parts. Distinct actors within this field might be understood as poles—rallying points around which cohere a set of ideas, strategies, and ways of acting. These poles exert forces within the field of the movement, attracting new people and connections, pushing back on others, and spreading or clashing with other ideas within the terrain. Some poles may be able to affect those around them through their actions, transmitting ideas or causing shifts in the field of possibilities; other poles may find themselves isolated or ineffective, unable to act on their own terms or influence others.

This view of movements as a field of forces and polarities clarifies a few things. First, it directs our focus not just to what an individual or a group is but to what it can do—how it affects the field of the movement and others in it. This emphasis on doing can help us let go of anxieties around recruiting people to join our organizations, focusing us instead on ways to spread autonomous and militant ways of acting. Influential poles can generate powerful proposals, models, or invitations to act that spread across crews, organizations, and networks. Furthermore, we can better understand the lines of transmission between groups, factions, and ideologies in movements through this framework. Rather than perceiving distinct sects (as implied by the term sectarian), we can discern how the force exerted by a pole can overflow the boundaries of a particular organization, or how people and groups themselves can move between different poles of a movement through their activity.

Using this framework, we can perceive and act upon the possibilities latent in open-ended situations. We can see how these situations emerge as organic reactions to flashpoints of oppressive force; we can grasp how a protest movement can reach a scale and intensity that escape the control of those who “organized” it to become more potent and infectious. Perceptive and strategic militants can find the openings in such moments to contribute in ways that help to shape the outcome—forging new relationships, advancing new strategies or tactics, and enabling greater coordination, self-organization, or escalation. In Stop the Sweeps, this was one of our greatest strengths, whether we were engaging with a sweep, the waves of activity in the course of the George Floyd Uprising, the Abbott encampments and city COVID hotels, or rallies and occupations initiated by other groups.

Stop the Sweeps emerged to fill a gap in the existing movement. While the Homes Not Handcuffs (HnH) coalition had secured the legislative victory of repealing the camping ban, they had failed to build the political force necessary to defend their win. So, when the city government responded to a wave of reaction a few months later by sweeping the ARCH at the same time that the state government cracked down with sweeps under the highway, the non-profit coalition was caught flat-footed. They scheduled a meeting at Street Forum the weekend before the sweeps to plan a response that would focus on legal observing, documentation, media campaigns, and continued legislative advocacy. The non-profit coalition kept most of its focus on Abbott’s exterminationist rhetoric, drawing no attention to the city’s or NGO’s use of sweeps to control the unhoused.

The cell that became Stop the Sweeps began as a group of friends who started showing up in the mornings at the camp outside the ARCH in anticipation of the sweep. The timing of these sweeps was left vague and constantly delayed; but keeping this rhythm for two weeks led to a series of connections with people at that camp and some strategic conversations among the handful of us. When the announcement finally came that the ARCH sweep would occur on the same day as Abbott’s sweep of the camps under the highway, we had already laid the groundwork for launching Stop the Sweeps.

A Homes Not Handcuffs rally at the Texas Governor’s Mansion in 2019, protesting Abbott’s threats to sweep camps.

When we attended the Homes Not Handcuffs response meeting and noticed that their plan did not include any attention on the sweeps at the ARCH, nor plans for direct resistance to the sweeps, we decided to break out into our own group adjacent to their meeting. At that meeting, we developed our own plan to mobilize a combative presence at the ARCH. While we could not stretch ourselves to mobilize on multiple fronts, we retained some presence at the highway sweeps to support any organic resistance to them. We took the name Stop the Sweeps—both a demand and a form of action—and put out our own call to action on our nascent socials.

Rather than attempting to convince the HnH coalition to adopt a more confrontational strategy (or calling them out for their failure to do so), we identified an opening in the movement where we could act and filled it. We sidestepped direct conflict with the non-profit wing of the movement in favor of opening up space for autonomous action alongside the non-profit’s strategy. Seizing the opportunity to mobilize where the rest of the movement did not have a presence was advantageous in this regard, and helped avoid conflicts over “hijacking” or about escalating beyond the risk tolerance of HnH. Similarly, while those of us at the highway camps communicated with HnH forces on the ground, we made separate decisions to support unhoused people planning to resist the sweeps while the others focused on their strategy.

Making our own plan enabled us to connect with other scattered forces, both within and outside the movement, that had been looking for more combative forms of engagement. In the days leading up to the ARCH sweep, we connected with members of the DSA-LSC who were involved in HnH and hungry to employ direct action tactics against the sweeps. They were able to leverage some of the contact lists that the coalition had not utilized, using email blasts and phone banking to turn people out to the ARCH. Through our existing connections, we were also able to pull in friends from anti-fascist and anti-police organizing.

Consequently, a small group without its own base was able to bring together about thirty people on a Monday. We temporarily prevented the destruction of the camp at the ARCH—at least, until they came back at 4 am.

From its inception, Stop the Sweeps existed in this delicate balance between maintaining connections to other actors in the movement and acting on our own terms. We attended the meetings that Homes Not Handcuffs hosted and maintained lines of communication with people in those groups; at the same time, we planned our own ways to engage on the ground, created our own narrative, and called our own actions. Calling our own action at the sweep that Homes Not Handcuffs had decided not to respond to was one example of this; mobilizing to support unhoused people who planned to resist the sweeps under the highways was another.

Homes Not Handcuffs held one more meeting after the sweeps started. We attended and made up most of the “sweeps defense” breakout group; the other two groups were focused on policy advocacy around criminalization and housing. We ultimately absorbed the sweeps defense group into our efforts; we later learned that the other groups never got off the ground after that meeting. The consolidation of this pole and its rapid growth gave us the momentum to transition into confronting the Texas Department of Transportation’s weekly sweep schedule after November 4. As the only group still actively following, resisting, and shaping the narrative around the sweeps, we were able to shift the movement towards a more radical position.

Mercenaries destroying the homes of the houseless.

A few months into our work together, we had started to develop relationships with a wider range of groups. Seeking to increase the coordination and strategic intelligence of the movement, we initiated a closed assembly called The Hive. We framed it as an assembly that we were curating to be focused on shared action and reflection, explicitly not a decision-making space. The space was organized around three central principles: priority to grassroots, autonomous groups over non-profit and political organizations; a commitment to not undermining the work of other groups; and a commitment to not collaborating with the police against other wings of the movement. This last principle was intentionally crafted to make space for groups organized at state-run camps, which navigated complex relationships with the police and security that governed them, while holding a line to insulate the rest of the movement.

The Hive brought together a wide range of factions including non-profits, self-organized homeless collectives, the street newspaper, DSA, mutual aid groups, tenant organizers, and harm reduction groups. It served as a venue for communication and cross-pollination across different groups and fronts of the struggle. At various points, the assembly grappled with questions related to squatting and takeover schemes, pushing back against policing in the COVID hotels, and forming locally-rooted support and defense groups for camps. Many of the relationships that formed through this assembly came to form the initial core of the Camp Support network.

Building on the relationships formed in the Hive, we were positioned to bring groups together to build out the Camp Support mutual aid network after existing social services shut down following the outbreak of COVID-19. One comrade connected us with a church kitchen; the local Food Not Bombs chapter provided know-how and a network of cooks to start sending out meals. As we met more groups after the George Floyd Uprising, we were able to help them connect to this work in addition to sweeps watch, bringing together a dozen or so small organizations offering everything from harm reduction to resources for sex workers. At first, the success of this network underlined the painfully slow response of the city government to the public health crisis.

This was complicated when city resources finally caught up months into the pandemic and approached the network about using our volunteers to shuttle its prepared meals. The network accepted this deal, opting to use them as we pleased and to build what we hoped would be fighting relationships with camp residents. This part of the mutual aid work remained underdeveloped; the volunteers who brought food only showed up to fight alongside people at sweeps on rare occasions. Camp support coordinators did use their access to city food program meetings to pester city bureaucrats into putting pressure on the agencies running sweeps, and this was one prong of a successful effort to defeat most of the sweeps during the initial months of the pandemic.

Our ability to act decisively and maintain a wide range of complex relationships with other formations depended in large part on the high degree of trust and shared context within the core group of Stop the Sweeps, which emerged from our long-term relationships and experience throwing down together. The strong connections among our core group enabled us to take bold action and gave us the emotional resilience to engage in more complicated coalitional relationships with tact and grace. We had space to voice and think through critiques of other formations and strategies and to reflect on our relationships to other groups despite our differences. This helped release pressure and avoid unnecessary direct conflict.

As time went on and some of our initial crew stepped back, we started to bring in new people we met through our activity. We developed a set of principles and a process for onboarding people, emphasizing experience working together and a sensibility that resonated with our principles and strategy. We avoided rushing to recruit people, and emphasized the many ways to get involved in specific forms of activity that did not require formally joining Stop the Sweeps—such as planning specific actions, coming to the Hive, and coordinating around sweeps defense. This process helped to expand our crew and bring in new energy at crucial moments, especially when the movement was beginning to scale up and we encountered a number of other fellow travelers.

This also meant that the group composition slowly shifted so that there were fewer long-term, high-context relationships in the group. Eventually, many of us only knew each other from the movement against sweeps. As the latter phases of the movement brought more intense conflicts and we encountered new limits, members of our crew responded differently to these situations. Some members pushed to engage more directly in the intra-movement conflicts, such as by making demands of Austin Mutual Aid (AMA).

Unhoused people and activists rally at an encampment set up at City Hall by Little Petal Alliance in response to the passage of the new camping ban.

When Little Petal Alliance (LPA) launched an occupation at City Hall in response to Prop B, our group was divided in new ways. Some members saw the occupation as an open-ended situation full of potential and self-organization that exceeded any one group, and wanted to engage with it; others were wary due to a combination of tactical critiques and legitimate criticisms of the harmful and opportunistic behaviors of members of LPA. When the camping ban ushered in the demolition of camps, some members pushed for more urgent activity and took out their frustrations on other participants in the movement. Most devastatingly, this led to a split with one of the unhoused activists who was a founding member. Our experience demonstrates the need to remain attuned to how the changing composition of a group over time, alongside shifting movement conditions, can change the forms of trust and collaboration that are possible, even if it nominally remains organized around the same principles and strategy.

Understanding our activity in terms of the constitution of poles allows us to evaluate our relationships with other formations on the basis of what they make possible or foreclose. Relationships with other groups—even those with whom we have significant differences when it comes to our orientation towards demands, reform, the state, or other institutions—can open up opportunities to leverage information, increase our ability to circulate proposals and influence other factions of the movement, and produce openings for creative forms of activity. If we understand the porous, shifting, open-ended nature of all groups, we can see how they might transform in the course of a movement. Cultivating relationships with groups that work with the state while maintaining our own irreducible antagonism towards it can create new tensions, reshaping the demands of other wings of the movement and making it more difficult for the authorities to divide a movement into those they can co-opt and those they can repress.

The central consideration in such relationships is to keep the initiative and always maintain autonomy. Relationships can also have the effect of stifling possibilities rather than generating them; we can stifle our own initiatives for fear of upsetting other factions, end up tailing other formations, or become absorbed in the efforts of other groups. Maintaining the initiative within the field of movement polarity moves us away from the habit of merely critiquing other groups’ activities that we disagree with, so that we focus instead on how to develop and spread our own ideas and models for action as we collaborate and compete with others for influence.

These relationships require minimum standards of respect. Active hostility or denouncements, undermining others’ efforts, collaborating with the state against other wings of the movement, or acting as an extension of state, politician, or capitalist influence over the movement often precludes such relationships. Such dynamics have often defined the relationship between autonomous groups and other factions of movements, whether reformist, non-profit, or authoritarian left. However, it is not inevitable that these relationships must always be antagonistic. An understanding of movement polarity can identify the avenues for collaboration beyond simplistic ideological categories, so that autonomous groups can avoid becoming trapped in a self-fulfilling prophecy of conflict with everyone else.

Our relationships with Homes Not Handcuffs enabled us to receive and leverage certain forms of information regarding the motivations of city council members and the dynamics between them, upcoming meeting items and policy changes, and pressure points and information about the effects of our actions on the departments enacting the sweeps. We were also able to produce scandals as a means of shaping the demands that HnH brought to City Council, which enabled us to exert influence on the negotiations without participating in them. At the same time, we were able to continue agitating against the city departments and social service providers that the coalition negotiated with.

This framework also helped us to locate our work in this particular campaign in relation to the broader radical milieu in Austin. In 2019, the organizing terrain was complicated for autonomous organizers. Most organizing was dominated by non-profit organizations, the vast majority of which were hostile to more radical activity. There was a range of progressive non-profit and community advocacy organizations that had more radical political ideas, but whose activity was mostly oriented around policy advocacy and rallies at City Hall. Within the radical milieu, the Maoist milieu surrounding Red Guards Austin (RGA) had absorbed many of the people looking for more militant activity who were dissatisfied with the community organizer scene. As a consequence of sectarian conflict with other movement organizations, abusive authoritarian dynamics, and reckless disregard for their members’ well-being, Red Guards Austin had poisoned the well for militant activity. It was hard to engage in militant organizing, criticize non-profits, or even to wear a mask without being accused of being part of Red Guards.

An encampment at City Hall.

Part of our goal was to use our activity in Stop the Sweeps to open the field for more activity beyond the influence of the non-profit organizations and the Maoists. We developed a way of acting that emphasized autonomous principles without explicitly flagging ourselves as anarchists. We experimented with ways to push the tactical repertoire of the movement without entering into direct conflict with other factions or alienating potential collaborators. Many of us were intimately familiar with the caustic effect that the Maoists specifically had on movements that they entered and knew that we could not maintain our autonomy or initiative while working with them. We also knew that they thrived on direct conflict and polemics against other groups. So when they made attempts to gain inroads into the movement, we simply ignored them and did our own thing.

There is a long history of conflict between the autonomous factions of various movements and those oriented towards reformist negotiations or party organization building. In some cases, the strategies of autonomous militants contribute to this dynamic, particularly when they create a situation in which the contradictions between groups are resolved through a simple sorting of ideological or tactical alignments. Call-outs and polemics, direct conflict with reformist or “less militant” factions of a movement, and filtering all political allegiances through a rigid ideological filter can mirror liberal denunciations, collaboration with the state, and peace policing.

Ideally, the framework of movement polarity offers an experimental path beyond this impasse, though it can challenge assumptions about the role of ideology. How correct our critiques are will make no difference if they only result in us constructing isolated cliques instead of developing the ability to intervene in complex situations. Our hypothesis is that positioning ourselves within these contradictions rather than forcing them towards a simple resolution can open up generative possibilities. We hope others will test and refine this.

Using and Being Used: On Media and Communications Tools

We were media savvy yet media critical. This is rare in a milieu divided between anarchists who oppose any engagement with media on principle and anarchists whose primary form of communication is the Instagram-Infographic-Industrial-Complex.

We used social media as a tool to develop our own narrative and analysis of the sweeps. Every week, we would get practice writing reports on the previous week’s sweeps—drawing attention to their cruelty and to the growth of the resistance. This regular rhythm helped us document the sweeps at a point when most of the media coverage had dried up along with the attention of the larger organizations. As our posts spread—sometimes, ironically, due to reactionary hate comments boosting our performance in the algorithm—we were able to invite more people to join us in sweeps watch. For those who wouldn’t or couldn’t join, combining these posts with calls for phone and email blasts offered ways to enable spectators to participate.

At the same time, we strategically engaged traditional news outlets. We had access to some media contacts thanks to Homes Not Handcuffs, and we mobilized a number of these outlets to cover the ARCH sweep and create political pressure around it. In the process, we developed a number of relatively friendly media connections who helped to circulate our narrative and occasionally follow up on reports and questions that helped to inform our campaigns.

Austin police move to arrest a homeless Stop the Sweeps member who set up a protest tent outside of the downtown homeless shelter after the camp there was evicted.

At a certain point, we were able to use an offensive media strategy to produce scandal. Whenever we caught the sweeps crew on camera in an egregious act—throwing out water during the height of summer, destroying camping supplies in violation of their stated “clean-up” policies, or harassing and threatening sweeps watch volunteers—we could circulate the media and draw negative attention. Sometimes, this alone was enough to exert pressure on the higher-ups, and we saw the crews act differently on subsequent sweeps.

Sometimes, we took this further. We would generate a scandal, then tap one of our friendly media contacts to reach out to the relevant city department or company for comment. The department, trying to maintain public legitimacy, would make some minor concession to something we were demanding. The journalist would tweet out this response and, without waiting for a formal article, we would seize on this as new “policy.” Then we would launch a new set of demands, always pushing the envelope. We did not treat these demands as points of negotiation, but as discursive trenches—as soon as our enemies made a concession, we would dig new a new trench to keep pushing them further, ensuring they remained on the back foot. Combined with phone zaps and on-the-ground resistance, this approach de-fanged the sweeps for most of 2020.

Whether we were publishing our own reports or engaging with journalists, our strength came from developing our own strategy for engaging each of these media forms rather than letting them impose their logic on us. We used social media to circulate report-backs, but we avoided using it for discourse or petty conflict; we did not subordinate our political activities to the pursuit of followers or engagement. Similarly, we used corporate media to circulate our analysis and to produce scandals for our opponents while refusing to get mired in concerns about optics or respectability. Releasing a press release for a home demo was a way of seeking publicity on our own terms. We intentionally avoided news stations that we knew were hostile; we did not fetishize talking to media as an end in itself.

All media and communication tools contain their own internal logic. If we don’t intentionally impose our own logic on them, they will impose their logic on us. Our movements already recognize how corporate media represent specific class interests. We are starting to become aware of how social media do the same—from outright censorship to the ways that algorithms privilege certain forms of interaction while suppressing others, thereby shaping how we think, act, and relate.

This became especially clear to us as we reflected on one of our most-used tools, the Signal chat.

What happens when all organizing moves to Signal?

Early on in our campaign, we used Signal chats in limited ways. We communicated via one core chat for the Stop the Sweeps crew. Some of us maintained a small text blast system that we would plug new contacts into; we used this system to announce upcoming sweeps and bring people out to sweeps watch. We would follow up with them in direct messages, then orient them on the ground. This worked well enough until one week, the person bottom-lining follow-up fell ill. To streamline communication, they made a Signal chat including all the people who would be coming out for sweeps watch that day so we could coordinate with each other. Over the next few weeks, this pattern of starting coordination-focused group chats for sweeps days continued until we created a general sweeps watch chat, where a growing layer of participants from outside the core group could share information and self-organize breakout chats for specific sweeps.

The sweeps watch Signal chat became the movement’s defining platform. As we encountered new allies and plugged them into sweeps defense, they would be added to this chat. The chat took on a life of its own, with people announcing upcoming sweeps and self-organizing separate chats for each week’s sweeps. At first, most people in the chat probably knew most other people in it, or else came to know them by participating in sweeps watch. The conversations were mostly limited to sweeps-related planning. The big Signal chat enabled us to scale up our organizing by taking the labor of follow-up and orientation off our hands: someone new could connect with other people on the ground and get the lay of the land from whatever experienced people were there. Creating another large channel to coordinate camp support—complete with its own array of breakout chats related to specific projects, infrastructure, and camps—increased the movement’s capacity to scale.

If you’ve been running in activist circles long enough, you know where this is headed.

At some point, the Signal chats hit a crucial turning point. They had expanded in size, in part due to the ballooning camp support network that was bringing new people into sweeps watch. By that time, a large number of the participants had not met each other. The expansion of the movement ecosystem meant people in each chat were likely involved in a number of other projects, with varying degrees of affinity or tension with other groups in the ecosystem. While this communication system worked for a while, it began to break down around the same time that the movement began to hit other limits.

The big chats slowly lost their focus on coordination as people started to use them as discussion forums in which to debate strategy and tactics. At times, a small group of people would engage in lengthy discussion in the chats, with dozens of others as a captive audience. This became particularly fraught in moments of emotional intensity (for example, immediately after a sweep)—especially when the parties in conflict did not know each other or already had existing tensions. Over time, other movement conflicts were imported into the chat, as well. By the time the camping ban came down, these dynamics had already drained collective engagement in the big chats. Consequently, the movement fragmented as economic normalcy was imposed at the conclusion of the lockdown.

The Signal chat is a useful tool, but like other communication platforms, it tends to impose its own logic. As a Signal chat grows, two things happen. First, the chats can generate too much noise to be helpful. High-traffic conversations among dozens of participants quickly add up to hundreds of messages, especially if there are not shared norms regarding what sort of information belongs in the channel. Second, the levels of trust and vulnerability decrease as fewer of the participants are connected by real relationships. This compounds with the way that tone, body language, and other aspects of communication are lost via text—so that when conflict takes place, it occurs without a basis for trust, leading to escalating tension and hurt feelings.

In our experience, Signal chats were most useful when organized around a defined purpose, usually limited to coordinating and sharing information. Ideally big, chats should keep chatter to a minimum, making space for deeper coordination or planning conversations in smaller breakout chats, such as the date-specific sweeps watch chats. Strategic debates and conflicts should be worked out in small groups or private chats between comrades engaging in good faith. Higher-stakes emotional conversations or strategic debates should ideally take place in person or at least on a call, to maximize the extent to which the participants can be emotionally present and engage in a full spectrum of communication. It may be helpful to set a precedent for moderating and maintaining norms in a chat early on to ensure that chats do not devolve into meetings or amorphous discussion forums. Because we had not set that precedent at the outset, it was difficult for us to intervene as moderators.

Sweeps watch.

These are ways to adjust how we use the tool; but we should also reduce our dependence on the tool. If a Signal chat is frequently being overwhelmed with other kinds of conversation, that indicates a need for additional containers. In our experience, while there were lots of meetings to deal with the week-to-week activities, our movement had few containers for broader reflection or debate, few release valves for tensions and conflict. Building these missing components into our movements is essential—otherwise, what you repress will eventually burst into the chat in explosive ways.

Some of these things are more feasible with Signal now. Signal has since added Admin roles and permissions, which enable better moderation and the creation of announcement-only channels. Movements may benefit from centering dedicated announcement-only channels in order to ensure that a broad range of participants receive the most essential updates. Letting smaller chats handle planning, coordination, and strategy can create more intentional and sustainable avenues for those conversations.

On the other hand, it can inhibit a movement to over-correct and impose limits too early. If your organizing channels consist of small chats without much activity, it’s not helpful to impose rules to limit activity—and rather than reducing message quantity, too many breakout channels containing the same five people will only gratuitously inflate the number chats. While it eventually limited us, for a time, the open Signal chat enabled us to grow. The best thing is to anticipate the limits and develop plans for addressing them as you reach them.

Home: don’t steal.

Movement Money Problems

The last year or two of the camp support movement was defined by conflicts around money. This mirrored similar conflicts elsewhere around the country between 2020 and 2022. Questions about who raised money and what they used it for became divisive, provoking inflammatory conflicts that dissolved organizations, even entire movements. We want to reflect on our experiences for the next time these questions resurface and offer some thoughts for movements elsewhere to consider as well.

In the early weeks of Stop the Sweeps, we carried out limited goal-oriented fundraising, chiefly to replace tents, sleeping bags, and other essential survival gear lost in the sweeps. This was strategic as well as ethical: replenishing these supplies helped maintain the camps and thwart the goal of the sweeps. Our largest fundraising effort was a $3000 GoFundMe to buy 100 tents. The member with keys to the GoFundMe tracked itemized withdrawals and purchases. Since the goals were clear and the stakes relatively low, we were able to make most decisions easily over Signal chats, filling time-sensitive needs for shelter after each sweep. Most discussions focused on which stores to purchase from. Occasionally, we also fundraised for bail and legal funds for friends who were arrested resisting the sweeps. Had we expanded the scope of our fundraising, made larger purchases, or made fundraising a core facet of our organizing strategy, we might have needed a different container for financial decisions.

Money played a bigger and more controversial role in the camp support movement, which from its early days networked together a number of different initiatives around shared infrastructure, such as collective kitchens that relied on various organizations for their distribution network. One group, named Austin Mutual Aid (AMA), began to form a fundraising apparatus for this network. Its founder, Bobby Cooper, was a contentious figure; a white man from New York who had organized in Occupy Sandy, his ego and abrasive personality caused some tensions in this network. For the most part, the network was big enough and Austin Mutual Aid small enough that people could hold them at a distance, only approaching them for funds around things like water in the summer or cold-weather gear in the winter.

Things changed with Winter Storm Uri in 2021. AMA had had the forethought to claim a name primed for search engine optimization. As millions around the country turned their attention to supporting groups in Texas, AMA’s winter fundraiser gained mainstream attention—going so far as to be shared by cast members of Queer Eye. It ballooned to some $3 million, and AMA gained the national media spotlight as the face of mutual aid in Austin. Suddenly, a group that had been marginal and annoying was central to the movement. This inflamed the existing tensions and resentments, adding stakes on the scale of millions of dollars.

Volunteers sort through clothes at an ad-hoc Austin mutual aid donation center during Winter Storm Uri.

The following months saw protracted conflicts over the allocation of this money, the handling of the Winter Storm response in general, and AMA’s role in relation to the rest of the movement. The conflict crossed Signal threads, Instagram slide decks, and many-hours-long Zoom and Jitsi calls. Probably every organization in the movement had at least one meeting about AMA, and many participated in AMA’s “community meeting” to decide how to distribute the money. Among other things, people accused AMA of taking credit for work that was largely carried out by other groups, raising money and gatekeeping access to it, white saviorism, charity-style work, using other groups’ media for their own fundraising, and not using the funds to offer people long-term housing, whether in the hotels that were taken over during the freeze or in regular apartments.

Stop the Sweeps participated in some of these conflicts, including private criticisms of AMA, social media call-outs, and hour-long Zoom calls. How might we have approached those conflicts differently? How could future movements avoid or mitigate them?

There was certainly truth to the criticisms of AMA. There was a crucial moment when AMA’s fundraising far exceeded what they had hoped to raise or had plans for. That could have been a good time to pause their fundraiser and direct potential donors to some of the other projects that were raising funds, like the Jordan’s Place police-free autonomous zone established by the Black revolutionary organization 400+1 in East Austin during the 2021 winter storm. Instead, AMA leaned into the spotlight, taking media appearances, speaking on behalf of the movement, and claiming others’ work.

AMA’s blunders should serve as a warning to any group that might accidentally stumble into large sums of money—as a number of pre-existing bail funds and mutual aid projects did in 2020—to take a cautious and disciplined approach to finances. Organize fundraisers with clear plans for how much you hope to raise and how you will use it. While it can be great to exceed goals, at a certain scale, raising more money than anticipated can create confusion, liability, and conflict. It may be better to shut down a fundraiser once it has exceeded its goal and direct people to other groups. This can insulate your crew from money conflicts, redistribute resources in crucial ways, and help build goodwill with the broader movement.

Regardless of who raises them, large sums of money can generate conflict and create liability. While AMA was a particularly controversial organization, we doubt that any organization that ended up in that position would have avoided criticism and conflict. Controlling large amounts of money and attention inevitably stokes resentment, jealousy, and political factionalism. Even if a group has a solid plan for raising and using large amounts of money, and even if that group maintains good relations and collaboration with other factions of the movement, the existence of that fundraising capacity can give rise to all sorts of friction. The project you are funding will be criticized: it’s not militant, not mutual aid, not strategic, not sustainable, not democratic enough, it doesn’t center the right groups, it’s not safe enough, not organized enough. Not all of this critique will be in good faith; some of it will simply be a cover for interpersonal or factional competition.

We should be generous and graceful in our criticisms of groups that stumble into money. While we should generate and share good-faith political critiques of the decisions that they make, moralizing and attacks often do not help anyone. Groups are not necessarily enemies or threats to a movement because they don’t use money in the ways that we think they should or distribute it through the process we consider most just. Many such groups are simply figuring out a complicated situation as they go, the same way we would in their shoes.

If we aim to work in movements that involve a wide range of political and strategic orientations, we will have to accept diverging perspectives on big questions. Unnecessarily escalating political conflicts into movement-wide fractures consumes a disproportionate amount of everyone’s energy, sapping it from more fruitful activities. When we identify the political differences that distinguish us from another group, those offer ripe ground for launching new projects, leading by example, and acting on our own terms, rather than simply criticizing.

Winter Storm Uri in 2021.

Recognizing and Transcending Limits

To understand the rapid growth of the movement against sweeps and its ultimate collapse, it is helpful to think of movements as always running up against and struggling to transcend particular limits. Focusing on the limits of movements moves us from a framework that externalizes our problems (blaming them on liberals, non-profits, the state, the police, sectarians, authoritarians, rival factions) to a framework that approaches our problems chiefly as internal, organizational questions. If our movements will inevitably confront co-optation, repression, or fragmentation, we should look inward to understand what aspects of our strategy make us vulnerable to these and experiment with ways to become capable of overcoming them.

The effectiveness of any tactic is determined by context. This includes considerations such as whether it brings new people into the movement, whether the movement can sustain the tactic, and how prepared our enemies are to mitigate its effectiveness. The same tactic repeated in a different context, or even at a different point in the same movement, can produce completely different results. Innovation and experimentation can help overcome limits related to tactics, while fetishizing or stigmatizing tactics can keep a movement stuck in ineffective repetition.

Sweeps watchers try to save a tent during a sweep off Riverside Drive in 2019. This sweep was one of our early victories; we stalled the crew for hours and ultimately saved the camp.

Transcending the limits of sweeps watch by reorienting towards camp support helped us expand the movement at a crucial moment. For the first few months, the rhythm of sweeps watch helped us connect to people in the camps, plug people into a concrete activity, gather information about the contractors, gain experience in confrontational action, and make a political scandal out of the sweeps. Over time, we began to hit new limits, as we could not add numbers fast enough to keep up with the sweeps and faced arrests as a consequence of new work zone rules. Before COVID-19 hit, we had already begun to imagine alternative ways to approach sweeps watch, such as creating locally-based networks in the neighborhoods near particular camps.

The switch to camp support activated a new, broader network of people and activities. People built consistent relationships with the specific camps they supported, which enabled them to report back on camp needs and any sweeps announcements. This brought more people into sweeps defense generally, so that our smaller group’s capacity wasn’t always stretched to its limit. Camp support also overcame a barrier to using the old sweeps defense model during the pandemic: when traveling between the camps posed the risk of inter-camp viral transmission, the distributed defense model helped mitigate that threat. As camp support grew, so did our capacity to mobilize people against the sweeps through sweeps defense, phone zaps, and car demos. This network also leaped into action with the George Floyd Rebellion. One of the main battlegrounds of the rebellion in Austin was in front of APD headquarters, where protestors shared the space with a camp under the highway overpass at I-35 and 7th Street. After the height of the uprising, many individuals and new groups joined the network, turning to mutual aid work as a continuation of the uprising, sometimes at the same location.

Tactics that generate potential at one time can themselves become limits. This becomes clear when we reflect on the missed opportunities of “mutual aid.” Camp support arose at a critical moment when existing social services had shut down due to the pandemic, leaving many on the street without consistent access to food and other necessities. Filling this gap, mutual aid was a way of securing the survival of the camps; this hearkens back to some of the forms of mutual aid as communal care and support that precede colonialism and capitalism, and which oppressed and exploited peoples have used to survive within them. During the first phase of the pandemic, the Camp Support network basically supplanted the city’s disaster response efforts. This recurred when the network mobilized to supply and shelter dozens of people during Winter Storm Uri, filling in where the city government did nothing. In both cases, the network’s efforts compelled the city to offer access to some food program meetings and to ask to use the network to deliver its prepared meals. The network made use of these resources, nominally towards its own ends.

Supplies stored in an Austin Mutual Aid donation center after Winter Storm Uri.

These efforts were closely tied to confrontational movement activity, as they were connected to sweeps defense, the rent strike movement of the early pandemic, and the George Floyd Rebellion; consequently, they were also part of a broader strategic framework. By the end of 2021, however, something had changed. The initial political context of camp support had been forgotten. Moralistic rhetoric framed mutual aid as a radical act unto itself, putting it above criticism and turning it into an obligation. This erased the need for mutual aid to be connected to other confrontational political activity; the only purpose was to provide the most meals to the greatest number of people. At the same time, the conditions were changing: social services had resumed, making camp support food distribution less essential, and even wasteful in some cases. Yet to make an argument for focusing on something other than “mutual aid” was considered unthinkable.

We suspect that our experiences with the fetishization of “mutual aid” were a fractal reflection of a national trend. For us, mutual aid is important as a political project, not a moral task. Camp support and food distribution are good, but whether they are worth the majority of our organizing efforts depends on the conditions we are acting in and what the results will be. We understood camp support as a way to deepen our relationships with the camps, seeing the meal as a chance to build a foundation for trust so as to collaborate in more militant sweep defense or combative activity around other issues. This framework is distinct from a social services model that treats service provision as the end goal. It demands that we evaluate how much energy mutual aid efforts take and whether they are worth pursuing at the expense of other tasks.

This form of mutual aid also ran up against limits we can see in previous cycles of autonomous disaster response and mutual aid. In the initial window of a disaster, autonomous groups can effectively set up and sustain infrastructure to support large groups of people. While highly effective during this window of time, they are rarely able to translate this into a deeper crisis for the state or the economy, nor to undermine the inevitable reimposition of normalcy, organize new and enduring social relationships, or transform these efforts into sustainable and combative projects after the disaster recedes.

Notably, what people were calling mutual aid was decidedly not mutual; it was a largely one-directional, service-oriented model of activism. Early on, this emerged of necessity due to COVID-19 precautions, which limited our ability to build more collective relationships and gather with people. However, over time, this meant that the relationship between a camp support volunteer and a food insecure person in a camp was primarily defined by the giving and receiving of a meal. Sometimes, this relationship included other “case worker” services, such as help with medical services and public benefits—but that, also, failed to break the dynamic of service provider and recipient. Delivering food did not in itself generate deeper political relationships, enable shared struggle, or build the reciprocity that could grow into new kinds of social relationships and life-giving infrastructure.

Additionally, this meant that very little of the infrastructure built for camp support could actually sustain the ones doing the work—instead, it wore out the small handful of people who coordinated most of the effort. The early growth of camp support was possible in large part due to the pandemic shutdown, with paused or remote work and increased benefits enabling large numbers of people to dedicate time to the efforts. By spring 2021, however, the slow reimposition of normalcy meant that benefits were drying up, life was getting more expensive, and more people had to go back to work, draining the network’s capacity. With most of the infrastructure geared towards outward-facing service provision, the mutual aid networks could not provide people the support they needed to stay engaged in the movement. In the slow decay of the mutual aid networks, we were neither living nor fighting.

This model of activism is ripe for cooptation because it is essentially similar to state or NGO social services—just horizontally organized and less well-funded. Without no political strategy beyond feeding as many people as possible, in the face of waning capacity due to changing economic conditions, it was difficult to justify refusing to collaborate with the city government or social service providers. While the radical wings of the movement decried these changes with radical rhetoric, there was no alternative strategic framework to illuminate the limits of the camp support model. Radical ideas do not sustain people in a movement, resources and infrastructure do—and the radical wing of the movement was largely competing with the state and the nonprofit-industrial complex on their home turf. The limitations of the camp support model set the stage for the cooptation of certain wings of the movement, with groups like AMA working with social service providers like ECHO and Little Petal Alliance forming the mobile outreach wing of Sunrise Church.

If power is fundamentally determined by infrastructure, movements also confront infrastructural limits. What are the supply lines that move resources, the entry points that bring in new people, the sites of care that help reproduce the movement, the hubs where we can organize combative actions or spaces for reflection? What are their vulnerabilities, and how can our adversaries attack them? These may be direct attacks—raids, evictions, restrictions, regulation—or other issues, such as an economic shift that forces people to step back from a movement in order to resume earning money.

If we accept that movements inevitably go through phases of growth and shrinkage, we can orient our strategies towards anticipating and responding to these moments. Movement growth can necessitate new organizing formats or infrastructure to accommodate new participants, lest they overload the existing channels; movement shrinkage also requires abandoning rigid practices to make room for new possibilities. In the growth phase of a movement, the key thing is to be flexible and decisive in order to seize opportunities to level up. During movement decline, it is important to make space for reflection and strategic reorientation, to be prepared to drop practices that are no longer effective or sustainable. A movement increasing its capacity during a growth phase feels very different from a movement contracting in its decline phase, even when the movement’s actual capacity is in fact greater in the latter case.

A tent set up on the lawn of the WorkQuest CEO during a Stop the Sweeps home demo that took place at a time when the movement’s capacities were growing.

What could have helped us to surpass the limits we reached? In view of the camp support network’s ability to out-organize the city government in the early phase of crisis, how could we have used this position of power to undercut its legitimacy, make deeper connections with those we were supporting, reinvent social relationships via new experiments in organization, or build enduring infrastructure to enable collective survival? We can try out Phil Neel’s use of the concept of “competitive control,” a term used by military strategists to describe insurgencies that produce a base of support and an alternative geography of resistance by providing services and stability where the state has failed, often alongside efforts to destabilize the state. While this framework is derived from military thought and applied to a range of repressive forces like the Taliban, it can help us to consider how autonomous forces might build power in conditions of crisis and collapse.

We can consider the efforts of 400+1 to establish an autonomous zone named Orisha Land during Winter Storm Uri as a source of inspiration. 400+1 was a federation and cadre organization oriented towards Black revolutionary autonomy that acted parallel to the camp support network, with some overlap, collaboration, and connection between the movements. During Winter Storm Uri, they declared an autonomous police-free zone called Orisha Land in the historically Black (but gentrifying) Rosewood neighborhood. They occupied a park to establish a resource hub and shelter for unhoused Black people. Renaming the park Jordan’s Place, after a Black man named Jordan Walton who was killed by APD, they maintained the occupation for a few weeks after the storm and broadcast proposals for transforming the park with gardens, community programming, and ambitious visions for shelter and housing.

The city government ultimately cleared 400+1 out of the park in a repressive maneuver parallel to its recuperation of “mutual aid” groups. While the city government incorporated some aspects of the mutual aid network, using the groups as volunteer pools for future crisis responses such as running warming and cooling centers and distributing supplies, it repressed the militant faction that was contesting its legitimacy. This counterinsurgency strategy undoubtedly inflamed some of the later movement conflicts, as those who witnessed the eviction of Jordan’s Place while AMA aligned with the city government and service provider alliance directed their ire against the latter.

400+1 were not without their own limitations, some of which they shared with the broader movement. While they were capable of powerful gestures, these were often primarily spectacular, such as a live-streamed armed procession around the neighborhood to declare the autonomous zone. Some former members report that they did not manage to follow through on all of the promises that they made to people during the Winter Storm occupation. In 2022, the group saw an exodus of members in response to internal hierarches and conflicts over responses to harm within the organization.¹ Still, without romanticizing this organization, we can evaluate the strategic direction they pursued: exploiting the crisis of the winter storm and the failure of the police to maintain order to contest the state’s control of territory and promote combative visions of neighborhood-based autonomy.

What similar experiments could the camp support and sweeps defense networks have undertaken? Attempts to occupy vacant housing, hotels, or restaurants in order to establish autonomous shelters, kitchens, or resource hubs would have served to contest the state and private property. Such gestures, even if unsuccessful, can erode state control and legitimacy during crises, while opening directions that counterbalance the threat of cooptation. Some of us discussed this and followed some of these threads over the course of the movement.

The police and cooptation are two sides of the same coin.

There were moments when this approach seemed possible, such as when the network was able to run a shelter out of a hotel during the winter storm with the acquiescence of the manager. There were loose discussions about turning this into an ongoing occupation after the storm, but the necessary combination of attention, resources, and opportunity never coalesced. Perhaps if some of these gestures had proliferated, they could have worked in tandem with the efforts in Orisha Land to heighten the crisis, creating an ecosystem of escalation that could have frustrated efforts to repress some initiatives while recuperating the others. Since winter storms have become a nearly annual occurrence in Austin, mutual aid groups could build the relationships and capacities over the year to launch such initiatives when the next one hits.

Beyond these offensive paths, the network also could have tried to create lasting autonomous infrastructure. Building infrastructure for outdoor mobile kitchens or collectively-managed kitchens that could operate long term without dependence on churches could have enabled the movement to grow and transform. Perhaps, as vaccination access made it possible to begin gathering with others again, the network’s activity could have shifted from constant meal delivery services to hosting community dinners at which food was not simply given but shared, fostering new kinds of social relationships while sustaining the people making the food and running the space. Such communal gathering spaces could host trainings, assemblies, and strategic conversations—so that sharing food would give rise to collective deliberation, forming the basis for future projects. Ambitious proposals like these could have flourished by making use of the money AMA doled out after the winter storm.

Another path could have included shifting away from food delivery towards projects that addressed a need while simultaneously creating new relationships beyond the service provision model. Community gardens could have opened up new kinds of relationships with housed people supported by the mutual aid network; tending gardens offers a shared project to bring together activists and neighbors, which can help sustain households and open up relations of sharing with other neighbors. The vegetables grown could supply a broader network of food delivery and collective kitchens. A squatted garden in an occupied lot could offer space for unhoused people to camp and a rallying point to defend against gentrification.

We can’t know what path the movement should have taken. Actualizing any of these possibilities would have involved messy, situational questions. We can keep these horizons and strategic directions in mind for the next time we enter a similar cycle of struggle, but seizing these opportunities depends less on analytical precision than on our ability to strategize and plan in the midst of an emerging situation.

Take the offensive.

Conclusion: Partisans against the Coming Dispossession

The dwindling phase of the movement from spring 2021 into 2022 was a perfect storm of movement shrinkage, fragmentation, conflict, and escalating state repression, with each factor intensifying the others in destructive feedback loops. Economic pressures compounded the cumulative effects of over a year of intense movement activity, contributing to a buildup of tension, trauma, and burnout. Unaddressed emotional dynamics exploded around high-stakes contention following the freeze, worsening previous resentments. Escalating conflicts accelerated the process of decline as they consumed the movement’s limited capacity, while others who were less invested simply withdrew. The escalation of repression with the passage of the city camping ban, the statewide camping ban, and the scorched earth sweeps over the summer increased the pressure on the movement in the midst of these dynamics. Heightened urgency and stakes caused an even greater explosion of conflict as people took out their frustrations about the movement’s limited capacity on each other. Decline produces conflict produces decline; repression causes decline and conflict, which amplify the effects of repression. A vicious cycle in which we were the main actors, with our enemies largely in the background.

In addition to being our own worst enemies, our entire milieu was targeted by at least one bad actor using the moniker “Precious.” This person sought to map our traumas and fault lines, extract money, and exacerbate tensions. In the aftermath of the massive monetary windfall received by Austin Mutual Aid, a member of our collective began corresponding with the “Precious” Instagram account. “Precious” was later linked to a set of other accounts across social media that had targeted organizers across the South in Houston, New Orleans, and Atlanta using the same playbook of social mapping techniques and warped social justice language to call out organizations for various failings, real or invented. Several of these accounts were revealed to carry right-wing content if one scrolled back.

This episode was later documented and reported on by others using a dossier created by members of the impacted organizations. We mention this here to emphasize that when trust is already low and strategic thinking compromised, other actors will find ways to exploit the opportunities that open up.

Movements in decline must learn to lose better. That means clearly assessing our capacities, the conditions we are facing, and what is and is not possible. This can be a heavy task. Admitting defeats means accepting the grave consequences that come with them; in 2021, it would have meant admitting that we were no longer in a position to stop the sweeps and all the devastation they inflicted. We must grieve these losses while discerning what we can preserve from a phase of struggle in order to position ourselves for the next fight, wherever it emerges. Seeking to do this would shift our focus from desperate attempts to throw what little we have at our enemy to identifying which relationships, infrastructure, practices, and actions can equip us to lay the groundwork for the next phase of struggle. That approach could enable us to return to an asymmetrical conflict framework and to avoid getting locked into losing direct confrontations with our enemies. Strategic retreats, regrouping, and reorientation can enable a movement to continue taking the initiative instead of merely reacting, in order to be better prepared to intervene in the future.

Our enemies in orange.

Strategic thinking should not depend on the analytical, perceptive, or strategic capabilities of select individuals; it must become a political practice involving the entire movement. Even small gestures by crews and collectives articulating new principles and strategies can open a space for reflection. Collective infrastructure or practices can offer space for the movement to reflect on and adjust its activity, analyze changing landscapes, identify strategic opportunities and limitations, and release difficult emotions, tensions, and concerns. Such spaces can help build the strategic capabilities and emotional resilience of the movement. They can enable people to encounter each other across organizational or ideological lines, facilitating a circulation of ideas and strategies that can prevent the calcification of rigid ideological camps.

Such efforts can take various forms. In our experience, they included articulating a set of political principles and strategic interventions through sweeps defense in order to constitute another pole in a movement; building working relationships with a wide spectrum of actors, from factions within encampments to activist groups, in order to enable collaboration and the circulation of tactical insights; and assembling The Hive as a space for coordination, reflection, and proposing new directions. In The Hive, in particular, we see both positive examples and missed opportunities.

The relationships we built through the early Hive assemblies became the foundation of the early camp support network, which implemented some of the strategic conversations that had started in The Hive about neighborhood-based camp defense networks. This enabled the movement to level up at a critical moment. The Hive continued at a slow but steady rhythm through 2020, growing to include a wide range of factions at the height of the movement. However, by 2021, we had fallen out of practice. Assemblies saw less attendance as people focused on more urgent day-to-day work and meetings, and we put less effort into facilitating or reinvigorating them. By the time that the movement began to fracture and decline, there was no dedicated space or practiced rhythm for processing, addressing tensions, or big picture strategy discussions. Without dedicated infrastructure for facilitating these conversations, most organizations simply focused on the immediate needs of their particular project.

Continuing The Hive might not have resolved these problems. Strategic thinking is a habit that must be practiced and built into the rhythms of our work. We can offer a space for it, but that doesn’t guarantee that others in the movement will accept the invitation. If participants do not take it seriously, or cannot dedicate time to it due to the demands of their projects, the benefits will be limited. Nonetheless, such infrastructure has value even if only a minority of movement participants utilize it. It can still position them to make more effective interventions and proposals, holding open the window for strategic thinking and initiative. We must move from diagnosing our movement’s crises in the aftermath of their collapse to actively experimenting with ways to overcome their limits.

Those who participate in future cycles of struggle will continue to grapple with these questions. How can autonomous mutual aid efforts use the opening of a disaster and their ability to out-organize government responses to further undercut the legitimacy of the state and the economy? If we understand daily life within capitalist social relations as a constantly simmering crisis, how might projects that arise in reaction to acute crises (such as COVID-19 and the winter storm) maintain their initiative as the window of the disaster closes? How do we move away from a unidirectional, service-oriented model of activism to a model that generates new social relationships and communal infrastructure for meeting shared needs? How can mutual aid and crisis response enable a movement to take the offensive? There is no single right answer or right tactic; what counts is the ability to pose the necessary questions, stay creative, and take the initiative.

This could be you.

We believe the questions we grappled with will reappear because the struggle against sweeps is a harbinger of the struggles against precarity, dispossession, and displacement to come. We have already seen the encampments reappear in the refugee camps around Gaza and the solidarity encampments on college campuses in the United States—where, in Austin, some have experimented with using Signal to transcend some of the limits we discuss here. The camp is an image of the future—a future in which increased economic precarity, climate crises, wars, and state repression produce new waves of displacement and migration, and new forms of repression and managerial governance arise in response. Migrant caravans form tent cities at the border, facing the brutality of Border Patrol and police alongside the bureaucracy of the immigration system and resettlement programs; migrants bussed to New York end up circulating between camps and shelters, facing the brutality of sweeps and the bureaucracy of NGO management alongside a precarious working class that already cannot find sustainable employment or afford rising rents due to waves of gentrification.

As these crises intensify, the question of insurgent survival appears on the horizon. We need to organize collective sustenance and dignity in the face of the dispossessions to come—and to do so in ways that will undermine and fragment the forces of the state and capital. To do so, we will have to act both from within and alongside the ranks of the precarious and dispossessed and to join forces with the forms of insurgent self-organization that emerge, such as encampments and migrant caravans. The question is how to simultaneously survive the crises inflicted by the prevailing order with dignity while throwing it into crisis in a way that enables us to explore new ways of living.

—Some former members of Stop the Sweeps ATX

The successes, limits, and lessons of 400+1 are not our story to tell. We encourage our comrades who participated in that organization to publish their own reflections. ↩

The Eye of Every Storm : Anarchist Response to Hurricane Helene

2024-11-13T21:01:04Z

At the end of September 2024, western North Carolina and the surrounding states experienced 30 inches of rainfall over two days when an unnamed storm collided with Hurricane Helene over the mountains of Southern Appalachia. The resulting catastrophe laid waste to the entire region. At a time when misinformation, rising authoritarianism, and disasters exacerbated by industrially-produced climate change are creating a feedback loop of escalating crisis, it’s crucial to understand disaster response as an integral part of community defense and strategize about how this can play a part in movements for liberation. In the following reflection, a local anarchist involved in longstanding disaster response efforts in Appalachia recounts the lessons that they have learned over the past six weeks and offers advice about how to prepare for the disasters to come.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimated that Hurricane Helene poured 40 trillion gallons of water on the region. This caused an estimated 1800 landslides; it damaged over 160 municipal water and sewer systems, at least 6000 miles of roads, more than 1000 bridges and culverts, and an estimated 126,000 homes. There have been over 230 confirmed deaths across six states with many still missing.

The entire region was completely cut off from the outside world for a day or more, with all major roads shut down by landslides, collapsed bridges, and downed trees. Water, power, internet and cell service all went down within hours of the hurricane arriving, and remained down for days or, in some areas, weeks. There are still communities that will likely not have electricity for another three months because the roads that the power company would use no longer exist. Six weeks into this disaster, there are still tens of thousands of people who lack access to drinkable water. Not only have thousands of homes been wiped off the map—in many cases, the land they rested on no longer exists. Massive landslides have scoured canyons 30 feet deep, exposing bedrock that has not seen the light of day for tens of thousands of years. The torrential floods moved so much earth and caused so many rivers to change course that scientists have designated the hurricane a “geological event.”

In response, a beautiful web of mutual aid networks has emerged, saving countless lives by bringing in essential supplies, providing medical care, setting up neighborhood water distribution centers, solar charging stations, satellite internet hubs, free kitchens, free childcare, and more. Name a need and there are folks out here who have self-organized to meet it. We share these lessons we have learned in hopes of helping others to prepare for similar situations, aiming to increase our capacity to build autonomous infrastructure for the long haul.

Start Preparing Now

There is no time like the present to get organized.

Our mutual aid group has been around for almost eight years. Within 72 hours of the floodwaters receding, we had a functioning mutual aid hub and were mobilizing folks to check on missing people and chainsaw crews to cut people out of their homes and open up roads. We were only able to do these things because we had already put in the work in our community to build the trust and relationships that are so vital in times of crisis.

While we are a small group, we have an extensive network of friends and allies that has grown throughout years of smaller-scale mutual aid and organizing efforts. The best way to prepare for a disaster is not to stockpile supplies, but to build trust in your community and nurture a healthy web of relationships. The best way to accomplish this is to start doing mutual aid projects in your community before an acute crisis arises. This will give you practice operating as a group and organizing logistics, and it will also connect you with others you wouldn’t otherwise meet and show them that they can count on you. Because of the work we had already put in, when the crisis hit, people turned to us and spread the word that we are a good group to funnel supplies and money through. You can only build that kind of reputation by putting in the work now.

Communications

One of the biggest initial challenges we faced was that most means of communication went offline for between 24 hours and several weeks, depending on where you lived. That includes landlines, cell phones, and internet. We can’t stress enough the importance of having multiple back-up options in place to be ready for a situation like this. First of all, make sure you have a place and time established in advance where folks know they can find each other in the event of a disaster. This is probably a good idea even if communications don’t go offline—nothing beats face-to-face communication.

Satellite internet was invaluable during the first couple of weeks. For some particularly hard-hit communities, it remains the only means of communication six weeks into this disaster. Unfortunately, Starlink, which is owned by the white supremacist Elon Musk, has proven to be the most useful and the easiest to set up in a disaster scenario. We know from past experience that he is eager to suppress social movements that use his companies’ services. There are other companies that provide satellite internet, but it tends to be slower, with significant data limits. These are generally not mobile systems and would be challenging to set up in the middle of a disaster.

Don’t forget that you will need a source of electricity such as a generator or solar power to make satellite internet work.

Radios, especially ham radios, are another important means of communication that should be arranged in advance with people who already know how to use them. Our mountainous terrain limits the distance that radios can broadcast, but it would still have been helpful if we had possessed ham radios.

Supply Chain Logistics

Supply chain logistics are a huge piece of the puzzle. They will be one of your biggest headaches. In the first couple days of a disaster, you will probably only have access to the supplies you already have on hand in your immediate community. Stores will be closed and gas will not be available.

Soon, supplies will start pouring in from outside the disaster zone. The problem is that there will be a significant lag time between the announcement of a request for supplies and the time when those supplies arrive. In some cases, too many people will eventually answer the call, or by the time the supplies arrive, the needs on the ground will have changed. Social media can be useful in getting the word out about what supplies are needed, but it greatly exacerbates the lag time, especially as old posts are screenshotted and shared long beyond their relevance. When you make requests on social media, put a date in both the text and the visuals so people will know when the request was made.

Learn to anticipate what your needs will be a week from now, not tomorrow, because that is when the supplies will arrive. If and when regional support hubs are established, it is generally more efficient to communicate your needs directly to one of these hubs rather than blasting them on social media.

That being said, not every disaster is going to receive the kind of national spotlight that Hurricane Helene did. You may well find yourself in a situation where there are not enough donors or supplies.

Heavy Machinery

We need more people in our sphere that own or at least know how to operate heavy equipment. The floods destroyed hundreds of miles of roads and countless bridges. Massive piles of debris and tens of thousands of downed trees also blocked the roads, rendering many areas inaccessible. This is not the kind of problem you can solve with shovels and wheel barrows.

In many cases, communities that were totally cut off literally bulldozed their way to town; some used excavators to build new bridges out of pieces of the old bridges. It was not the state doing this work, but hillbillies who own heavy equipment who took matters into their own hands long before the state or federal government showed up. The rural activist scene is pretty well prepared to tackle anything involving a chainsaw, given that our network includes more than a few professional arborists and many of us already cut our own firewood. But we were not prepared for scenarios involving debris piles and earthmoving. Even beyond the immediate need of opening access to cut-off communities, heavy equipment such as dump trucks and track hoes remains crucial to the long-term demolition and clean-up work in the months following the storm.

Breaking the Spell

At the risk of repeating a cliché, acute crises such as natural disasters really do break the spell of normalcy that so many of us live under. Across western North Carolina, tens of thousands of people have experienced the joy of breaking out of the shell of isolated individualism and diving into the exhilaration and sense of purpose that collective action offers. Suddenly, people see that we are better off when we work in cooperation with each other, and that there are enough resources to meet everyone’s needs when we collaborate rather than compete. Even for radicals, there is a difference between knowing these truths intellectually and living, breathing, and feeling them 24/7.

To be clear, we don’t think that mutual aid groups should approach their work with the question “How do we radicalize people?” as the primary objective. Our primary goal should always be to save lives and make sure that people’s basic needs are met. But it is true that in the course of this crisis, thousands of people have gotten a taste of how we could organize society better. Many of them have a real hunger to keep that spirit alive but don’t know where to begin or where to plug in.

We should not show up in disasters the way that authoritarian or Christian groups do, looking to prey upon the vulnerable. Rather, we should make sure that there are ways that those who are radicalized by disasters and the experience of responding to them have opportunities to become involved in something lasting.

Rumors and Misinformation

Reliable information is hard to come by in a disaster. Even when phone and internet access return, rumors run rampant as everyone scrambles to figure out what happened and what kind of help is available or on its way. Many people will be deeply traumatized: when you have suddenly lost everything or your sense of stability has been pulled out from under you, fear and anxiety reign. On top of this, many of those joining in relief efforts will be running on pure adrenaline. None of these states of mind are conducive to clear thinking. It is important to get grounded and spread calm.

Do not repeat unverified information, especially on social media. If a statement starts with “my best friend’s uncle said…” or “I heard from a reliable source that…”, there is a pretty good chance that it is a rumor and not verified information. The more sensational the rumor, the more tempting it will be to spread it.

We can’t count the number of rumors that circulated here. Most of them only served to spread fear. “The military is coming in and shutting down mutual aid hubs and seizing supplies.” “Militias are out hunting FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] workers.” It is best to take note of such rumors and be prepared in the event that they turn out to be true, but in the meantime, to keep on doing what you are doing until you see otherwise with your own to two eyes. The best way to get reliable information is in face-to-face interactions with primary sources.

Ask questions of people as you are distributing aid. Whenever we did a supply run or a wellness check, we made sure to ask extensive questions, such as:

“What are the needs here that aren’t being met?”
“Has there been any help from the government yet?
“Are there still missing people?”
“What roads are open or closed?”
“Do you know of people who are still cut off from supplies?”

Vultures

Count on it: the far right will hurry to capitalize on any disaster, no matter what the scenario, in order to advance their fascist agenda. Within hours of communications returning, there were racist fake news stories alleging that Black and brown people were looting. Soon, these morphed into absurd claims that FEMA couldn’t help people because they had spent all their money on immigrants, and then into even wilder conspiracy theories suggesting that the government had manufactured the storm to disenfranchise Republican voters and that FEMA was going to seize people’s land for lithium mining. Never mind that there is no lithium to be found in the mountains of western North Carolina.

On top of this, many far-right and white nationalist groups made appearances in western North Carolina to provide aid. In most cases, they just showed up with a few supplies and left as soon as they had taken pictures to post on social media. It is worth distinguishing between groups that are part of the organized far right, like Patriot Front and the Proud Boys, who are only showing up to score political points, not to help people, and groups that really are there to provide direct aid but also happen to lean to the right. There should be no tolerance for the former. We feel that people should approach groups in the latter category with caution and evaluate whether it makes sense to work with them on a case-by-case basis. Crises make for strange bedfellows; there were a lot of Trump supporters working alongside anarchists to save lives, clear roads, and deliver supplies.

The best solution to countering the influence that the far right can build in disaster scenarios is to be better prepared and better organized. The groups that get the most done, deliver the most supplies, and do the most good are the ones that garner the most respect. It’s as simple as that. A good social media game doesn’t hurt, either. It is vital that we crank out reliable information and inspiring memes and narratives to counter the racist fearmongering that the far-right disinformation machine churns out.

Engaging with the State

We need more nuanced ways of thinking about government aid. Anarchists find themselves in a awkward situation in regards to FEMA and other forms of official government assistance. We rightfully criticize the government for its painfully slow and inadequate response to the disaster, but when the government finally shows up with significant resources, we aren’t sure how to engage.

We’d suggest that people should approach FEMA and similar organizations with the same cautious curiosity as aid groups that lean to the right but are not actively organizing for fascism. While grassroots mutual aid efforts are a thousand times more flexible and efficient in responding to disasters than the lumbering bureaucracy of the United States government, our access to resources pales in comparison to theirs when it comes to money, machinery, and labor. There is simply no way that we can crowdfund the estimated $17 billion in damages that Helene did. We need to strategically tap into those resources without compromising our principles or weakening our own efforts. Strategies such as helping people to navigate FEMA’s cumbersome aid applications and insurance claims can take pressure off our own fundraising efforts.

Another example of how we need a more nuanced approach to engaging with the government concerns the military. The presence of the military drastically changes the atmosphere in a community as soon as they show up. The communal feeling of mutual aid and cooperation can start to dissipate as their chain of command takes over. It is crucial to keep our mutual aid hubs completely separate from the military; do not let them staff or set up shop at our locations under any circumstances. But that does not mean we cannot strategically engage with them to use their free labor (and machinery) to muck out buildings, split firewood, and swing hammers.

The majority of military personnel are working-class folks in their late teens or early twenties who were sold a lie by military recruiters, a decision many of them come to regret. It will not hurt if they catch a glimpse of a better way of helping people.

Finances

Direct financial assistance is a huge need that most disaster relief groups are unable or unwilling to provide. If your group has the ability to raise large amounts of cash, you can be an absolutely invaluable resource in the days and weeks after the disaster. Donated supplies can only do so much.

In our case, tens of thousands of people have not only lost their homes, they’ve also lost weeks or months of employment. Bills are coming due and the overwhelming majority of folks are not getting anything close to the kind of assistance they need from FEMA or insurance companies. If you have a mutual aid group, set up a checking account in the group’s name and a few different digital wallets like Paypal and Venmo. Set up a website and social media accounts with clear links on how to donate. Do not wait for a disaster to do these things.

If you know that a disaster is on its way, take out a large amount of cash to have on hand. Remember, Venmo and credit cards are not going to work when the power grid and communications are down. We have found that most people are able to set up some sort of digital wallet if they need to, but it is important to have cash on hand for those who can’t.

It is also likely that if you are suddenly receiving and sending out large amounts of money in a short time, your account will get frozen or the people you send the money to won’t be able to access it immediately. This is infuriating, but there seems to be nothing that we can do about it—these companies have automated systems that flag accounts and they claim that they can’t override the system when your account is flagged.

Getting Organized

Grassroots disaster relief is no longer the exclusive province of church groups and small bands of autonomous mutual aid groups. The notion has gone mainstream since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, when so many people discovered that their neighbors were all they had to count on. At this point, well-organized and well-resourced groups of every stripe are prepared to mobilize quickly—from reactionary right-leaning groups like the Cajun Navy and to networks of volunteer helicopter pilots, not to mention radical groups like Mutual Aid Disaster Relief. Beyond these specific groups, more people understand how to self-organize now. Within three to five days of the flood waters receding, you couldn’t drive more than ten minutes without running into a do-it-yourself relief hub or water station in someone’s front yard, church, or gas station parking lot. It would not be an overstatement to say that within a week, western North Carolina had the highest concentration of four-wheelers, all-terrain vehicles, and dirt bikes in the world, as people poured in from all over the South and beyond to help with search and rescue and to get supplies out to cut-off communities.

Most of these hubs were truly grassroots, with no formal organization behind them. This is an overwhelmingly positive development, but it does not come without challenges. The chief problems were redundancy of effort and lack of coordination between relief hubs, road clearing crews, and people doing supply runs, search and rescue, and wellness checks. The sooner you can develop relationships and good communication systems with other hubs, the better, so you won’t have to be constantly reinventing the wheel.

Creating an intake system for incoming volunteers and arranging for people to coordinate them is a huge piece of the puzzle. We had to turn away many offers of help in the first few weeks because we didn’t have a good system in place for fielding newcomers, especially those from out of town, nor could we guarantee that we could plug them into a project on any given day if they just showed up, despite the fact that there was always a mountain of work to do. Connecting volunteers to communities and individual homes that need medical care, mucking, gutting, and repairs requires an enormous amount of legwork on your part, not to mention building trust between you and the residents. You would do well to have someone in your group that has a deep love of spreadsheets.

How to Organize an Assembly : Preparing to Respond in an Era of Disasters and Despotism

2024-11-10T09:45:35Z

There are times when people who have kept to themselves, counting on politicians and specialists to solve their problems, suddenly realize that their only hope is to make contact with others like themselves and work together. Perhaps a hurricane has just torn through the state, or a demagogue has just won reelection on an explicitly fascist electoral platform. For many people, this is one of those moments right now. But how do we connect with them—or at least connect them with each other? One answer is to host an open assembly.

Here, we’ll offer a brief guide, along with some sample discussion questions you could use to discuss how to prepare for the second Donald Trump administration.

Ingredients

A comfortable meeting space
A large whiteboard or flip pad, plus markers
Pens and paper to hand out
Snacks
Nametags or tape and markers for making nametags

Before the Assembly

First, talk with the people you already work closely with. Get on the same page about what kind of assembly you want to organize, who you want to invite, and what you want to achieve together.

Is your chief goal to enable people to get to know each other better? To draw new people into existing projects? To establish new working groups around pressing issues? To formulate a collective strategy spanning different groups and tendencies?

Then announce your assembly. Nowadays, everyone relies on social media to spread the word—but if you want to reach people outside your usual circles, you should also make handbills that you can distribute in person. If you want to organize with a modicum of confidentiality rather than turning out the largest possible crowd, you could limit your announcement to handbills and Signal messages. Generally speaking, you’ll want to maximize the number of earnest participants while keeping your assembly off the radar of people with bad intentions.

Hopefully, you’re already connected to local projects that have some reach through which to make the announcement. These could include mutual aid projects, community spaces, bands, Signal loops, reading groups, DJs, student groups. Consider approaching other groups at the outset and inviting them to help organize or at least publicize the assembly. The more different groups are on board from the beginning, the wider the range of people you will bring together, and the less the gathering will feel like the private property of any one group.

Timing is everything. If you want to bring people together in response to urgent news, you have to announce your assembly while the news is fresh and people are still prepared to change their priorities. Ideally, they should hear about your assembly within a few hours of whatever news you are responding to, and it should take place soon enough that it will still feel urgent.

In the announcement, make it clear what the subject and character of the assembly will be and what people should bring with them (e.g., a chair, a snack, a proposal, a question).

Choose a space that will be accessible to everyone who might want to participate. Will people be warm enough, comfortable enough? Is there seating? A public park with covered areas and restrooms could work—or, if inclement weather could be an issue, consider a community center. You might be able to reserve a room at a library or arrange with someone who runs a music venue to let you use the space during off hours. Whatever you choose, the space should feel equally inviting to everyone you want there.

Prepare for success. Don’t underestimate the number of people who might come. This might be your only chance to make contact with some of them. You’ll want to impress them with the quality of your organizing, and you’ll want it to be easy for them to identify a role they can play. Make sure you have enough fliers, zines, snacks, and masks for everyone.

Make sure people will be able to hear each other. How are the acoustics in the space? Is there likely to be background noise? Should you bring a microphone and portable speaker? Is there reliable electricity, or will you need to bring a power source, as well? Will you need a visible place to write important information? Will people need to be able to make notes themselves?

If you are in a multilingual community, consider accommodating multiple languages. Don’t promise more than you can deliver—if you advertise the assembly in multiple languages, make sure that there will be translators prepared to interpret in each of them. If it’s just a matter of translating for a few people, a couple skilled translators may be able to quietly offer simultaneous translation. If there are many people participating who don’t share a language in common, you’ll have to have an interpreter offer consecutive translation; bear in mind that this will more than double how long everything takes.

Have a plan to deal with disruption. One of the few advantages of a private venue is that it will be considerably easier to remove people who should not be there.

Think about how to create an environment that will make people feel at home and bring out the best in them. Snacks, warm drinks, and tasteful décor can go a long way. If you want to offer reading material, you can choose from a wide array of zines to print here.

During the Assembly

At the beginning of the event, you’ll want to welcome everyone and make it clear what the parameters of the space are. For example:

Welcome everyone! We are so glad each of you has come. In order to ensure that everyone will be comfortable, there will be no filming or recording here. This is a space for us to talk about participatory community initiatives—about concrete things that we can do together to address our shared needs. We will not be talking about or recruiting for political parties of any kind; there are plenty of other spaces for that. Our hope is that in two hours, we will all understand each other better and have a sense of what we can do together.

Spell out how you intend to structure the time. Don’t overschedule! Make time and space for informal conversation before and after the main event. Often, the most important initiatives arise out of informal conversation by the snack table.

Be clear from the outset whether the assembly is intended to be a decision-making space, and if so, what the process for making decisions will be. It can be difficult to reach consensus in an open assembly comprised of a diverse crowd without preexisting shared commitments; it may make more sense to focus on sharing information and ideas so that the participants can make decisions and take on commitments autonomously. If you are organizing an open assembly, it may not make sense to think of it as a single social body, but rather as a space of encounter where multiple social bodies can form, interchange perspectives, and embark on different projects.

Plan your time according to your goals. If your objective is to connect people to local organizing in the face of an emergency, you could begin by inviting organizers to announce existing local projects and upcoming events, then invite people to propose new projects, then break out into groups to discuss the proposals, and conclude by coming back together to share the results and planning for the future. Alternatively, if your goal is to formulate a collective strategy, you could begin by opening a space to propose questions, then break out into groups to discuss them.

Especially if you are hosting an assembly attended by a hundred people or more, you’ll want to make it easy for people to know how to find the discussion that is right for them when they break into small groups. You could do this by having a point person with a sign for each group to cohere around, or by designating the spaces in advance, whether with signs or on a map that everyone can access.

Be clear about how much the participants should trust each other. If you are putting strangers in contact who have no real basis for trust, make sure that no one shares compromising information or overextends themselves. If necessary, have someone speak about security culture at the beginning of the assembly.

If the assembly is intended to plug new people into ongoing organizing, think about the things that you take for granted that may not be familiar to newcomers. For example, if you are using Signal for encrypted communication, you could circulate handbills with a QR code for downloading Signal, a second QR code directing the user to instructions for how to use Signal, and perhaps a third QR code leading to an announcements-only Signal thread.

Click on the image to download the poster. You could use the space on the flier to add a third QR code directing people to a local announcements-only Signal thread.

Facilitation

Aim to keep your assembly under two hours, with one or two breaks. Better for everyone to leave with unfinished business and enthusiasm than to leave everyone exhausted. The idea is to create a situation in which everyone will want to gather again. And again.

Avoid unstructured large group conversation and back-and-forth exchanges between two people that reduce others to spectatorship. As a general rule, the more people are speaking, the more people will be engaged.

What follows is not a full meeting facilitation guide, but an example to help you design your own plan. You can consult this source for more ideas and points of departure. Peter Gelderloos has also written a guide to consensus decision-making.

Solo Reflection: Ask a question and instruct people to think about it for one minute, then to write about it for a minute or two. This can be a standalone tool, or be followed up by a pair-share or group discussion. The goal is to get the brain working.
Pair-Share: Ask a question. Encourage people to turn to a neighbor and answer the question to each other.
1-2-4-All: This is an effective way to crowdsource and refine group brainstorms and help strong ideas float to the top. Ask a question and instruct people to think about it for one minute, then to turn to a neighbor and share their responses for two minutes. Then combine pairs into groups of four, and have people share their answers and refine them into a list. Finally, ask each group to share a few of the responses they developed, and list the responses on a whiteboard or flip pad.
Breakout Groups: Divide into smaller groups, each tackling different questions, topics, or challenges. Then come back together to report back.

Questions

As an example, this is a list of questions, divided into personal reflection, local context, and broader systems-scale thinking, about how to prepare for the second Donald Trump presidency. These questions can be used to facilitate large or small meetings, to help think together in order to orient to the present and start making plans.

You could pick a few questions from each category and use them to facilitate assemblies and meetings. Choose the ones that are inspiring, troubling, or thought-provoking, and use them to help develop a shared orientation to the present moment.

Personal Reflection

What do you need to stay calm, collected, and able to act on your own timeline according to your own capacities, instead of being forced to react according to the tempo of the Trump administration?
Outrage and moralism have limited uses, and have already been channeled by Democrats to no great effect. How might we keep our outrage and anger in reserve, acting upon them when we choose to, on our own terms?
If you were to take all of your fears about what might happen seriously, what would you do differently than now?
If you were to take all of your hopes about what is possible seriously, what would you do differently than now?
What is a sustainable level of engagement for you? What risks are you willing to take? Which fights are you willing to make sacrifices to participate in? Which fights will you sit out?

Local Context

What resources, skills, and capacities do we already have covered? Which ones do we need to cultivate?
How do we conserve our energy to be able to intervene decisively when it is necessary, instead of reacting to every indignity?
Who are the people around us who are isolated? How do we cultivate connections with them?
Who is most likely to be targeted and affected by Trump? What can we do to build power with them?
How do we make the most of our resources? How can we add to them?
What is our collective sense of what makes life worth living? What increases our joy?
Which Trump policy is most likely both to affect your local community and to be unpopular? How can you begin organizing to subvert it?
How do we prevent the normalization of fascism?

Systems Thinking

Do you think Trump can effectively govern? If not, what are the state functions that we most want to collapse, and are any of them likely to be compromised by Trump either intentionally or through dysfunction? What are the state functions that we depend on most, and how can we build alternatives to them?
What new possibilities open up with a second Trump presidency? What is different, what remains the same?
Given a coming Trump presidency, what are the things that need immediate attention? What can we begin planning longer responses to?
What will Trump likely do in the first 100 days, and which moves are we best situated to fight back against? Which issues or tactics are most likely to deliver us a decisive win early on? What is our definition of winning? (For example, mass disruptive mobilization could count as a “win” whether or not it changes a specific policy in the short term.)
What medicines are likely to be threatened? What specific medicines do our community members need? Can we manufacture them? Can we get them prescribed and stockpile them? How can we distribute them? Are there other ways we can support community health?
How can we start preparing to impede mass deportations? What can we do to make every deportation a spectacle and to encourage mass non-compliance with the mercenaries deputized to carry out these orders?
What networks already exist to resist the criminalization of migration? Do we know people who are familiar with the terrain? What infrastructure already exists in these communities and what resources would be helpful? (For example, communications networks, vehicles, housing, data management, lawyers.)
Beyond specific state functions, what enables, emboldens, and extends Trump’s presidency into our everyday lives? How do we fight Trump and small-time fascists simultaneously, in such a way that a victory against one will aid us against the other?
We have seen speech and dissent violently repressed from the demonstrations in solidarity with Palestine to the Stop Cop City movement. How can we organize collective defense and solidarity in the face of increased criminalization of social justice movements? What infrastructure can we create now?
As we face a worsening economy, likely including the return of inflation and the consequences of new tariffs, how can we assure that rage is directed towards those exploiting workers rather than towards scapegoats? How can we expand organization among tenants, workers, and others?
How can we make sure that trans and queer people are safe? How can we ensure adequate medical care?
As civil society ceases to be an arena for people to resolve disagreements and we increasingly live in a world determined by heavily armed police, how can we protect our communities? How do we respond when they murder another person or seek to soak up more resources?
What forms of solidarity and support can we enact to preserve reproductive autonomy, whatever the laws may be?

An assembly during the Occupy movement in 2011.

The Sunbird: How to Start an Announcements-Only Thread on Signal : And How Organizers in Austin Used One to Coordinate Solidarity with Palestine

2024-05-27T20:36:48Z

As billionaires have clamped down on social media, secure group messaging platforms like Signal have moved to the fore as spaces for discussion and organizing. In this interview, organizers in Austin, Texas describe how they established Sunbird, a Signal account that runs an announcements-only thread to enable participants in the Palestine solidarity movement to share news and coordinate horizontally.

This model represents an alternative to centralized, top-down leadership models, showing how a movement can scale up without losing its decentralized, egalitarian character.

To skip directly to a step-by-step guide to establishing your own announcements-only Signal thread, click here.

Tell us about Sunbird.

Sunbird was started on April 24 by a group of unaffiliated students and community members in Austin, Texas. Our intention is to serve as an anonymous, real-time announcement and coordination platform to foster greater participation and activity from everyone who is involved in the struggle for the liberation of Palestine.

A principle that we hold dear is diversity of tactics. Everyone should be able to plan and promote events and share announcements while retaining their anonymity. In the current climate of repression, in which public organizers are being targeted all around the country, this is especially important. Here in Texas specifically, the 5th circuit ruling in McKesson v. Doe criminalizes organizing protest-related activities.

Sunbird is a creative technological solution to this problem. We draw inspiration from decades of movement infrastructure going back to Indymedia, the origins of Twitter as TXTmob, and the work of the Riseup collective, not to mention anonymous partisans in Ukraine, Hong Kong, and elsewhere who have creatively used Telegram groups to similar effects.

An announcement on Sunbird.

Why did you establish Sunbird?

Sunbird was created in the wake of the internationally coordinated economic blockades of April 15. When students established encampments at Columbia and then elsewhere, it became clear that in order to ensure the longevity and widest possible ownership of the movement locally, there was a need for an anonymous switchboard to potentiate fearless and confident participation.

The best way to combat the repression of social movements and to empower ourselves to act is to eliminate the distinction between organizer and organized. We believe that no individual or organization in Austin speaks for the entirety of the Palestinian resistance; consequently, we wanted to create a space that could empower everyone who feels ethically called to respond to the ongoing genocide to take action, announce events, and share live updates.

Who are you? Are you students?

We are an all-volunteer collective. Some of us are students at the University of Texas at Austin, others are community members. We are not affiliated with any organization, student or otherwise.

What scale is Sunbird operating on?

Sunbird is a platform for the Pro-Palestine, anti-genocide movement in Austin, Texas specifically. The need for platforms for anonymous coordination of diverse and creative movements exists wherever hearts yearn for liberation and freedom. We are inspired by similar projects elsewhere, but Sunbird is a special and unique solution deep in the heart of Texas. The power of Sunbird lies in our attention to and participation in our local context; rather than seeking to scale up this project, we encourage people to establish similar experiments with switchboard-style announcement threads elsewhere. We have heard that movements around the country are exploring creating platforms inspired by Sunbird.

We grew rapidly during our first few days, quickly hitting the 1000-person limit for Signal groups. To address this, we initially started a Telegram channel, as Telegram has better support for larger groups, but we ended up returning to Signal, establishing a second announcement channel that mirrors the content on the first. Downloading Signal in order to keep up to date with Sunbird was the first time many movement participants had installed an encrypted messaging application on their phones; Signal threads already existed for supply coordination, jail support, and other core functions, so sticking with Signal was easier than changing platforms. Though numbers fluctuate, there are currently approximately 1200 people across both announcement groups, a number that represents a sizable percentage of the most active and committed participants in the local pro-Palestine, anti-genocide movement.

State troopers and other violent mercenaries prepare to attack students on the University of Texas campus on April 29, 2024.

Why did you choose Signal?

There are two major benefits to using Signal. First, the messages are end-to-end encrypted, which means that Signal (the company) does not have access to them. Only you and the person on the other end can access the messages. This makes Signal different from texting and social media. Second, while you need a phone number to make an account, following a recent update, it is now possible to withhold your phone number from the people you message. This is very important for those who prefer to remain anonymous, because your phone number can be used to connect your messages to you.

We live in the age of surveillance capitalism. Big tech is actively working with governments and private security companies to monitor and undermine individual activists and entire movements. We see this in the shadow bans on Instagram and Twitter, the firing of pro-Palestine employees from Google, and the well-documented collaboration between law enforcement and tech companies.

We are normal people who live normal lives, but we take digital security very seriously. We are not technological or cryptography experts. We don’t have specialized skills. What we have set up is something anyone can do.

Anonymity is an important part of the Sunbird model.

How does Sunbird work?

We use Signal to coordinate, as well as encrypted documents in Riseup and Cryptpad. We work in shifts, since we receive up to hundreds of messages a day from different individuals, organizations, and journalists. To make sure that we all understand what is happening while any one person is away, we keep detailed notes, message drafts, and the text of frequently sent messages in a cryptpad.

We set up our Signal groups to only allow admins to post messages. This way, users can keep up with important developments and event information without being bogged down by chatter. All of the announcements in the group are aggregations of group member submissions. Though we edit for clarity—and we would have weeded out content by those opposed to Palestinian liberation had we ever received it—we welcome shared resources and announcements that movement participants believe would benefit others.

We don’t forward everything we receive. We avoid posts that would sow fear and disinformation; these can function as a form of self-repression, doing the work of the state. We work to verify all information that we send. We happily forward messages from many organizations in our role as a sort of “switchboard,” but we are not affiliated with any one organization. Our focus is on hyper-local announcements rather than nationally- or internationally-focused graphics, news, and content, though we do include some virtual events that movement participants submit.

How does Sunbird interface with larger established organizations?

In many movements, there are large, well-funded organizations that, despite their good intentions, undermine movements when they try to establish a central role as the single or authoritative voice of the movement. Just as resistance movements in Palestine collaborate to enable diverse forms of political action to take place alongside each other, we see Sunbird as encouraging a plural and diverse movement not monopolized by any one group. In places where a single organization has been able to establish itself as the “authoritative” voice of the Palestinian movement, this often undermines independent initiatives. These organizations can limit the bravery, ferocity, or creativity of movements, as the organizers are too cautious, unprepared, or incapable of directing those initiatives.

By using an anonymous switchboard-style model instead of the centralized model we have seen in the past from groups like the ANSWER [Act Now to Stop War and End Racism] coalition or PSL [Party for Socialism and Liberation], we protect all organizers—regardless of organization—from being held responsible for the activity of the movement as a whole. This is especially important in Texas in the wake of McKesson vs. Doe.

What has Sunbird enabled people to do?

During the first violent crackdown on students and community members, on April 24, Sunbird sent out live announcements to help keep students safe as state troopers called in from Houston violently attacked a planned rally. Sunbird facilitated the distribution of a jail support hotline phone number and circulated updates on police movements and other developments, helping students to remain calm amid the worst state violence seen on campus in decades.

The original organizers of the rally tried to work with police to disperse the crowd when the police declared it an unlawful assembly. After the police arrested the student organizers who were trying to de-escalate the situation and end the protest, the crowd became significantly bolder, leading to a several-hour standoff in which the state troopers were eventually forced to withdraw from campus. After the students successfully expelled the police from the campus, they declared the South Lawn a “Liberated Zone.”

A student paints a sign at the South Mall on April 25, 2024.

The courage and intelligence of the crowd in these moments—as well as the care, commitment, and initiative of ordinary students who were transformed by their experiences—represent an important corrective to the inertia one often finds in larger organizations.

Over the following days, Sunbird became a crucial element of infrastructure for students and others who wanted to organize events in the Liberated Zone. We invited everyone to submit event announcements, which we circulated on their behalf. We ourselves organized no events in the Liberated Zone, but we received event submissions from dozens of people and organizations, including a Popular University organized by the student organization that had planned the original protest on April 24, a talk from a doctor who had recently returned from medical mission in Gaza, and a call for musicians to participate in a jam session—not to mention reading groups, live call-ins with other student encampments, art makes, meetings for various newly-formed groups, and workshops on direct action, protest first aid, digital security, and the legal system for protesters.

We helped coordinate large supply runs for the Liberated Zone, helping off-campus supporters figure out the on-the-ground needs for food, water, art supplies, literature, and shade. We also helped put people in touch who took on the responsibility of storing these materials every night and bringing them back to the Liberated Zone each morning.

Many people told us that they would not have felt comfortable planning things without the anonymity, support, and encouragment that Sunbird provided. It often occurred that people would message Sunbird with an idea, saying something like “I think students/alumni/artists should…” In response, we encouraged people to organize events themselves and to use Sunbird to promote them. This approach to political organizing contrasts with the narrow vision of political change that is common among non-profit organizations and authoritarian political groups, which seek to maintain tight control on who participates in a movement and how. For our part, we believe that movements are stronger when people are able to determine for themselves how to contribute their particular talents, experiences, capacities, and specialized knowledge; the role of organizers should be to encourage autonomous initiatives.

Through Sunbird, University Baptist Church, which is located just off campus, declared itself a sanctuary space. Intitially imagined as a police-free space for student protestors fleeing violence, over the course of a few weeks the UBC space became a robust movement space with nightly dinners, workshops including media and legal trainings for those who had been banned from campus, and a place to store materials that could not be kept on campus overnight. The church held a nightly dinner for almost three weeks before switching to a weekly dinner. Arrestees from April 24 and 29 have used this space as a place to heal and plan as they face legal charges and pending disciplinary action. Here, Sunbird helped not by seeking to impose any one vision of organization, but by encouraging and promoting different local iniatives, in this case helping to put the pastor of the University Baptist Church in touch with people who had been contacting Sunbird looking for a space to hold workshops.

The first meeting of graduate students concerned about Palestine was announced via a message through Sunbird and took place in the Liberated Zone. No one there acknowledged being the person who posted the call, but within an hour, over 30 graduate students had formed a new robust organization with plans to coordinate graduation day actions and to draft a letter from the grad students to UT Austin president Jay Hartzell. As of today, the letter has well over 1000 signatures and graduate students are continuing to talk into the summer about how to use or withhold their labor to continue to pressure the university in the fall.

On April 29, we were contacted by students who were planning to set up an encampment. We were able to send out live updates during a second violent crackdown by Texas state troopers on UT campus, which led to the largest mass arrest in Austin since the anti-apartheid movement and the largest mass arrest with charges in this city’s entire history. Receiving live updates from people on the ground, Sunbird was able to help many people quickly mobilize to join and defend the students. We also shared announcements about post-arrest support logistics, including a jail support vigil that ran for nearly 48 hours as the arrestees were released.

On Commencement Day, several student walkouts took place at graduation ceremonies while other actions occurred around campus. All of these were announced on our Signal channels or described in live updates we received from students in attendance.

These are just a few examples of the events that Sunbird facilitated over the past month. Some of them were organized by established groups, but a large number of the events submitted to Sunbird were organized by individuals or informal groups that had just met, many of them new to organizing.

Demonstrators stand with linked arms to protect a solidarity encampment at the University of Texas, calling attention to the university’s relationship with defense companies on April 29, 2024.

Have there been any similar efforts in Austin since Sunbird got started? How have those fared? Can those efforts show us anything about how best to use this model, or what it is best for?

Yes. Both larger organizations and autonomous initiatives have started announcement-only Signal groups clearly inspired by Sunbird or attempting to compete with it.

In the group started by a larger organization, several admins were using their legal names, a practice we would caution against as it can allow the state to target organizers. Furthermore, a group like this can easily become limited in perspective, since it is not informed by submissions from other participants in the movement.

In general, it appears that the groups set up to compete with Sunbird were not able to last as long or experience as much success as we did because they did not adopt the principles we used to run Sunbird. The messages they posted were often poorly formatted, included conflicting or alarmist information, and did not foster the same sense that users could directly participate and interact with the admins. This was acceptable if you only wanted to receive announcements from organizers telling you what to do, but many found this a disempowering experience.

On the other hand, when smaller autonomous initiatives such as the church canteen or the organized arrestees have started announcement threads, it has been clear that the announcements are specific to those entities. In these cases, the model that Sunbird provided as an announcement-only thread was adopted, becoming part of a more broadly shared strategic intelligence across social movements in Austin.

How do you anticipate that the model you are employing might be repressed or coopted? Do you have any ideas for how people like you might deal with such challenges in the future?

This model cuts against the impulse to manage or consolidate. Our commitment to the principles outlined above sets Sunbird apart from established organizations. We have gained much of our influence by being calm and faithful cheerleaders of initiatives of all kinds. We sincerely want the movement to win. Established organizations want a megaphone for themselves, not a switchboard for everyone, so a model like this would probably feel like a waste of time compared to the larger reach available via social media. Our wager is that the movement itself requires a reliable switchboard that platforms many kinds of initiatives and trusts the creativity and intelligence of the participants. Without this advantage, we suspect that competing sectarian announcement threads would quickly fade into irrelevance or be eclipsed by better models.

Because of their centrality to movements, announcement platforms of all kinds receive a lot of attention. Since October, we have seen state and non-state actors go to great lengths to identify organizers in the movement for Palestine. Though it remains to be seen exactly what forms of repression will emerge in response to this cycle of movement activity, we want to reiterate that anyone employing this model should take precautions to do so anonymously, following good digital security practices and only working with a small number of trusted comrades.

Packing up signs after a protest at the University of Texas campus on April 25, 2024.

Start Your Own Announcements-Only Service on Signal

1) Obtain a burner phone and set up Signal on the burner. Use Signal settings to hide the phone number and set up a Signal username. To assist people in contacting you, post your Signal username in your profile byline.

2) Assemble a few trustworthy friends who are willing to take turns as admins. This is the hardest part. These individuals must be reliable, good writers, and willing to sit in front of a screen during entire shifts. The group of admins must be large enough that everyone can take breaks so as not to burn out, while being available to offer second opinions or review message drafts; but it should be small enough that everyone can trust each other and the identities of the admins won’t be widely known. Because of state repression, maintaining the admins’ anyonymity is of utmost importance. This is not something to discuss freely or in public organizing spaces; the admins’ identities should only be revealed on a need-to-know basis.

3) Install Signal desktop on the admins’ laptops (this is currently limited to five devices). Have each admin send the QR code from their Signal desktop to the person holding the burner phone to link their device to the same Signal account. If you already use Signal desktop, you can download Signal Desktop Beta to use for your own personal device and link your shared admin account to the more secure and stable Signal Desktop app.

4) Set up shifts. Shorter shifts are better during high-activity periods when admins must be monitoring messages constantly. During lulls, day-long shifts are feasible.

5) Set up a separate Signal group for admins. This is a good place to discuss message framing, workshop tricky submissions, and generally figure out how to stay on the same page. Determine a setting for disappearing messages that is long enough for consistency and short enough for security (we set our timer to one day). Utilize riseup pads as secure ways to draft messages, keep track of important contacts, paste old messages for reference, and keep lists such as supplies offered/supplies needed.

6) Set up the announcement thread with your burner number as the group admin and adjust the settings so that only admins can send messages to the group. Put a description of the function of the group and instructions for sending submissions (including your admin account’s Signal username) in the description of the group.

7) Advertise your group! We created small flyers with a description of the group’s function on one side and a QR code on the other. Friends of ours passed these out at large rallies and marches, explaining what Sunbird is and actively guiding people in downloading the app and setting up a Signal account. Our group’s growth started slowly, then snowballed as more people added their friends. Eventually, we reached the 1000-person Signal group maximum capacity and started a second mirror group to which we forwarded all the messages posted to the first group. If you do this, be sure to link successive groups in the initial group’s description so folks can easily send it to their friends.

8) Start sending messages! There are a few that we would send at least once a day: “What is Sunbird?” “How to hide your phone number and create a username,” and “How make an announcement or submit an event to Sunbird.” We sent out daily schedules comprised of submitted events, supplies needed at the encampment, and requests from people wanting to connect with others to get organized.

9) Dispatch trusted friends to actions and events to send you live updates via text, photo, and video.

10) Don’t burn out! Add admins as needed, take breaks sometimes, and be transparent with the group about posting hours, response times, and the like. It’s OK to match your posting frequency to upticks and lulls in movement activity.

Police use chemical weapons to attack protesters at the University of Texas on April 29, 2024.

Share some tips for writing Signal announcements.

Use a calm, helpful tone. Sunbird was not just a source of information; during high-intensity moments, it was a source of reassurance. Responding to direct messages in a timely manner instills trust in those messaging Sunbird with requests and submissions.
Forward a wide range of submissions. Include those from larger organizations and individuals while maintaining a focus on live local events and updates; steer away from analysis, national or international news, fundraisers, and the like (all of which have ample platforms in other spaces).
Synthesize reports on police, university employees, and Zionist presence. Follow SALUTE protocols (specifying the Size, Activity, Location, Unit, Time, and Equipment of groups as applicable). Avoid spreading fear or rumors.
Send clear, well-written messages. Put effort into good formating and add emojis for readability. This will convey that your account is serious and trustworthy.
Clearly distinguish the messages you draft yourselves from messages forwarded to you. We include ”FWD:” at the beginning of all forwarded messages and “Sunbird here!” at the beginning of messages that we author.
Avoid linking to sites like Instagram and Twitter. We are actively trying to create alternative platforms to the exploitative and empty ones offered by Meta and Elon Musk.

An example of an announcement on Sunbird.

What principles can make a switchboard service like Sunbird successful?

No one way works. Our movements are powerful when everyone takes initiative. This means that we post events and messages from everyone in the movement, seeking not to monopolize or centralize control but to proliferate a sense of empowerment and participation. While the power of running a platform might make sectarian decisions to exclude certain groups seem appealing, over the long run, this sort of control and exclusion runs contrary to the goal of the platform and could undermine trust in it.
Tell no lies, claim no easy victories. We work hard to verify all the information we send out. In some cases, this has meant following up to verify that jail support forms calling for confidential information or fundraisers for medical support were being hosted by trusted groups—that they were not honeypots or scams. Overwhelming people with poorly written, factually dubious messages is a surefire way to lose the respect and attention of movement participants.
Don’t Panic, Stay Tight, We’re Gonna Be Alright. In high-stakes protest scenarios, fear and panic can rapidly sap a crowd of confidence and undermine the bravery, determination, and resolve necessary to keep everyone safe and accomplish goals. While Sunbird played a crucial role providing live updates, we made an effort to keep our announcements factual. At some points, we held off on posting information (like confirmed gatherings of police far away from campus) that might instill panic rather than equipping people to act.
No Police Orders. The police have megaphones, guns, chemical weapons, and the backing of the courts and the prison system. They can announce their own orders and to enforce them. While other announcement threads reposted police dispersal orders or the ever-shifting rules of university bureaucrats, we chose to not amplify the messages of our enemies.
Take yourselves seriously. We are doing this because we want to stop the genocide in Gaza and because we are revolutionaries who believe in the liberation of Palestine and all oppressed peoples. The least you can do is take your historic task seriously: spend the extra time it takes to format things nicely, write clearly, treat every communication with the respect it deserves. The political culture in the US that treats “activism” as an unserious hobby undermines our movements and often results in people treating the political projects they value deeply with less care than the work they do for the careers they hate or the degrees they don’t really care about.

Professors, students, and supporters demonstrating at the University of Texas Austin campus on April 25, 2024

How to Host a Haunted House : A Guide for Anarchists with a Video Walkthrough

2024-01-19T11:05:14Z

In the following account, a participant describes how people involved in an anarchist social center set up a haunted house last October as a fundraiser to support defendants facing RICO charges as a consequence of repression targeting the movement to Stop Cop City. This is an excellent example of how creative efforts can add a joyous element to political outreach and legal support.

“I don’t know what to say about it other than it was one of the coolest events ever. I literally felt like you could get lost in our space. I didn’t recognize where I was.”

-Participant testimony

This video offers a walkthrough of the haunted house. Watch at your own risk!

How We Made a Haunted House

Many Halloweens ago, in a galaxy far far away, our local anarchist puppet troupe (not to be confused with the other local radical puppet troupe, which also involved anarchists) hosted a haunted house fundraiser for the local books-to-prisoners project.

It was a wild success. With a sliding scale admission of just $5-10, we raised over $10,000. Dozens of anarchists artistically collaborated, improvised, and laughed together throughout two nights of performance. The haunted house attracted hundreds of townspeople who otherwise would never have set foot inside our books-to-prisoners space, or been to exposed to the abolitionist and anti-authoritarian ideas undergirding the jokes and jumps throughout the haunt.

So, years later—to be precise, at our Weelaunee Defense Society meeting last September—when someone made a passing comment to the effect that we shouldn’t limit our imaginations to only the traditional rote tasks of solidarity committees, I leaped at the chance. “Halloween Haunted Weelaunee Forest! But, uh, I can’t work on it. I’m too busy…”

In the end, I was still nailing wooden trees together minutes before opening. Not because no one else was willing, but rather because the collective’s creative energy was too electrifying to resist.

Checklist

Personnel:

A team to hammer out a theme or narrative for your haunted house
A team to coordinate logistics
A team to promote the event (social media, fliers, interfacing with other projects)
Acting crew
Make-up and costuming crew
Set build and safety crew
Prop gathering and making crew
Electrical and special effects crew (e.g., sound and lighting)
Day-of volunteers

Materials:

paint
fabric
plastic sheeting
two-by-fours
plywood
chickenwire
nails
artificial foliage
bones
costume supplies

Tools:

hammers
saws
drills
paintbrushes
staple gun

Lights and Electricity:

black lights
strobe lights (make sure to warn attendees in advance)
colored gel lights
colored LED lights
extension cords and power strips
fog machines

Don’t let this list intimidate you—we made our haunted house a success with the initiative of a half dozen people. That’s all it really takes to get started.

As for brainstorming props and mechanics, go to a library and check out books about how to make your own haunted house. There’s a wealth of information on the subject.

Organization

Our anarchist social center is, for lack of a better term, federated. The building has its own name, but inside it, there are half a dozen spaces, each managed by a freestanding organization or project: a community print space, a radical lending library, a queer Jewish zine archive, a co-working space for a handful of anarchist publishers and podcasts, a semi-squatted garden, a harm reduction warehouse, and a free kitchen that serves two meals a week. To pull off the haunted house, we had to get permission from each of these projects and acquaint ourselves with their preferences.

The garden and library were already reserved, as another collective had already booked those areas to throw a Halloween rager on the same night that we wanted to do the haunted house. That left us with the harm reduction warehouse, the office, the kitchen, the print shop, and the hallway between those areas.

To coordinate with the party crew, we met face to face with as many collective members as we could gather. It was hard to find time for a critical mass of us to meet, but I think it was worth it to sit down in person. There are some things that just can’t be expressed well over text, like the fact that we sincerely weren’t trying to compete with the party, we wanted to collaborate with them.

We took a different approach with the project spaces. We chose point people for each room who would be responsible both for coordinating with the regular users of their space and for bringing together the materials and design for that room in the haunted house. By decentralizing responsibility, we maximized each point person’s investment in their room and their ability to respond to the needs of those who would normally use it. The project would have been too much for one person to take on alone. It also meant that each room had its own creative vision for the scares and wonders. The results included jump scares, compressed air guns, falling spider babies, chainsaw chaser guys, and a grotesque, impaled dummy representing a cop.

Internally, we met in person for a couple of hours once a week, and established a signal thread for discussion between meetings. Both the thread and the meetings were completely open to whoever wanted to contribute. All in all, the project took about a month and a half from start to finish. It was surprisingly little work for what we accomplished. Only afterward did it become clear how much more we could have achieved with just a little more time and teamwork.

We only had one “casting call” for actors. As it turned out, this was less a matter of selecting the best actors and more a question of begging the few people who showed up to commit to the roles, days, and windows of time that we needed them to fill.

Our dress rehearsal took place immediately before we opened. It took about five runs through to start to feel confident in our rhythm.

Building Another World

Early on, we decided that all of the money raised would go to support those facing charges stemming from forest defense. We explicitly agreed not to reimburse anyone for costs or materials from building the haunted house. This was a good decision. It forced us to be more creative with our designs than we would have been if we could have essentially just bought the haunted house piece by piece from Amazon or Walmart. Some of us did spend a little money on this or that, but the vast majority of the materials were acquired through anarchist economics—they were gifted, stolen, dumpstered, returned after use, or borrowed. We even attracted two professional makeup artists from the fancy ($60 admission!) studio haunted house in town. They originally asked to be paid but quickly decided that we were cool enough for them to happily donate their time and makeup!

We developed the story through big group brainstorming, then we tasked one of our participants—a person who had professional haunted house experience—with synthesizing the ideas into a script. One of the bigger debates in our group was whether an absurdist work of horror was an appropriate way to represent a struggle that has already cost some people their life or liberty. It wasn’t exactly a formal decision, but those who participated most in the preparation and were actually in touch with defendants all seemed determined to make the haunt a direct reference to the ongoing struggle to defend the forest, with our sights set on building towards the Block Cop City week of action just a couple of weeks after Halloween.

We had three long build days ahead of opening. Miraculously, no one lost any of their tools in the furious clanging and banging. Often, a small team would embark on a stated task only to be pulled in by a sudden, spontaneous, fun idea that would then take hours to accomplish, morphing again and again in the course of its genesis. Almost every room saw new details added right up to the very last minute. This is a benefit of haunted houses for anarchist expression: they are spaces of maximalist chaos. The more detail, the more it confuses, the more it creates chaos, the better.

Pulling It off

In addition to the actors in the haunt, we had a Stop Cop City protester to work the crowd as they waited in line and a stage manager to check in on the actors and make sure we took a ten-minute break every hour. Those roles were indispensable. We had a line the entire night and only got all the way through it at the very end: we somehow managed to plan perfectly for the audience that showed up for us. Actors kept showing up until the end, and we managed to improvise to fill in gaps as other actors left early.

One of the highlights of the night came when a mostly Spanish-speaking group arrived to tour the haunted house. The “project manager” character started them off in Spanish, figuring that the people in the other rooms would end up using English but that it would be all right, since those rooms weren’t as dependent on narrative. Instead, from one room to the next, the people running each room heard Spanish being used in the previous room and adapted their script accordingly, resulting in a complete tour in Spanish for the group. It was beautiful to discover that we could improvise and collaborate on the basis of our affinities without making formal decisions or even being in the same room together, not to mention the analogous benefits of exercising that kind of collaborative social muscle within an anarchist community.

Room for Improvement

As in many anarchist efforts, our chief error was that we didn’t plan for success. Early on in the planning process, we decided to forego a second night on Saturday because the social center was booked for a show. As it turned out, that show lasted two hours, took place early in the evening, and did not use any of the haunted house rooms. Cast and audience alike had a blast on the night we ran the haunted house. We could easily have hosted it a second night—we would have made more money and had more fun. Part of the reason that we rushed to commit to only hosting it for one night was that we were asking a lot of the projects who lent us their space, but we should have had more faith that we would succeed in pulling off something great. Whether you’re planning a risky direct action or just a fun piece of theater with your friends, the most important question in any anarchist activity is “What if everything goes so well that we want to take it further? What will we do then?”

We reached our fundraising goal, but we easily could have made double it by raising the price of admission. Admission was basically set at $5 by making a two-for-one ticket price: $10 admission to the party, $10 for the Haunted House, or $15 for both. In reality, the Haunted House was just another activity for the party-goers, and I think they would have paid $10 or more to check it out. Everybody in our collective seemed most comfortable making the admission price as adjustable and low as possible so that no one would be turned away for lack of funds, but—in my non-expert opinion—most of the crowd could and would have gladly donated more to forest defender legal defense if prompted. With dozens of comrades facing RICO and domestic terrorism charges, we shouldn’t take any opportunity to raise funds for granted.

We had planned to publish video from the haunted house to hype up the Block Cop City week of action that was scheduled to take place just a couple weeks later. In the end, unfortunately, we just didn’t have the capacity, partly because we had done so little planning around media. Likewise, early on, we had jokingly discussed adding a hell-house-style recruitment effort at the end of the haunt. Obviously, we weren’t actually going to sit people down in the final room and ask them if they would accept militant sabotage as their one and only salvation, but we did miss an opportunity to promote the week of action or channel the interest that we generated and the bonds forged that night into some kind of action treating our local Cop City profiteers to trickery.

We also failed to make a plan for cleaning up, which ended up demanding just as much effort as preparing for the haunt had. Fortunately, the success of the haunted house won us plenty of willing volunteers the next day… but still, we should have planned better. You need people to take out the trash, but you also need places to put the trash. Many thanks to the local queer Shakespeare collective for taking the psychedelic trees off our hands. We should have reserved time to communicate with the people responsible for the spaces on the backside of the haunt. Some of them were upset with how we left those spaces, while others expressed gratitude, having enjoyed the haunted house and saying that their spaces were cleaner after the event than they had been before it. The differential between the happy people and the unhappy people was one drawback to the decentralized, point-person model of organization, in that different point people had different standards regarding what it meant to clean up.

In Conclusion

You should host an anarchist haunted house in your social center! Apart from May Day, is there a more anarchist holiday than Halloween? Dark, mischievous, occult, fun!

Our haunted house brought in plenty of people who don’t usually participate in other projects at our social center, and the crowd that attended was full of people I hadn’t seen at previous event. And a whole lot of them screamed.

You can consult an interview about the haunted house and Halloween party here courtesy of our local radical journal, Living and Fighting.

Recipes for Disaster: Asphalt Mosaics : A Hot Weather Activity for Lonely Asphalt Near You

2023-05-24T20:00:14Z

We’ve just reprinted our classic manual for direct action, Recipes for Disaster. You can order a copy here. To celebrate, here’s one of the first chapters, a guide to installing unsanctioned mosaics in asphalt streets and parking lots.

In the course of the years of research that went into the book, our contributors experimented with a wide array of tactics—some drawn from protest movements, others from outsider art. Some of the most inspired participants in Recipes for Disaster reverse-engineered the process by which a mysterious street artist in their region had installed cryptic tiles in the streets. At the time, almost no one had heard of these “Toynbee tiles.” In the years since, they have become legendary, inspiring an entire mythology.

After we publicized the method in 2004, other tiles began to appear around the country. Others eventually made their own pop-culture guides to the art form; in 2011, a film appeared about the original artist. Yet we have yet to see asphalt mosaics themselves become widespread.

So just in time for summer—which softens up the asphalt, the better to receive your mosaics—we offer the following how-to guide. We’ve also added an account that postdates the book. Carry out these instructions and send us photographs of your work!

Asphalt Mosaics

This is a method for making colorful, permanent mosaic installations in asphalt roads and lots. Like glass, asphalt is amorphous, somewhere between a liquid and a solid; this means that a design affixed to it with more asphalt will eventually settle in and become a part of it. We owe our awareness of this technique to a nameless mystic we have never encountered in person.

“You must make and glue tiles!! You!!!! As media!”

We saw the first one in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. We were walking along a downtown street when we spotted a colorful patch of text embedded in the asphalt of a crosswalk. It was clearly made of vinyl floor tile—but how was it attached? We found the pictured on the left at the corner of Smithfield Street and Oliver Avenue. As we walked we saw more versions of the same design. While befuddled by the message, we were amazed by the technique, and avidly discussed how it might be reproduced. But a few blocks later, miraculously, we came upon the Rosetta Stone, a similar piece of the same material and text… except that this one featured an additional block of smaller text: instructions! The words were old and badly damaged, but we could just make out the crucial sentence: “…I USE ASPHALT CRACK FILLER…” We got right to work.

The next time we came through Pittsburgh we were on tour. Part of our program was a skill share on asphalt décor, and we had already left a respectable trail of color across the country. After our workshop, we ventured downtown to visit the original pieces. When we got there, we found most of them—but the crucial piece, the one with the instructions, were gone. It had been buried under a fresh slab of asphalt. We had discovered it in the nick of time.

In a subsequent internet search, we found that the same text has been spotted all over the world, though mostly in North and South America. There even seems to be a fan club. According to one posting, a piece in New York starts with the same Toynbee text, then adds, “Murder every journalist, I beg you.” Well, we would never be so impolite, but between that and the kindly instructions provided in Pittsburgh, it’s clear where the artist stands on do-it-yourself media.

So, in the spirit of the inventor who was thoughtful enough to declassify his or her technique, we present the findings of our attempts to reverse-engineer it. Now, go make and glue tiles!! You!!! As media!!!

Ingredients

The so-called “Toynbee Tiles” are made out of two kinds of floor covering material: Vinyl Composition Tile and true Linoleum.

Vinyl Composition Tile: The text is vinyl composition tile, also called “VCT.” VCT works because its color is solid, so when it wears down it still looks good. What will not work is the variety of self-adhesive, so-called “linoleum” tiles sold in hardware and tile stores. The surface of those tiles, whether it is a color or faux marble, is paper-thin veneer. When it wears down, it reveals its white substrate. For Christ’s sake, don’t even use those on your kitchen floor!

VCT is cheap, even brand new. It sells for less than sixty cents a square foot at hardware marts. The problem is that color selection is generally limited to a few bland options when you’re only buying single tiles. They do come in exciting colors, though, and if you want to order a case you can get almost any color you want; however, a case is expensive, and it’s unlikely that you will ever need forty-five square feet of any one color, so we have some other recommendations.

A lot of cites these days have salvage building-supply warehouses. They are often non-profit and community-run. These are a good place to start, as they usually have partial cases in a variety of colors. We have also had luck calling and stopping by floor covering stores and/or installation contractors. We ask if they have any partial cases in their storage area that we could have for an art project. Sometimes they are generous, sometimes they ask for a little money. Another method that has worked well with other materials is a classified “want ad” in the local paper. If someone has redone their own kitchen floor, they may have a partial box that they couldn’t bring themselves to toss but don’t really need. People love to donate these kinds of materials to starving artists.

Linoleum: The background of the Toynbee tiles is made of linoleum. Like VCT, linoleum is solid color through and through. But beware—the word “linoleum” is also used generically to refer to any non-ceramic floor tile. True linoleum is a specific product made of flax fiber and linseed oil. You must use the real thing. Like carpet, linoleum mostly comes in rolls, and has to be cut and fitted into place when installed. For this reason, it is highly likely that you will be able to get cut-offs for cheap or free from an installation contractor or salvage lot.
Asphalt crack filler: Asphalt crack filler is acrylic-based liquid tar made for filling cracks in asphalt driveways. It is available in most hardware stores, especially in the summertime, when it is best applied. It comes in one-gallon jugs. We have found many brands, but just two basic types. The regular strength stuff says that it will fill cracks of up to half an inch. The maximum strength product says it will fill 3/4-inch cracks and last longer. Both work, but for the minimal price difference, we lean toward the heavy-duty stuff. It goes for around $7.50 a gallon. One gallon is good for a dozen or more one-square-foot designs.
Cardboard or Plywood Board: For an area as big as your design, in good condition and flat with no creases or dents.
Tarpaper
Waterproof Wood Glue
Utility Knife (with plenty of blades, as they dull quick on VCT)
Metal Ruler or Straight Edge
Stapler or Tape
Heat Gun (optional, but helpful)

Instructions

You have two options for creating your design. You can make mosaics, or you can make what we’ll call Toynbee-style pieces, in which your text or image is set into a solid background.

Mosaics

The advantage of the mosaic approach is that they can be made with VCT alone. You may find VCT to be easier to obtain than linoleum. Because of its brittleness, VCT is hard to cut into precise shapes such as small letters, and large pieces of it can crack apart as the road shifts with temperature and pressure. Mosaics circumvent these problems, by piecing together small, randomly cut pieces of tiles to form a design.

First, you have to make whole tiles into pieces. We’ve developed a method for producing durable pieces of irregular shapes. Using a utility knife and straightedge, score a line 1/2 to 3/4 inch from the edge of a tile (figure 1.1). Now Gently work from one end of the line to another, bending the strip away from the score line. The crack will become deeper and deeper, until it finally breaks. Once you have removed the strip, score it cross-ways to make smaller bits (figure 1.2). It is best to make a wide variety of shapes: squares, rectangles, rhombi, triangles. The more variety you have, the easier it will be to put your image together.

Figure 1.1.

Next, you need a flat surface. It is best to work on a flat piece of plywood or thick cardboard, so you can move your piece as necessary. Cut out a piece of tarpaper that is larger than your design, and tape or staple it to your work surface. The tarpaper needs to be flat and smooth; tears or wrinkles will mess things up.

Smear the surface of the tarpaper with an even coat of waterproof wood glue. The glue-cover area should extend one or two inches beyond the edge of your design on all sides. Let the glue dry thoroughly.

Figure 1.2.

Prepare the surface for layout. With a cloth, spread a thin layer of glue on the dry glue. This will cause the letters to stick to the glue surface.

Figure 1.3.

Lay out your design on the glue-coated tarpaper (figure 1.3). If the glue dries before you get all the tile down, add a thin layer of fresh glue. Laying out the tile pieces will appeal to your compulsive side. Put them down like a puzzle, custom-shaping pieces if need be. Aim to maintain consistent 1/8-inch gaps between tiles; as the tile itself is 1/8-inch thick, you can use a piece of tile as a guide (figure 1.4). If the tiles are too close to one another, the tar will have trouble flowing between pieces; if they are too far apart, the tar will span the gap, but it will be a weak spot. A consistent layout will also make your design more readable.

Figure 1.4.

Keep your design at least one inch away from the edge of your plastic, staples, or tape.

If you are using text, lay it out backwards. This is easy to forget! What you see when you are laying out your image will actually be the underside when it is installed.

Allow the second layer of glue to dry thoroughly. Before you move on to adding tar make sure no tile bits are loose. If one is loose, glue it back down.

Shake the jug of asphalt crack filler thoroughly and pour it over your design (figure 1.5). The ideal consistency of the crack filler is like honey. If the brand you are using is too thick, place the jug in the sun so it will flow better; you can also try adding a little water. The important part of this step is to get the tar between the tiles. The surfaces of the tiles need not be tar-free, but you should be able to see the shapes and some of the colors of the tiles. When the entire design is covered, add a 1/2-inch border of tar beyond the edge of the tiles.

Figure 1.5.

Cut a piece of tarpaper in the shape of your design and, while the tar is still wet, press the tarpaper into the tar. If the paper starts to curl at the edges do something to hold it down. Once the tarpaper is stuck flat, spread another layer of tar on the back of the tarpaper, so it is completely coated with tar. This second layer of tar should be no more than 1/16-inch thick.

Refer to “Finishing and Installing” below to complete your project.

Toynbee-Style Designs

The Toynbee method is laborious, but it looks fantastic, and produces installations that are, by some indications, more durable than mosaics. For our example, we will assume you are using text, although you can use an image instead.

First, cut your text out of either VCT or linoleum (figure 1.6). It is worth your while to use a very sharp utility blade for this. Both linoleum and VCT become soft and easier to cut if left in the sun; if you are doing anything intricate, a heat gun makes the stuff cut like butter. If need be, you can make difficult letters on more than one piece.

Figure 1.6.

Next, trace the text (figure 1.7). Lay out a piece of linoleum (not VCT) and arrange your text on it. Using a fine-point permanent marker or dark pencil, make a close tracing of each letter, or place the entire text on the linoleum at once and use a light dusting of spray paint to transfer the letters precisely onto the background. If you use the spray paint method, lay out the text backwards, so the paint will be on the back side of your tiles.

Figure 1.7.

Now, cut out the negative space. Use a sharp blade, and make sure your linoleum is warm. Cut out the traced letters as precisely as possible (figure 1.8). Save the spaces in the letters, such as “O” and “B” to put back in. Save the letters you cut out; you can use them with a background of a different color for your next design. Toynbee-style pieces do not require an 1/8-inch gap between pieces—in fact, the tighter the fit, the better.

Figure 1.8.

Staple or tape a piece of tarpaper on a flat portable surface—cardboard and plywood both work well. Cover the tarpaper with a thin, even layer of waterproof wood glue. Spread the glue so it covers an area larger than your design by at least two inches on all sides. Next, place the design. Lay the linoleum background onto the wet glue so that the readable side is stuck to the tarpaper. Fit each letter into place (figure 1.9). Thoroughly remove any glue that has made its way into the side of the tiles not facing the tarpaper. When everything is in place, weigh the piece down with a board, and allow twelve or more hours for the glue to dry completely; it takes much longer than usual because there is hardly any airflow.

Figure 1.9.

After the glue is dry, apply the tar. Squeeze some tar onto the center of the design, and use a piece of card to spread it to a 1/16-inch thickness. Add a 1/2-inch perimeter of tar around the edge of the entire design.

Cut a piece of tarpaper in the shape of your design, and press the tarpaper into the wet tar, just as you would in preparing a mosaic design. Once the tarpaper is stuck flat, spread another layer of tar on the back of the tarpaper so it is completely coated with tar. The second layer of tar should be no more than 1/16-inch thick.

Finishing and Installing

Let your piece dry. In warm sunlight, most crack fillers will dry sufficiently in eight hours; in the shade of indoors, it could take up to twenty-four hours. When you think it is safe to handle your piece, detach it from the board. The side that has been facing the board is the top of your mosaic. Trim the tarpaper on the top side so that it is a half-inch bigger than the tar-coated tarpaper on the bottom side. The layer of tarpaper on top of your piece will remain until it is washed or worn away.

Prepare the bottom surface of your piece. Different tar products dry to different consistencies. If your tar has dried like a tire rubber—flexible, yet dry to touch—use a paper towel to spread a very thin layer of fresh tar to the bottom side. The goal here is to create a sticky surface, not to make a layer of wet tar! If your tar has dried to be flexible and sticky, it is not necessary to add fresh tar.

Find a spot. Asphalt crack filler sticks only to asphalt such as is used to make roads, sidewalks, and paths. It does not work on concrete, brick, or cobblestone. Find a high visibility location. We recommend crosswalks, as your piece is probably scaled for pedestrian viewing: pedestrians will be able to enjoy your work as they cross the road, and the passing cars, will help mash the piece into the asphalt. Also, in their capacity as dumb and dangerous moving objects, cars will faithfully deter someone from kneeling down to pick at your piece. Yes, just this once, cars are working for you!

Don’t let your masterpiece be covered up in the prime of its life just because the road needed repair. Your tile can last for ten year, possibly longer than its asphalt host. Apply your piece on the freshest asphalt you can find that is also a good location. Also, new asphalt is softer and stickier, and thus more receptive to your decorations.

Install your artwork. You should install your design during warm weather, when the asphalt is warm, soft, and dry. If the forecast calls for significant rains in the next few days, wait until they have passed. Bring a small brush to remove sand or debris from the road. Place your piece by simply setting it down, tar side to the road. Now walk, skip, jump, and run all over it to make sure it is firmly planted. The top layer of the tarpaper will serve to camouflage and stabilize your piece for the first few weeks, when it is most vulnerable, while it begins to join with the road. Eventually, the top layer will wear through or wash away, unveiling your masterpiece.

Tips

You can give your tile more time to set into the asphalt by adding extra layers of tarpaper on top of the design. Before you go out, cut two pieces of tarpaper a few inches bigger than your tile all around. Smear the pieces of tarpaper with a generous amount of glue, and stick them together glue side to glue side. This will keep them from drying out or sticking to things on the way to the installation site. Once you have laid the tile down and walked on it a bit, peel the two pieces of tarpaper apart and paste them—one on top of another—over the tile.

Brightly colored tiles look the best on asphalt; colors like dark green tend to be invisible unless they are used effectively with other colors. Make sure there is plenty of color or tone contrast between your figure and its background, especially if your design includes text.

Experiment with other materials! You have probably seen pennies, fasteners, and bits of brake light embedded in asphalt at intersections; thin bits of metal, mirror, or plastic will work too.

To make cutting easier, heat your VCT or linoleum with a heat gun or in an over set on warm; make sure the area in which you do this is well ventilated.

As with stickers and stencils, pizza boxes are great for transporting pieces to their designated sites (figure 1.10).

Figure 1.10.

This technique has a lot to recommend it over standard graffiti and wheat pasting: it can be more permanent, it makes use of a medium not yet often utilized creatively, it is still virtually unknown to the authorities and so can be remarkably easy to get away with.

Here’s a dare: make asphalt mosaics as popular—and unpopular—tomorrow as spray paint murals are today!

Account: The Adventure of Our Lives

The following is excerpted from the report on the 2007 CrimethInc. convergence.

In August 2003, after participating in the CrimethInc. convergence described in “Under the Helicopters,” my barnstorming group made one more tour stop—in Athens, Ohio. By that time, following an unplanned parade-turned-riot and subsequent media feeding frenzy, there was an APB out and police officers were waiting for us everywhere we went.

Our final evening of performances and workshops went smoothly enough until the conclusion. We’d been ending each event by teaching people how to make the asphalt tile mosaics described in Recipes for Disaster, then affixing one in a street as a token of our passing. We debated briefly as to whether we should attempt this act of unorthodox vandalism under the watchful eyes of the police, and finally concluded—as we always do—that we had to go for it and let the consequences sort themselves out. A slapstick scene ensued such as one might see in a European comedy: imagine us running around the campus pursued by police and audience members, attempting to elude the former and put down our tile mosaic in front of the latter. In the end, we succeeded in deploying the mosaic, but were followed by police to the house we’d intended to stay at and had to escape through the back alley to sleep somewhere else.

Months later, unbeknownst to us and against all odds, the mosaic remained in the parking lot—somehow the police never bothered to have it removed. Long before we ever met, the person who is now my lover and partner walked past a colorful heart set into the asphalt on her way to class every day, wondering how it came to be there.

Fast-forward nearly four years, to the end of July 2007. The tile mosaics our barnstorming tour put down have been paved over and the passionate friendships that bound our group together have cooled. All of us are now involved in new projects and friendships—for example, I’m back in Athens, in an unpermitted parade at the conclusion of the sixth CrimethInc. convergence, surrounded by hundreds of costumed maniacs. Some of them are spinning fire; others are beating improvised percussion instruments, including one enormous drum pushed on a shopping cart; still others have just dislodged an enormous road blockade reading “ROAD CLOSED” from a construction site and are carrying it to the front. Among the whirling dancers and masked faces, through the haze of enthusiasm and good cheer, I can make out a couple people who were with me here four years earlier. We’ve covered a lot of ground in that time.

My partner calls me over to a spot in the road. There, set in the asphalt, as fresh and bright as the day we put it there, is a colorful tile heart.

When experiments like these work, they connect us to spaces and to each other in a magical way, giving our lives back the narrative meaning that capitalism drains from everything. They may not immediately overthrow the government or abolish private ownership of capital, but they give us the networks, experience, and sense of our own power necessary for tilting at such monstrous windmills. Separated from our ongoing struggle for liberation they are senseless, but they aren’t only useful as incremental steps towards liberation—they also are that liberation, as we recapture our lives, moment by moment, from routine and obedience.

“Resurrect Dead - The mystery of the Toynbee Tiles (2011).” You can also learn more at Steve Weinik’s website.

Producing Transdermal Estrogen: A Do-It-Yourself Guide

2022-12-15T18:51:29Z

This guide describes how a small collective produced and distributed transdermal estrogen using reproducible do-it-yourself methods.

What follows here is not medical advice; it is a report on an experiment in process, providing proof of concept. Generally speaking, if you want to take estrogen and you have the option to acquire it through the prevailing medical institutions, we encourage you to consider taking that route. At the same time, it is already difficult for some people who need estrogen to access it that way, and those difficulties may only increase in the future—so we believe that information like this should be distributed widely. Taking a hands-on approach to healthcare can give you a more direct relationship to your agency, which can give you more control over your safety in the long run, provided you learn about the risks and reflect properly on them.

Above all, we believe in gender self-determination: the idea that everyone should be free to position themselves as they see fit within the matrix of gender. Neither governments, religions, patriarchal authorities, nor anyone else should be able to confine us within their narrow visions of who we should be or who we can become.

This guide was adapted from a zine by the Fairy Wings Collective, available here along with related resources.

Introduction

We made our own transdermal estrogen and started giving it out to people. Transdermal means you just rub it on your skin and that’s it: no needles, no adhesives, no eating it. When we tell other anarchists about this, they’re usually like, “Oh yeah, I talked to some friends about that once, but we didn’t know how to do it.” We got together with about four people and scrounged up a few thousand bucks and decided to figure it out. This article describes what we did, some of the risks involved, and how you can do it yourself.

With access to transgender health care becoming increasingly politicized and restricted, especially in certain parts of the country, being able to make our own hormones is a necessary step towards ensuring that people in our communities have access to the care they need. Doing this project ourselves instead of relying on doctors, prescriptions, and the established medical supply chain offers more privacy, autonomy, and ease of access for individuals who might find it difficult to access hormones through traditional methods. Our primary audience includes young people, people who are transient or without an established address, people who are uninsured or underinsured, and those living in rural or politically conservative areas. We don’t think we can reach all of those people via our little distribution network—that’s why we are proposing that anarchists in other areas start making DIY estrogen in a decentralized way. We encourage anyone who wants to participate in this project to read this guide and start producing their own supply.

First, some good news: it works! Several individuals started using the transdermal estrogen we made without taking any other exogenous hormones. After several weeks, they had successfully raised their estrogen levels. They were able to adjust the dose by taking more or changing the administration site, as different places on your body offer a higher or lower efficacy of absorption. Below, we’ll offer a more detailed report on their experiences.

Estradiol suppresses your body’s production of other sex hormones through a negative feedback loop; an estradiol level of 150 pg/ml is usually enough to suppress your body’s production of testosterone into the female range. However, current standards of care and some individuals’ body chemistry may require an anti-androgen to achieve these levels. Since the dose is flexible and site of administration can be changed to suit your needs, some of this depends on your body and the results you want.

For more information, check out TransFemScience.org—specifically this article.

The process of producing a usable form of estradiol is pretty straightforward: buy ingredients, mix them together in set ratios, apply. Based on our experiences, the hardest parts were researching how exactly to turn estradiol powder into something usable and attempting to find a lab to analyze the estradiol we bought. Now that we’ve done those things, you can copy our steps and end up with about the same result.

We encourage you to do your own research and learn as much as you can on this topic. None of us are experts and we would all benefit from learning from each other. The way we chose to approach this is not the only way. We could have bought a pill press and a binding agent and cranked out estradiol pills. We could have produced injectable estradiol. However, based on our limited knowledge of chemistry and medicine and our cleanliness standards (reasonable, but not a clean room and not sterile), we felt that producing transdermal estrogen was the safest and easiest approach. Contamination risk is very real and injectable products must meet a much higher standard to be safe for use.

You will need:

Secure methods for communication and online activity: encrypted email (Protonmail)¹ and messaging (Signal), encrypted document storage (Cryptpad), Tails stick or Tor
Addresses for receiving online orders
Money: roughly $2000 to buy all supplies for 250 bottles of about six months’ supply each
A physical location to make the product and store supplies
A distribution location or plan
Trusted friends to help with production, distribution, and any other parts of the process

Rather than setting up a formal organization, we favor a more decentralized approach. This is why we called our project Boobs not Bombs—an homage to Food not Bombs, a call to action for people in any community to feed their neighbors. Anyone with a small set of supplies can make enough do-it-yourself estrogen to serve hundreds of people. We intentionally chose reproducible methods. Our goal is to equip others to make do-it-yourself hormones as well. You know your community and its needs better than we do. Via direct action, we can secure the autonomy of queer and trans folks, even in the face of an increasingly oppressive and surveilled future.

If you are starting a Boobs Not Bombs, email us!

Boobs Not Bombs!

Disclaimer: Neither the vials we produced nor this text are intended to diagnose, treat, prevent, or cure any medical illness. None of these statements has been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. They are NOT medical advice.

Boobs Not Bombs is a reference to Food Not Bombs, an anarchist food distribution project dating back decades. Boobs Not Bombs is our name for the idea of distributing estrogen cheaply or for free; Fairy Wings Mutual Aid is the name of our specific chapter. This chapter was created as an explicitly anarchist project and we have sought to organize it around anarchist principles. If anything in here is unclear or confusing don’t hesitate to send us an email at fairywingsma@protonmail.com. We’d love to hear from you!

Application

A standard dose is 0.57 ml—about a quarter of a dropper—applied to the scrotum or neolabia once per day. Based on the bloodwork we have done so far, this should be enough to fully suppress testosterone into the female range and induce feminization.

For lower levels, switch to a less efficient application site or reduce the dosage. You can choose from the following application sites, listed from least absorbent to most absorbent: the soles of the feet or palms, abdomen, forearm, armpit, scrotum/neolabia.

If your levels aren’t high enough, you could increase the dosage or apply a dose twice per day. It’s worth noting that once testosterone has been suppressed, higher levels of estradiol have not been shown to produce any benefit and carry additional risk.

Applying lotion afterwards at the site of application will slightly increase absorption. Using sunscreen will decrease absorption. For one hour afterwards, make sure not to make skin-to-skin contact between the site of application and anyone who doesn’t want additional estrogen in their body.

Risks

As in many do-it-yourself projects (and most activities), there are risks to making or using this product.

Some risks have to do with the supply chain. For example, we tested the estradiol we bought as raw powder and found it to be 97.2% estradiol. The test also showed that it contained no heavy metals. That being said, we weren’t able to figure out what the remaining 3% was. Is there something dangerous in that 3%? We don’t know.

The same is probably true for grocery store supplements as well. If a company is accused of putting dangerous chemicals in its supplements, it might be investigated, but otherwise, supplements are not regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. In our opinion, this estrogen is probably about as dangerous as a standard over-the-counter supplement. If you are able to get estradiol prescribed by a doctor and you can afford it, it will undoubtedly be higher quality, and we recommend you do so.

Nevertheless, that isn’t possible for many people. That’s where this guide comes in.

There are inherent risks to taking estradiol, as well. The following is written for AMAB (Assigned Male at Birth) people. For AFAB people, the risks are greater and the rewards are very different.

For all people, estradiol is associated with blood coagulation. This can lead to a number of adverse events including heart attacks, strokes, and blood clots, also known as thrombosis. Of particular concern are venous thromboembolisms, or VTE events—blood clots in veins moving blood towards the heart. For AMAB people that take estradiol, the increased risk depends on the dose and the means of administration. The risks are greater with higher levels; some ways of taking estradiol are more associated with VTE events than others. The exact risks are not precisely known, as research on trans people is poorly funded. However, based on the available data, it seems that transdermal estradiol levels within 100-200 pg/ml (and perhaps as high as 300 pg/ml) produce little or no additional risk of clotting events. For a fuller overview of the research, read this.

Another risk to consider is breast cancer. Like blood clots, there seems to be a causal link between exposure to estrogens and breast cancer. This also seems to be dose dependent, so higher doses of estradiol will result in an increased risk of breast cancer. As with blood clots, the exact degree of risk isn’t precisely known; for AMAB people taking estradiol, the risk level is likely to be somewhere between the risk levels for cis men and cis women.

Lastly, the primary effects of estradiol itself—feminization and suppression of your body’s reproductive processes—could be considered risks, depending on your perspective. For better or worse, the vast majority of effects from estradiol, like smoother skin and fat distribution, are reversible. However, some effects are permanent, including breast development and, possibly, infertility. Anyone who might use this product should be made aware of the risks so they can make an informed decision.

Estrogen is not a scheduled substance. It is legal to import it. The other ingredients you need are all legal to purchase. As long as an item is not labelled for medicinal use, it is legal to sell or give away even if it contains potentially bioactive ingredients—think of herbal medicines sold in stores. In many places, you can buy estrogen over the counter to alleviate symptoms of menopause. All in all, we think that the present legal risk is very low.

However, this could change at any time: several states have passed laws against mailing or importing misoprostol and some have introduced new laws restricting access to gender-affirming medical care for youth or even adults. It’s probably better to stay a bit below the radar in case this becomes illegal later. Currently, our chief security concern is publicity from hostile far-right groups: we’re more concerned about showing up on Fox News than FBI raids.

Unlike estrogen, testosterone is a scheduled drug—it is generally illegal to access it without a prescription. Producing and distributing testosterone would involve a different set of legal risks.

As there is insufficient research on trans health, the long-term health consequences of starting and stopping hormone treatment are unknown. Hormones affect many body systems in ways Western medicine still doesn’t understand, and there is little data available on the long-term effects of intermittent hormone use.

Results

So far, the Fairy Wings chapter of Boobs not Bombs has distributed approximately 200 bottles of transdermal estrogen. Early on, we invited several volunteers to switch to Boobs not Bombs estrogen and to test their estrogen and testosterone levels. As more bottles were distributed, people who were starting hormones for the first time also provided lab results. We asked volunteers to wait until they had been taking Boobs not Bombs estrogen for three to four weeks before they tested, in order to avoid lingering effects from other preparations of estradiol they may have been on previously. The results we collected do not meet the rigorous standards of a scientific study, especially considering the wide variety of possible administration sites, dosing, and individual variables including other medical conditions, concurrent medications (hormone-related and otherwise), lifestyle, and the like. However, we can provide the information we received from volunteers.

Since the beginning of the project, five people have taken or switched to Boobs not Bombs estrogen and provided numerical lab results. While we asked a standard set of questions of each person, some people were unable to have their testosterone levels checked and some provided incomplete information. At least one individual never took any lab tests, but did experience breast development and sensory changes.

One person reported applying a quarter of a dropper daily to the scrotum/neolabia, which resulted in estrogen levels of 250 pg/ml and testosterone 200 ng/dl. Two people applied the estrogen to their forearms: one used a half dropper per day and measured estrogen 94 pg/ml, while the other used one full dropper daily for estrogen levels of 125 pg/ml. The two people who administered this estrogen to their armpits were also both taking anti-androgens. Both applied a half dropper per day; one had estrogen levels of 200 pg/ml and the other 842 pg/ml (and testosterone of 33.3 ng/dl).

According to transfemscience,

Commonly recommended ranges for transfeminine people in the literature are 100 to 200 pg/mL (367–734 pmol/L) for estradiol levels and less than 50 ng/dL (1.7 nmol/L) for testosterone levels (Table). However, higher estradiol levels of more than 200 pg/mL (734 pmol/L) can be useful in transfeminine hormone therapy to help suppress testosterone levels. Lower estradiol levels (≤50–60 pg/mL [≤180–220 pmol/L]) are recommended and more appropriate for pubertal and adolescent transfeminine individuals.

If you want to share your own results, email us and tell us how long you’ve been taking this estrogen, any other hormone-related medications, your dose, administration site, and lab results (estrogen and testosterone levels).

Why?

For some people, there can be risks associated with not taking hormones, as well, and these can also be life-threatening. Those who want to restrict access to hormones often speak about the “irreversible changes” that are associated with taking hormones. In fact, our bodies are always changing in irreversible ways. Taking exogenous hormones can be a way of intentionally participating in that change in order to move it in a direction that feels more aligned with how you want to be.

While there are numerous barriers that prevent people (especially trans people) from accessing hormones like estradiol, there are comparatively few mechanisms to ensure that everyone who wants hormones has access to them. Furthermore, even when the medical establishment is able to meet our needs, this only occurs on the terms of insurance corporations, medical review boards, the state, the family, and other institutions that have historically served to oppress, exploit, and exclude people. These institutions restrict access to hormones and other resources in order to reinforce cis-heteronormativity (the idea that being cis and straight is the only “correct” or “natural” way to be). They aim to reinforce these ideas and gate-keeping structures in order to diminish our bodily autonomy because that helps them to maintain control of all the other aspects of our lives. Rather than trying to work within and validate the existence of those institutions, we can deliberately choose to work outside of them. We believe everyone should be free of the coercive power of the state and should have access to the tools they need to shape their bodies however they want.

Some people believe that only massive institutions can meet people’s needs and that those institutions have to adopt repressive practices in order to do so. By making estradiol widely and easily available at little or no cost, we can help people access a greater degree of bodily autonomy and give people cause to question the necessity of centralization and control.

How?

The following instructions have been calculated for a batch that starts with 100 grams of estradiol. This number was chosen because it’s relatively affordable and makes the math a little bit easier.

The formula that we used is based on a patent (technically two patents) we found for a transdermal birth control product. The patent describes a product that is 0.24% active ingredient, which is split between a progestin (0.18%) and estradiol (0.06%). We modified this recipe to include only estradiol at 0.24%. We recommend that you look over these patents to get an idea of what we’re doing and to make sure we’re not missing anything. Copies of these patents, the spreadsheets we used to calculate the amounts of each ingredient, and other helpful information are available here.

Before Getting Started

Before embarking on your own Boobs Not Bombs adventure, think carefully about the risks involved and whether you’re willing to take them. Because Estradiol is not a controlled substance, what we are doing is legal—as far as we can tell—given that what we are offering is not intended to diagnose, treat, prevent, or cure any medical illness. Nevertheless, the fact that something is legal has never stopped the state from harassing people. This is especially true because trans people have unfortunately become a target for many conservative politicians. The prospect of people handing out estrogen on the street is ripe to get blown out of proportion by the right-wing media and politicians looking to score points by attacking trans people. If you aren’t comfortable with these risks, consider helping existing BnB efforts by donating to or contacting the authors of this text.

If you decide you are willing to take these risks, watch this video discussing why you should never speak to the police. You can also read this text about security culture.

As a rule, don’t discuss your involvement in this project with people that you don’t trust. Only tell people what they need to know. If you need to discuss the project with others via electronic means, always use open-source encrypted software like Signal, ProtonMail, and Cryptpad. Of course, every approach has limitations and there is nothing you can do to guarantee that you haven’t left a trace. The guidelines we have set out here should be regarded as a solid baseline to add to, rather than a security guarantee. For more information about digital security, read this.

Project Infrastructure

The first step in this project is to get together with your friends and comrades and see who would like to help make it a reality. If you don’t have a network of trusted friends who are interested in helping, try going to the closest anarchist community center or mutual aid project and see what you can help out with. Hopefully, you will develop friendships with people in the course of working together. If all goes well, eventually Boobs Not Bombs can be one of the projects you can add to your shared repertoire!

If you are going to work on this project on your computer, we recommend that you get a Tails stick. This is a USB flash drive with the Tails operating system installed on it. Tails is a secure operating system that only connects to the internet via the Tor network and saves absolutely nothing to your hard disk. To obtain a copy of Tails, have a friend that already has a Tails stick clone it. If you don’t know anyone with Tails, you can download it and read a full set of instructions here. If this process seems overwhelming, find a computer-savvy friend to help you.

Next, start your computer running Tails and create an email account with which to contact vendors. It is strongly recommended that you only sign in to this email from within Tails. Remember, Tails and Tor are not magic. If you sign in to your personal email account at the same time as you sign in to the email you are using for this project, you will have associated the two. Only work on one project at a time when using Tails.

To prepare for ordering and receiving shipments, get together with your friends and figure out how to receive the packages anonymously. The easiest way is to get a friend who isn’t directly involved in the project to receive the package for you. Ship it to them under their own name and then pick it up from them. Receiving packages is a good way people can aid the project while limiting their involvement. Other possibilities include getting packages shipped to a friendly community center or an abandoned house, or dividing up the ingredients and shipping them sporadically to your own houses. For example, one person could order and receive the propylene glycol, another the diethylene glycol monoethyl ether, a third person the alcohol. Doing it in this way reduces the chances that an investigation could determine the pattern of purchases and deliveries.

If someone is receiving a package, it’s usually best that they pay for the package themselves using their own payment methods and then you reimburse them in cash. You can probably send multiple packages to some people if the things they’re receiving are not sketchy, such as scales and glass jars. At the same time, you should seek to minimize your online purchases. Wherever possible, buy things in person with cash. Do you need to buy glass overflow jars online, or can you get them from a thrift store?

You will need a certain amount of resources to get started. If need be, raise funds discreetly among your friends. You should be able to fund the entire project with about $2000. If you can, set aside more than this to allow for unexpected problems. Store these funds as cash in a secure location. Keep track of how much money comes in and how much has been spent on each item so you can see how much money you have left and identify ways to reduce expenses.

Your operation will need a physical location. An empty bedroom is big enough, though we don’t recommend a bedroom that anyone lives in, as it would be difficult to store everything you need in a room along with someone’s personal possessions. You should also think about security here. You could find a friendly community space that is willing to rent a room to a member of the project, come up with a persuasive cover story, and rent it as a personal room. Draft a lease that stipulates that the room is not to be entered without your permission and put a lock on the door. This both protects you and those you are renting from: in the event of trouble, they will have a lease to provide legal cover, confirming that as landlords, they are not responsible for what their tenants do.

You could use cryptpad to create a spreadsheet to keep track of your finances. This includes managing your money and keeping track of prepaid cards—where they are, how much is on them, what they’ve been used for so far, and the billing information attached to them. For example, if a website requires you to put in a billing address for the card, make sure you note which billing address has been used for which cards. This way, you won’t have the card get rejected due to using contradictory information.

First steps

1. Purchase and Test Estradiol

Cost: $800 ($300 for estradiol, $500 for the test)

Raw estradiol can be purchased directly from manufacturers listed on the Estradiol PubChem page. The prices they quote are prohibitively expensive, and many manufacturers will only ship to businesses or research institutions. That may not be an insurmountable hurdle—it might suffice to find a friend with a .edu email address and an address to receive packages.

Alternatively, you can message gray market vendors from China, such as Hanzhong Han Traceability Biological Technology Co. Ltd. To find more vendors, try searching “estradiol suppliers china” on duckduckgo. They usually sell bulk amounts of estradiol; however, the quality may be lower as a result. When communicating with a vendor, only email them from your secure email account. See if you can pay via money order. If you can, purchase a money order with cash and mail it to them. If that is not an option, use cash to purchase a pre-paid debit card from Walmart or another big box store. You might be able to pay with bitcoin, but make sure that the bitcoin itself was purchased in a manner that can’t be traced (e.g., with cash).

Purchase 100 grams of pure estradiol, CAS number 50-28-2. Have it shipped to you using one of the methods outlined above. If you used a prepaid debit card, make note of it in your spreadsheet.

If you bought your estradiol from a gray market supplier, you will need to test it when it arrives. Go to toxassociates.com. Order a comprehensive drug analysis: tell them you want a quantitative analysis of estradiol and a test for heavy metals. Pay for the test with a money order purchased with cash and await your results. If the test doesn’t come back clean (e.g., they sold you a bunch of baking soda), go back and start over.

If you can go in on this step with other groups like yours, you could save a lot of money. Assuming multiple chapters place an order of estradiol together, you’ll only need a single test for everyone.

You’re looking for the results to say >99% estradiol and no heavy metals or anything else detected. Ours was 97%. We would love to know what the other 3% is—but after extensive research, it appeared that we’d need thousands of dollars and corporate or academic credentials to find out. If you know of another way to identify impurities in a sample, please contact us!

Purchase the Materials

1. Purchase 6 gallons of 95% alcohol.

Cost: $650

You can buy alcohol in bulk online from Laballey.com and organicalcohol.com. Laballey often offers good sales. Depending on the vendor, alcohol may be referred to as ethanol. Ethanol is the name for the kind of alcohol that you can drink. You could also use isopropyl alcohol, which is much cheaper—but not for internal consumption, as it causes organ damage and blindness. We went with ethanol because we wanted to stick as close to the patent as possible. The patent mentions that you can use isopropyl alcohol, but they imply that ethanol is preferred.

If you order from Laballey, bear in mind that they will automatically cancel any order that has a different shipping and billing address. To get around this, have a friend buy alcohol from them legitimately, paying with their own card and shipping it to their legal name. You will need to have alcohol shipped to someone older than 21 and they must sign for the package when it arrives.

You could also get around this step by buying Everclear from liquor stores. This has the advantage of being faster and available in return for cash, but it is also much more expensive—we calculated that it would be roughly three times more expensive to use Everclear.

Alcohol is extremely flammable. Six gallons of it should be considered a major hazard. Do not open the container it comes in until you’re ready to make a batch. Store the alcohol far away from any fire hazards. Never smoke while working with alcohol; make sure there are no open flames anywhere nearby.

2. Purchase two gallons of propylene glycol USP.

Cost: $150

Propylene glycol is a very common chemical. You can obtain it via a number of websites, including the aforementioned Laballey. Wherever you get it, make sure that it’s pure propylene glycol, not propylene glycol mixed with something else.

USP (United States Pharmacopoeia) refers to a standard of purity for chemicals. All chemicals should be sold to you as USP. If you can afford it, you should send all of your reagents off for testing in addition to the estradiol.

3. Purchase two liters of diethylene glycol monoethyl ether USP.

Cost: $200

Follow the same steps as for propylene glycol to obtain diethylene glycol monoethyl ether. We could not find other vendors for diethylene glycol monoethyl ether besides Laballey.com.

4. Purchase a large wide mouth glass container for mixing.

Cost: $30

Throughout the manufacturing process, we use glass because it’s nonreactive.

Realistically, it’s hard to find wide-mouth glass containers larger than two or two and a half gallons. You can find five-gallon glass carboys (the kind of bottles used in water coolers), but it is difficult to mix liquids in them owing to their narrow mouths. You might be able to find a workaround involving a long, narrow stirring stick, a magnetic stirrer, or something else.

We used a wide-mouth glass container of approximately two-gallon capacity. Generally bigger is better, provided that you can find a way to stir it.

You might be able to find a large enough glass container at a store. If you can, use cash to buy it. If you can’t find one in a store, there are plenty of options on Amazon.com.

5. Purchase an even larger glass container for storing the finished product.

Cost: $60

The size of this container doesn’t matter so long as it is bigger than the mixing container and it is made of glass. It’s unlikely you’ll be able to purchase this item in person at a store. You can get a five-gallon glass carboy for $60 on Amazon.com.

6. Purchase seven wide-mouth glass containers of medium size.

Cost: $100

The size of these containers doesn’t matter as much. Perhaps half a gallon. These should absolutely be purchased with cash at a store. Walmart and ACE Hardware offer six-packs of half gallon mason jars for something like $20. You can likely spend far less than $100 for all of these if you go to a thrift shop.

7. Purchase scales.

Cost: $75

One scale will need to be a higher capacity kitchen scale accurate to within .1 g. The other must be accurate down to 0.01 g. Make sure that the higher capacity scale can handle the weight of the mixing jar and water or alcohol. For the batch size we’re talking about here, the scale should have a capacity of at least 15 pounds, preferably 20.

8. Purchase bottles and tincture droppers.

Cost: $600

There are several websites where you can buy bottles and droppers in bulk, including thebottlestore.com and containerandpackaging.com.

Buy at least 350 four-ounce amber Boston round bottles and an equal number of 1 ml tincture droppers. Make sure that the bottles and droppers have matching neck sizes. In our case, we used the neck finish 24-400.

9. Purchase miscellaneous lab equipment.

Cost: $100

For this step, we’re mostly thinking about gloves, goggles, a table if you need one, and any other small items.

10. Buy water.

Cost: $20

Buy four gallons of distilled water from any grocery store. It must be distilled water, not spring water, “purified” water, or anything else.

Make a batch

Overview

The basics of making transdermal estrogen are as follows: measure out all of the raw materials by mass, add them to a mixing container, mix vigorously, pour into a larger container, and bottle it from there. To bottle it, just pour the mixture out of the large carboy into a smaller wide-mouth container, then scoop it out and pour it into bottles. The point of using the carboy is to enable one team to continue to make two-gallon batches while another team bottles. Based on our experience, the bottleneck in this process, ironically, is bottling. Because we bottled by hand, that part took much longer than preparing the batch itself. Using the carboy is a way to speed up the process. Otherwise, the team making each batch will have to stop and wait until all of the transdermal estrogen has been bottled before they can start making the next batch.

You’ll be making about five batches of two gallons each. The process is actually pretty straightforward—it just takes a while to bottle. You should set aside about four hours for the whole process. Keep in mind that this will likely be messy, involving alcohol spilling over your work environment. You should pick a place where that won’t be an issue and clean up as you go. Don’t work by open windows where passersby can see what you’re doing—they might think you’re making drugs.

1. Label all of your containers.

Once you’re ready to get started, clean your work surface, lay out all of the materials, and label your containers. You should have a weighing container and an overflow container for every ingredient except estradiol. You should also have a two-gallon mixing container, a five-gallon (or more) glass carboy, and a bottling jar.

If you ordered more than one bottle of something, keep only one out on your work surface. This will help keep the space less cluttered. You can also have the bottling station set up separately to keep things organized.

2. Put on PPE

This means long sleeves, gloves, and goggles. If you have long hair, put it up before beginning.

3. Add 16.4 grams of estradiol in the two-gallon mixing container.

Place your estradiol weighing container on the scale and tare it. Then add 16.4 grams of estradiol using a spoon. If you add too much, scoop some back into the container that the estradiol came in. Then pour the estradiol into the two-gallon glass jar. Some estradiol will likely remain in the cup. We will deal with that in a second.

4. Measure out 2872.9 grams of alcohol to the mixing container and mix vigorously.

Place the alcohol weighing container on the larger scale and tare it. Then add 2872.9 grams of alcohol. If you add too much, pour some out into the alcohol overflow jar until you’ve got the number right. When you are weighing out alcohol for the next batch, add this overflow into the alcohol weighing container first. As you pour alcohol into the mixing container, have someone hold the estradiol weighing container in the mixing jar and pour in the alcohol such that it washes it out. Once the alcohol has been poured in, mix vigorously it for one minute using a glass stirring rod. If you don’t have one, use a large metal serving spoon.

5. Add 2585.7 grams of distilled water to the mixing container and stir.

Use the large scale to measure out 2585.7 grams of distilled water. Use the water overflow jar to pour out any overflow. When you’ve got the amount right, add it to the mixing container and mix it vigorously for one minute.

6. Add 1026.6 grams of propylene glycol and stir.

Follow these steps for propylene glycol (PG). PG overflow goes into the PG overflow jar; add it to the next batch. If you want to be especially precise, make sure to weigh the weighing container after you’ve poured the propylene glycol into the mixing container, so you can tell exactly how much remains in the container. Write this amount down and add slightly more than that amount to the PG weighing container. Add this to the mixing jar, then check the weight to see how much actually ended up in the mixing jar. Repeat until you’re satisfied that you’re close enough. Once you are done adding PG, mix vigorously for one minute.

7. Add 342.2 grams of diethylene glycol monoethyl ether and stir.

Follow this same procedure for diethylene glycol monoethyl ether and mix vigorously for one minute.

8. Pour the mixing container into the carboy; begin bottling; start the next batch.

When you have finished steps 1-7, you have completed a two-gallon batch. Using a large clean funnel, pour all of the contents of the mixing container into the glass carboy. The bottling team can then pour the transdermal estrogen out of the carboy and into another wide-mouth container. From there, they can scoop out the transdermal estrogen using a ½ or ¾ measuring cup and a funnel to pour it into bottles. Leave a little room at the top when you fill the bottles—otherwise, when you add the dropper lid, it will overflow. After filling a bottle, dry it with a towel and then add a label. Store the bottle in whatever box or container you’re keeping the transdermal estrogen in before distributing it.

While one group of people is bottling, another group should repeat steps 1-7. Continue to do so until you no longer have enough raw materials to make another batch. At that point, you can either stop and help with bottling or measure out the last of whatever ingredient you don’t have enough of, and then calculate new amounts for all the other ingredients using the ratios provided. For example, if you only have 1500 grams of alcohol, you can’t make a full batch. But since you know that alcohol is 42% of the batch by weight, you can work out what the total weight of the last (smaller) batch should be and make one more batch before you reorder supplies.

9. Clean up your workspace.

When you’re done, clean up your work area. Tear off all of the labels of the packages you received and burn them (somewhere far away from the alcohol). This is to prevent you from putting a bunch of incriminating evidence into the same dumpster. Once all of the labels are disposed of, you can discard the boxes as regular recycling. If you peel the labels off the chemicals you bought (the propylene glycol and diethylene glycol monoethyl ether), you can also dispose of them as normal recycling. If not, dispose of each one in a separate dumpster that cannot be connected to you.

Empty any remaining overflow containers back into their original bottles. Wash all non-disposable lab equipment thoroughly. Return all of your supplies to storage. You should have about 300 bottles filled, though you might have less, depending on whether you worked until you ran out of an ingredient or just stopped when you didn’t have enough for a full batch.

10. Print zines

We made a zine explaining our process and goals to distribute along with the transdermal estrogen. We designed it from scratch because we didn’t have a model to work from. You’re welcome to take the one we made, change out the contact information and any other details, and print your own edition. Make sure to change the title of the zine to “Boobs Not Bombs—[Your chapter’s name]” or something other than the title of our zine, so as to not confuse people. If you’d like an electronic copy of our zine for editing, email us.

Giving the length of this zine, printing will be expensive. We recommend finding someone with a printing hook up.

Distribute

1. Create a distribution network.

For a clandestine arrangement, keep the bottles yourself and distribute them through word of mouth only. If you’re comfortable with a more public arrangement, you could advertise online and mail the bottles out. If you want to go this route, you could contact hrt.cafe and see if your small operation can be listed on the website. You could also set up a BnB station somewhere presenting the bottles and zines alongside a donation jar. Periodically check the sites to keep them stocked.

You could also offer your wares at Really Really Free Markets, Food Not Bombs servings, drag shows, art spaces, and any other location frequented by people who might like to have access to estrogen. Of particular interest are places (such as Republican-controlled states) that are making it increasingly difficult to access hormones.

The more decentralized the network that is producing estrogen, the more difficult it will be to suppress it.

2. Distribute bottles.

Once you know where to take the bottles/zines, physically transport them to all of the various locations. You could mail them, but that would be expensive, as the bottles are heavy. If you ship bottles, package them so they don’t shatter in transit.

If you’re distributing at physical locations, you could set up a station with bottles, zines, and a donation jar. This might necessitate a folding table or rack for each location. For a donation jar, you could cut an opening in the lid of an old coffee container and write “donations” in large visible letters on it.

Once you have run out of bottles and zines, collect a final round of donations, conduct any additional fundraising necessary, and then repeat the process from the beginning.

Further Resources

The zine, patents, and spreadsheets that this article is derived from
transfemscience.org—We recommend this website for your research needs. The site is run by transfemme people for transfemme people and interested medical practitioners. We recommend spending a considerable amount of time learning about feminizing hormone therapy.
transdiy.reddit.com
estrogel.reddit.com
hrt.cafe—This site is great for sourcing everything you’d need for feminizing hormone therapy, including antiandrogens. The downside is that the site only includes items that must be purchased online.

A note about email security. The only way to ensure the security of an email server is to run it yourself, and running email servers is not easy. The way that email functions involves a lot of information being transferred in the clear in order to allow for the routing of messages. In this sort of structure, the best we can do is encrypt the message content. Protonmail provides encryption without the users having to do any work, as long as they are messaging other users of the service or have someone’s keys loaded into their account’s keychain. Protonmail does have access to your registration details and the times that certain IPs accessed accounts, and they have provided that information to governments before. If you sign up with information that does not lead back to you and always use a VPN or Tor to check your inbox, this information should not be compromising. ↩

A Demonstrator’s Guide to Understanding Riot Munitions : And How to Defend against Them

2021-01-04T21:23:19Z

If there’s one thing that police officers prefer to hitting people with sticks, it’s shooting blunt objects and chemical weapons at people. Arms manufacturers are constantly developing new ways to assault people from a distance—and taxpayers keep buying new toys for their oppressors.

This article offers an overview of less-lethal projectiles—both chemical weapons and impact munitions. The police themselves don’t bother distinguishing the two. We’ll cover chemical weapons like tear gas and pepper spray. We’ll cover impact weapons like baton rounds, rubber bullets, and pepper-balls. We’ll cover the systems police use to apply these weapons, including air guns, sprays, grenades, grenade launchers, and shotguns. We’ll cover the ways that police mark people for arrest—and the ways they probably don’t. Other articles in this series discuss batons and other police weaponry. One of the most useful articles to read in conjunction to this one is our “Protocols for Common Injuries from Police Weapons.”

This can be a scary subject. But remember—their goal isn’t to strike us with plastic bullets or spray us with chemicals. Their goal is to make us live in fear. They want us to stay home, disconnected, leaving their authority absolute and unchallenged. They fail to achieve goal every time we take the streets together. They fail every time we refuse to let that fear dictate what we do.

In this article, we’ll touch briefly on how to protect ourselves via gas masks, armor, shields, and the like. Other articles explore those options in detail. But the chief thing that can protect us against the police is solidarity. We are the ones who must keep each other safe. One shield on the front line of a demonstration can protect many people. One medic willing to treat those in the line of fire can protect many people. A few people who risk jail time to push the police back can protect many people. Our best protection against riot munitions is each other.

Courage is not the absence of fear. It is acting despite fear. Together, we can overcome fear.

https://twitter.com/hungrybowtie/status/1344916089436655618

On Standardization and Oversight

We have found no evidence that there is any federal or state oversight of what weapons police are permitted to use to quell civil disturbances. According to an anarchist lawyer who specializes in this field, each of roughly 18,000 agencies in the US maintains its own use of force guidelines detailing internal standards regarding what its officers can do to people. We’ve found no body that certifies the chemistry employed in chemical weapons. Any given chemical weapons manufacturer chooses their own binding agents and chemical additives; it appears there is no easy way to know what chemicals we are being exposed to when police target us with these weapons. While this shouldn’t cause us to back down and accede to authoritarianism, it’s important to remember that these weapons are only “less lethal” in comparison to live ammunition.

There are only two factors contributing to standardizing these weapons. The first is that weapons that use existing projectile systems (such as 37mm launchers) are more likely to be widely adopted than oddball systems that require entirely new training and weaponry. The second is that manufacturers tend to copy each other’s innovations.

While the federal government apparently does not provide oversight, it does occasionally offer advice and suggestions—for example, in this somewhat-outdated 2004 manual of less-lethal weaponry.

Impact Munitions

Police fire a wide range of blunt force projectiles from a variety of weapons. Manufacturers and police departments sometimes call these “Blunt Impact Projectiles” (BIPs) or “Kinetic Impact Projectiles (KIPs). “Rubber bullets” are only one of many variants. They vary in size, force, composition, delivery methods, and lethality.

The sales pitches that manufacturers make to law enforcement agencies emphasize the ability to obtain compliance from subjects via projected force with minimal risk of injury or death. All of the academic studies—not to mention our lived experience—show that neither of these claims is correct: impact munitions regularly maim and kill protestors and they rarely succeed at breaking up demonstrations. They’re even less effective at stopping social movements. Often, when one of us loses an eye or suffers a fractured skull, more people come out to the streets.

Some of the more common impact munitions include baton rounds, large plastic, foam, gel, or even wooden projectiles that are fired from a multi-launcher or occasionally a shotgun; rubber bullets, metal projectiles coated in rubber or PVC; bean bag rounds, woven bags filled with either silica or lead, usually fired from shotguns; pepper-balls, which are essentially paintballs filled with pepper spray; FN303 rounds, a combination of pepper-balls and regular impact munitions; rubber balls, which are rubber or plastic or foam pellets packed into grenades to explode like shrapnel or shotgun shot; and, of course, the venerable gas canister (bearing chemical agents or smoke), which is not designed to be fired directly at protestors—but regularly is.

Contrary to popular supposition, most modern impact munitions are designed for “direct fire” rather than “skip fire.” Direct fire munitions are for shooting directly at individuals, while skip fire projectiles are designed to be skipped off the ground into the crowd. Tear gas canisters are generally intended for skip firing at close range or firing at a 25-30 degree arc into the air for maximum range; they are not rated for direct fire. Some styles of baton rounds that split into multiple projectiles are designed for skip fire to distribute the projectiles more widely, while others are designed to be fired over the heads of protesters in order to rain chemicals down. Full-size wooden baton rounds and some rubber bullets seem to be designed for skip fire as well, but in general, skip fire is less accurate and less common.

Baton rounds, stinger grenades, and beanbags hurt. They injure people. Occasionally, they maim or—even more rarely—kill people. Yet of all the tools used by the police, they are some of the least effective at stopping demonstrations. Unlike a cop within mêlée range, a baton round cannot arrest you. Unlike a cloud of gas, it can’t force you to disperse. Ranged impact weapons rely primarily on pain compliance. While this may work on individuals, pain alone usually cannot force a resolute crowd to comply. Standing around getting shot at isn’t always the right move. But the effects of impact munitions can be mitigated by protective equipment including shields, armor, helmets, goggles, barricades, and even umbrellas. Impact weapons rely on fear above all—and through mental preparation and mutual support, we can defend ourselves from fear. We can choose not to comply with fear.

All around the world, intimidation is the chief weapon of the mercenaries who serve the ruling class.

Common Injuries

Impact munitions are ostensibly designed to hurt people and cause compliance without causing significant injury. But there’s nothing safe about them.

It’s been difficult for us to parse the available data to work out which parts are applicable specifically in the United States. The largest study, from 2017, includes information from many other studies around the world. But a good portion of its data—about 41%—describes the use of rubber bullets. Rubber bullets account for a vastly disproportionate number of the serious injuries in the study, and a slightly disproportionate number of deaths. The study found that 3% of people injured with impact munitions die as a result, but that is not a useful number to understand in the context of a demonstration of the US. People do die as a consequence of impact munitions—but it will not be anywhere near 3% of those who are injured by them. We have not been able to confirm whether rubber bullets are currently in use in the US (as they are easily confused with rubber ball ammunition), but if they are, they are not the predominant impact munition in use.

The 2017 study found that the majority of serious injuries and deaths were the result of impacts to the head or neck. A smaller study from 2000 found that the majority of deaths were the result of impacts to the chest (causing ribs to break and puncture the heart or lungs).

After the type of munition fired, the most significant factors determining the severity of injuries are the distance from which it is fired and the speed with which the victim can access medical care. Attacks from within ten feet caused the greatest number of broken bones, for example. Also, street medics save lives.

The most common injury from impact weapons is intense bruising. And despite police lacking competence and acting with impunity, it does seem like most impact munitions are aimed where they are supposed to be aimed, at the abdomen or lower, where serious injuries are less likely to occur.

Occasionally, injuries and deaths occur when an officer fires breaching rounds (projectiles designed to break through barriers such as doors) directly at people, presumably by accident.

Three weeks into the George Floyd uprising, the American Academy of Ophthalmology reported at least 20 serious eye injuries at protests caused by impact weapons (including baton rounds, bean bag rounds, and pepper-balls), tear gas canisters, and, in one case, the probe of a Taser. These included seven instances in which people lost an eye as a result of such an incident, with many more people awaiting surgery, unsure if they would keep their eyes. In one case this year, a journalist suffered a serious eye injury after a projectile broke the protective lenses of his gas mask.

Across the world, medical specialists continue to call for the abolition of impact munitions in policing.

Protection

Based on street experience and the analysis of studies, the most vital areas to protect are the head, eyes, neck, and chest. Helmets, gorgets, sports armor breastplates, and impact-resistant goggles, face masks, or gas masks can protect against this, potentially combined with shields. The neck is the most complicated of these areas to protect; most people have never heard the word “gorget,” let alone imagined wearing one while protesting against the police. Basically, a gorget is an item of neck armor worn by fencers. None of us have ever seen anyone wear one at a demonstration.

We will discuss shields in a later article. Here, suffice it to say that, to protect against impact munitions, a shield must be strong enough to resist penetration of the round, rigid enough to distribute the force of impact across a large surface area, and be backed by foam wherever the wielder’s body is in contact with it. Plywood 3/8” thick serves well enough, though 1/2” can hold up to more weaponry. Traffic barrel plastic resists penetration well but distributes the force poorly, though it is substantially lighter than wood. No shield makes you invulnerable.

Most injuries occur below the waist. It appears that the most effectively trained police prefer to shoot demonstrators in the kneecaps. In view of this, it may be worth considering wearing kneepads or more complete sports armor, not so much to avoid permanent injury or death as to remain mobile, effective, and uninjured.

Shields and barricades can help mitigate all of these potential injuries as well.

https://twitter.com/gravemorgan/status/1295116634583994369

Understanding Ballistics

To understand impact, we have to understand kinetic energy.

Kinetic energy, often called muzzle energy in ballistics, is measured in joules (or in foot-pounds, if you’re not feeling metric). It’s derived from the velocity of an object and its weight, with velocity being exponentially more important. The formula to determine the kinetic energy of a projectile is E_k = (1/2)mv² with E_k representing energy (kinetic), m representing mass, and v representing velocity.

None of us are engineers, but we consulted a couple in the course of writing this article. Basically, we can understand joules measuring the answer to the question “How much did I get hit with?” A baseball thrown at 90 mph might have 120 joules. A baton round might have 240 joules, hitting you twice as hard as that baseball. A .22 rifle might also deliver projectiles with 240 joules, but the baton round is a blunt impact whereas a bullet is designed to penetrate. A 9mm pistol might deliver bullets with 470 joules, an AR-15 with 1850, while a slug from a 12-gauge shotgun could approach 4500. If a 180-pound person fell from a height of 15 feet, they’d have around 4000 joules when they hit the ground. A speeding car? Easily 200,000 joules.

Yet most of us would rather get shot with a baton round than a .22. As one contributor to this text put it, “I’d rather be hit with 200 joules of marshmallows than 200 joules of baton.” Joules are far from the whole story about the damage a given projectile can inflict. The surface area it hits you with (the joules per square meter), the angle it hits you, where it hits you, and the object’s composition (a wooden baton round will absorb less of its own impact than a gel baton round, for example) all matter more. In one study, it took only 375 joules to break bones when pressure was applied at certain angles, while it took 9920 joules to break the same bones when pressure was applied at other angles.

Because velocity is more important to energy than the weight of the projectile, the energy with which a projectile strikes a target drops off quickly at distance. A faster object will often carry more kinetic energy than a slower, heavier object.

It is useful to start with the energy various weapons can deliver and the impact testing to which various pieces of protective gear are subjected. We’ve found one military document that refers to a “internationally recognized lethality limit” of 75 joules. But these factors do not give us enough information to know how a given projectile will affect a given target. While we are testing various impact munitions against various items of protective gear, we’d like to hear any anecdotes or research you can share about the effectiveness of different forms of protection against projectiles.

Baton rounds

Material composition: plastic, foam, gel, wood
Delivery methods: mostly 37/40mm launchers, some 12-gauge shotguns
Velocity: most seem to be around 300 fps (feet per second), with some examples up to 650 fps
Energy: one example is 244 joules
Range: depends widely on composition, but an overall advertised range of between 1.5 and 80 meters

Baton rounds come in multiple shapes, sizes, and materials, but they’re basically big chunks of painful object. They tend to be large-caliber (37mm and 40mm), so that they impart as much force as possible while remaining too blunt to penetrate skin. Many baton rounds also include some kind of payload, such as chemical agents or marking dye.

Most projectiles that get called “rubber bullets” are probably baton rounds. It’s not necessary to correct people pedantically, but for the purpose of this article, we’re going to make the distinction and call them baton rounds instead.

The most common materials for baton rounds are plastic, foam, gel, and wood. While there are far too many varieties list at length, and different manufacturers use different materials for different purposes, the general idea seems to be that foam rounds tend to be intended for short-range fire while plastic and wood are intended for longer range applications. Gel rounds are advertised as being useful at short or long range, as are “collapsible head” plastic rounds. Of course, it’s hard to imagine the police really thinking through exactly which round they want to use for which tactical purpose, especially in chaotic situations, and it’s safe to assume that they are firing all of these at any range they want.

40mm foam baton round.

Baton rounds often contain multiple projectiles within each shell that are designed to split apart.

Some baton rounds have rifling built into the shell or into the barrel of the launcher to spin-stabilize the projectile for accuracy. Most appear not to. While every baton round is rated to a different range, most seem to be designed for use between 2 and 40 meters; only a few varieties are designed for up to 80 meters.

Direct fire baton rounds are supposed to be aimed at the navel, thighs, buttocks, or knees—though as previously mentioned, it is a mistake to expect police to limit themselves thus.

Most people struck with baton rounds just come away with a nasty welt. However, baton rounds have maimed and killed people, especially when they strike people’s faces. In July, Portland police shot a 26-year-old protestor in the face with a baton round while he had his hands up. We believe that round to have been a Sage International 37mm KO1 round. The blow fractured his skull, nearly killing him and necessitating surgery.

There are also 12-gauge shotgun baton rounds. Most of these are various rubber projectiles that have fins and look like tiny missiles or rocket ships. One, for example, the stabili-shock, weighs 6 grams and is meant to fire at 426 fps for a total of 51 joules of force. We found one video of someone loading the round wrong and shooting it at three times that velocity. We have seen some evidence of police using these at protests in the US.

Another make is the Lightfield Superstar, a colorful sea urchin of pain. It is a close-quarters weapon, considered safe for direct fire at as close as two meters. We have found no evidence of law enforcement using these in the US.

Baton rounds seem to have been invented by the British for use in their colonial project in Ireland, because the rubber bullets they were using at the time were killing too many people. Plastic baton rounds still killed colonial subjects, but at a slower rate.

Modern baton rounds often contain one or more chemical weapons, including OC (Oleoresin capsicum) and CS (common tear gas) most commonly, though CN (which is more dangerous) is used as well. Some baton rounds also contain marking compounds.

37mm wooden baton round.

Rubber Balls

Composition: hard rubber
Delivery methods: hand-thrown grenades, 37/40mm canisters, 12-gauge shotguns, possibly .68 caliber air guns
Velocity: variable
Energy: 30-200 joules when fired from a shotgun, other styles unknown
Range: widely variable

Rubber balls are fired individually or, more often, packed into shotgun shells, multi-launcher shells, or hand-thrown grenades. They shoot out wildly and injure people unpredictably. Brand names include Stinger, Sting-ball, and Hornet’s Nest; they are sometimes generically described as rubber buckshot. We’ve found a few common calibers of balls: .32 caliber and .60 caliber (which is to say .32” and .6”), are common in grenades and larger canisters, while “rubber buckshot” seems to come in 00 buckshot size: .33”. Some shotgun rounds are packed with one to three .68” rubber balls.

According to one manufacturer, rubber ball weapons are considered a weapon of last resort when other less lethal options have failed. This is probably because rubber balls are unpredictable in who they strike and where.

It’s possible, though we have not been able to confirm it, that most of what people describe as rubber bullets in the United States are the larger caliber of rubber ball. Combined Tactical Systems Sting-balls are in common use in Portland—they are presumed to be the means by which police broke someone’s finger in August. Anecdotally, a lot of them seem to misfire, as demonstrators have found a large number of improperly-deployed canisters.

A sting-ball grenade.

There is speculation that expired rubber balls lose some elasticity over time and become more hazardous.

Rubber balls are also packed into grenades that for all other purposes function as flash-bang grenades: disorientation devices that use sound and light to distract people. One hand grenade we looked at, the ALS Hornets Nest Sting Grenade, holds 180 .32 caliber balls and produces a flash of 1-2 million candela and a bang of 130 db at five feet.

Rubber balls move very chaotically; grenades detonated on the ground can easily send projectiles towards our faces and eyes.

These grenades are absolutely not safe to handle and should not be caught or thrown back.

12-gauge stinger balls.

Beanbags

Composition: silica or lead in Kevlar or other fabric
Delivery method: Mostly 12-gauge shotguns, but also 37/40mm launchers
Range: 20-35 feet
Velocity: ~270 fps
Force: one 12-gauge example was 146 joules

Beanbag rounds are bags full of metal (such as #9 shotgun shot) or silica (sand). On average, they are for closer-range use than baton rounds; they more often used inside buildings—specifically, in jails. Every manufacturer and every round will be different, but most seem to be intended for use between 20-35 feet. Some beanbag rounds are “drag stabilized” with a bit of cloth that hangs off the back to keep it accurate its entire effective distance. They are fired from 37mm and 40mm launchers and 12-gauge shotguns.

Manufacturer’s guidelines suggest that it would take 2-3 shots with a beanbag round to incapacitate a target. When they are used in riot situations, they are not usually employed to incapacitate people so much as to inflict a psychological impact on the crowd.

We saw one police officer on a forum telling the story of a man on PCP surviving 34 shots with beanbag rounds (though one round shattered the bones in his hand). Police on internet forums often boast about how they shoot rookies with beanbag rounds to haze them.

We found Safariland beanbag rounds for retail at $30 or available on eBay for $10. Other manufacturers charge around $6-7 per round.

40mm beanbag round.

Rubber Bullets

Composition: rubber- or nylon- or PVC-coated steel, or a hard composition of rubber and silica
Delivery method: varied

Thus far, our research into rubber bullets has been less conclusive than our research into the other rounds. Historically, rubber bullets for crowd control come in two forms: metal projectiles coated in rubber, as British occupiers used extensively in Northern Ireland, and hard pellets made of a homogenous mixture of roughly 20% rubber and 80% silica, as commonly deployed by the Israeli colonial occupation in Palestine.

We know that the police in the US are shooting people with rubber balls, and there has been some speculation that in 2020, DC police have used the steel-cored variety that have killed so many people over the years.

As metal-cored projectiles were disproportionately responsible for death and maiming in the 2017 study of less-lethal weapons, this warrants further investigation. If you see police fire rubber balls at people, try to grab some. Measure them, cut them open, and send us pictures.

There are also bullet-shaped rubber bullets designed to be fired from 9mm handguns and, presumably, every other common firearm caliber. But as these are fired from regular firearms, they do not seem to have found their way into the police riot control weapon arsenal. So far, the only manufacturer we’ve tracked down that makes this style of bullet is in Canada: Lamperd Less Lethal. It’s safest to assume that the rifles and handgun you see police carrying hold live ammunition.

Pellets and Paintballs

More and more commonly, less lethal munitions are fired from .68” caliber airguns—which is to say, paintball guns. A few styles that we have not confirmed to be in use in the USA are covered above under “rubber bullets.” The more common styles are pepper-balls and FN303 rounds.

While both are used as impact munitions, they are unique to their individual platforms, so we’ll cover them under “launchers” below. However, fascists have lately adopted the paintball gun as a favored tool for street conflict. Rumors abound that they are using frozen paintballs, but we suspect that they may be using rubber balls.

Frozen paintballs are nearly mythical in the paintball world because local media outlets falsely claim they are favored tool of Halloween vandals. Paintballs frozen in a home freezer for 48 hours do not freeze solid; they only become slightly more brittle and tacky, and they thaw quickly. Paintballs frozen in dry ice are much more solid and potentially dangerous, but unwieldy to shoot. Liquid nitrogen frozen paintballs are as hard as ice, but so brittle they are nearly impossible to load and fire. All cold paintballs become less accurate—as the shell becomes tackier—but sting more.

In parts of the world where access to firearms for self-defense is less ubiquitous, airguns are sometimes used to deliver near-lethal force, firing pellets including solid rubber and rubber- or PVC-coated steel balls such as those covered under rubber bullets above, sometimes referred to as “glass breaker” balls. These projectiles are certainly available to US law enforcement as well as civilians; they can be fired from any paintball launcher.

“Glass breaker” balls.

Anti-fascists leaking far-right communication logs in Portland in 2020 revealed that at least one far-right militia member discussed using frozen paintballs but noted their lack of accuracy. He suggested instead using glass breaker balls, as detailed above.

There are also self-defense rounds for airguns that use a D-shaped round like First Strike. First Strike is a style of paintball round fired from a magazine instead of a hopper, designed for greater accuracy. The same system has been adapted to shoot rubber projectiles with enough force to be deadly. We’ve seen no evidence of their use by police, besides the Pepperball VXR rounds covered under pepper-balls, below, and the FN303 rounds.

FN303 rounds.

Barricade Rounds

Barricade rounds are projectiles that are designed to penetrate barriers as tough as glass windows (12-gauge), hollow-core doors (37mm), or thin wallboard or plywood (40mm) and release chemical agents from their nosecone upon impact with said barrier. They are not as effective at breaking through double-pane windows or getting past heavy drapes. The rounds are not meant to be fired at people; they have killed multiple people who were struck directly by them.¹

They carry OC, CS, CN, or inert liquid or powder. The liquid-carried ones are heavier and penetrate barricades more effectively, while powder carriers are more effective at dispersing gas. Liquid rounds come with red dye that mark where they hit.

Launchers and Dispersal Methods

Police have access to a wide variety of tools they use to project force at a distance. The most common of these include .68 caliber airguns (essentially, paintball guns), 12-gauge shotguns (referred to and usually marked as less-lethal shotguns, but effectively interchangeable with any other 12-guage shotgun), grenades, and 37 or 40mm “multi-launchers,” which are functionally grenade launchers. They also disperse chemicals with sprays, hoses, and smoke candles.

These weapons are not particularly inaccurate, manufacturers’ promises notwithstanding. Studies show that when the operators of less-lethal weapons are under stress, their vertical accuracy past 30 meters is significantly compromised. Other factors include fatigue, the weight of the launcher itself, which is significant when loaded, and the recoil of the rounds, which tend to “pull” the round up when fired. These minor differences multiply in effect over distance. What would be a one-inch variance at close range can become a difference of several feet at a longer range. This means that even if an officer chooses to aim a crowd control weapon at someone’s lower body, he could easily hit his target in the head—or hit someone else entirely. There is not a surefire way to shoot any weapon into a crowd of people and be certain to hit your intended target.

.68 Caliber Air-Powered Guns

Police use what amount to paintball guns to launch chemical agents, impact munitions, and marking rounds at people. These are .68 caliber air-powered rifles and handguns. At one time, these were used almost exclusively to shoot pepper-balls and paintballs at protestors, but it wasn’t long before one manufacturer added impact munitions to the projectiles by forgoing a round ball and making fin-stabilized projectiles that contain both chemical agents and enough metal to hurt.

There seem to be two primary manufacturers of .68 caliber “less lethal” weapons and ammunition: Pepperball and FN Herstal. We will focus on each one’s flagship rifle as an example, but police might be armed with older models of these weapons, the pistol versions of these weapons, or systems from other companies entirely. The pistol version of the Pepperball system seems to be even less accurate than other options.

Pepperball pistol.

There are also a large number of “riot ball”-style munitions designed to be fired from air rifles/paintball guns (including .68 caliber and .50 caliber), though we have not collected evidence of their use in the United States. These might be anything from solid rubber balls to PVC- or nylon-coated steel pellets to D-shaped projectiles that use “First Strike” paintball guns for increased accuracy.

There is a lot of anecdotal information about paintball players suffering eye damage from ordinary paintballs. These smaller projectiles may be especially dangerous in demonstrations. That’s a good reason to wear goggles.

Of the two weapon systems known to be employed by US law enforcement, the FN303 seems to be substantially more dangerous in terms of pain, injury, and death, while the Pepperball system is more tactically versatile.

The FN303.

FN303

Effective range: 50 m
Maximum range: 100 m
Caliber: .68
Magazine capacity: 15
Weight: 5 pounds
Velocity: 295-300 fps
Energy: 35 Joules
List price: $1699
Ammunition list price: $2.85-$4.65/round (paint rounds are cheaper, chemical weapon rounds more expensive)

The FN303 is a gun that uses compressed air to fire rounds at targets. While the actual barrel is small, firing a .68” projectile like other paintball and pepper-ball guns, the FN303 looks a bit like a grenade launcher from some angles because the compressed air tank sits above the barrel and can be mistaken for a larger barrel itself. It fires polystyrene projectiles that are fin-stabilized for accuracy. Each projectile has a front section containing tiny pellets of bismuth and a rear section containing the payload. Bismuth is essentially a non-toxic alternative to lead. The front section is designed to deliver trauma without skin penetration; but tests on ballistic gel imply that it often penetrates skin regardless, and protestors in Portland have found that the rounds can penetrate bicycle helmets. Bismuth pellets can penetrate skin and stay embedded for weeks until manually removed.

The FN303 has a 10” barrel (shorter than a rifle) and a 15-round drum magazine. The air tank can fire up to 110 shots before it needs refilling. The safety is inside the trigger guard. The entire device can be removed from its stock and mounted underbarrel on a rifle, although fortunately, we have not seen any evidence of civilian police doing so. It is also available in a pistol format, with a six-round magazine that contains a disposable carbon dioxide cartridge that powers the gun.

Each FN303 projectile weighs 8.5 grams. There are five versions on the market, each color-coded. White projectiles contain inert powder and are used for training; clear projectiles have no rear payload and are only used to hurt people; orange projectiles contain PAVA powder (synthetic pepper spray—see below); pink projectiles contain a pink, water-soluble, washable paint for marking targets; yellow projectiles contain a yellow, latex-based, indelible paint for marking targets that cannot as easily be washed off. The projectiles have a shelf life of three years when kept in their original, foil-lined packaging.

In 2004, a Boston police officer used an FN303 to shoot and kill Victoria Snelgrove. The officer was allegedly aiming at someone else in the crowd. The pellet entered her eye, breaking through bone and injuring her brain. She died of her injuries a few hours later. Studies indicate that an individual FN303 loses accuracy after a few hundred rounds have been fired through it; the FN303 was the weapon used in the aforementioned study showing how inaccurate less lethal weapons are in the hands of an operator in a stressful situation. The city of Boston discontinued the use of the FN303 as a result, as did several other cities. Boston apparently melted theirs down to make manhole covers. As of this writing, Portland police continue to employ the FN303, as many other departments around the country presumably do.

In Luxembourg, in 2009, police using FN303s for the first time shot and broke a journalist’s finger.

In 2020, Portland police shot a National Geographic filmmaker with an FN303 round; it broke the plastic lens on his Czech M10 gas mask, lacerating his eye and necessitating surgery. Weeks later, the bismuth pellets were still embedded in the skin of his face, looking like small blackheads that he has been removing himself with a needle.

In July 2020, federal agents shot Trip Jennings, a videographer who has worked with PBS and National Geographic, in the eye with a less-lethal round in Portland, Oregon.

Pepperball VKS

Effective range of pepper-balls: 20 m
Effective range of VXR projectiles: 50 m
Caliber: .68
Magazine capacity: 10-15 rounds in magazine, 180 rounds in hopper
Weight: 6.2 pounds without hopper
Energy: Adjustable between 10-28 joules
Velocity: 280–425 fps
List price: around $1200
Ammunition list price: unknown

The Pepperball VKS (Variable Kinetic System) is essentially a paintball gun designed to look and function like an AR-15 and to fire paintballs full of pepper spray or other rounds. The user can switch between feeding them via a rifle-style magazine (which can hold pepper-balls or shaped rounds) or a paintball-style hopper (that holds only pepper-balls) by rotating the barrel. They can also use two different compressed air sources: the stock itself is a compressed 13ci HPA air canister or a remote air line can connect to any compressed air tank. Online forums suggest a wide range of how many shots one can get from a 13ci tank, estimating between 80-250. The AR-style safety switch has three modes: (S) Safety, (F) Fire, and (D) Disassemble. A velocity adjustment screw sits above the trigger on the right side. The VKS comes in black-and-yellow, black-and-orange, and all black.

The manufacturer’s guidelines say that the weapon is not to be fired at the head, face, eyes, ears, throat, or spine.

Police departments use pepper-balls for direct impact as well as area saturation. A Denver PD trainer says that the police use pepper-balls to saturate an area that would otherwise be dangerous to approach, to draw suspects out from hiding or cover.

The rifle fires two types of ammunition: round pepper-balls, loaded from the hopper or magazine, which are accurate up to 20 meters, and the newer form of ammunition, VXR-shaped projectiles, which are only loaded from the magazine. The VXR projectiles are accurate up to 50 meters, as they are fin-stabilized.

This rifle can fire projectiles at speeds of up to 425 fps. For comparison, most paintball fields limit guns to 280fps for safety.

Each round is color-coded. The shelf life of ammunition is 3 years.

A pepper-ball launcher with a hopper.

Pepper-balls: 280-350 fps, 12-15 joules, 20 meter accuracy, 50 meters+ area saturation

White and red: LIVE, 0.5% PAVA (synthetic pepper spray)
Black and red: LIVE-X, 5% PAVA
White and blue: CS, 2.5% CS (tear gas)
Blue and red: CS/PAVA, 1.25% CS and 1.25% PAVA
White and purple: Inert, used for training or just to hurt people
Solid green: marking, contains paint for identification
Solid white/beige: glass breaker, designed to shatter glass and then itself shatter, not designed for use on people or animals
Clear: water-filled, used for training or just to hurt people
Also clear: UV marking, used to mark people with ink that can only be detected under UV light

VXR rounds: 280-425 fps, 12-28 joules, 50 meter accuracy, 130 meter+ area saturation

Red and orange-red: VXR Live, .25% PAVA
Red and black: VXR Live-X, 2.5% PAVA
Blue and black: VXR CS, 1.25% CS
Blue and red: VXR CS/PAVA, 0.625% CS Powder and 0.625% PAVA Powder
Purple: VXR inert powder, used for training or just to hurt people
White and black: VXR inert liquid, used for training; might containing marking paint—documentation is unclear
Dark blue and black: VXR marking, contains paint for identification
Also white and black: VXR UV marking, used to mark people with ink that can only be detected under UV light

A “less lethal” shotgun.

12-Gauge Shotgun

A large number of less-lethal projectiles are fired from 12-gauge shotguns. Beanbag rounds are the most common, but rubber ball rounds exist, as do baton rounds, as do muzzle blasts—a means of dispersing chemical agents directly from the barrel of the gun, shooting a cloud of dust 10-15 feet or so.

Note that the title “riot shotgun” does not apply to dedicated less-lethal shotguns but instead describes shotguns that are designed for defensive fighting, in contrast to a hunting shotgun for hunting or a tactical shotgun for offensive combat.

We have not found evidence that there is any oversight in the US that requires police departments to use dedicated less-lethal shotguns, though most departments do. Dedicated less-lethal shotguns are generally designated by the use of bright orange, red, or other color furniture (i.e., the outer parts of a firearm) on the stock and/or the fore end (the part you pump on a pump-action shotgun). While some models of shotgun are sold specifically for less-lethal use, many departments retrofit existing models to color-code them instead. This makes it hard to offer specifics about what shotguns are in use.

Most police shotguns are pump-action shotguns, as these enable them to fire a wider variety of ammunition. A semi-automatic shotgun usually uses the blowback from the shell to chamber the next shell, and that amount of force is irregular if different types of ammunition are used, causing feeding problems and jamming.

Most police shotguns appear to have either 14” or 18” barrels. It is illegal for a civilian to own a 14” barrel shotgun without filing federal paperwork for a short-barreled shotgun. Most pump-action shotguns hold between 4 and 8 shells. One less-lethal 18” shotgun we found held 6+1: that is, six shells in the magazine tube and one chambered.

However, we have received reports on the ground of police using full-length hunting shotguns, presumably with barrel lengths of 26 or 28 inches. One comrade in Cleveland reports that these were being carried primarily for intimidation purposes, while the same department fired actual less-lethal rounds out of 18” barrel shotguns instead. The longer the barrel of a firearm, the more accurate it will be, but also the faster the projectile will go and more powerful the impact will likely be.²

Barricade rounds can be launched from a 12-gauge shotgun. They are not designed for firing directly at people. Despite this, since they are loaded into less-lethal shotguns, officers have killed multiple people with direct shots, presumably unintentionally. Relatedly, “breaching rounds” are designed to destroy locks and doors. These are shotgun rounds generally comprised of small metal shot, or metal powder, often lead, suspended in a medium like wax. The idea is that the round maintains rigidity until impact, expels energy into a hinge, lock, or doorframe, then fragments into a powder after impact.

With both barricade rounds and breaching rounds, the injuries result from the initial impact, which can transfer a lethal amount of energy into a target.

Several manufacturers of police munitions sell “grenade launching cups” that attach to the muzzle of 12-gauge shotguns, enabling police to launch grenades that are ordinarily thrown by hand. These are used by attaching the cup to the end of the barrel and loading special launching cartridges into the gun.

12-gauge beanbag round.

37mm and 40mm Launchers

The majority of riot munitions—including tear gas canisters, muzzle blasts, baton rounds, flash-bangs, and marking rounds—are fired from devices designed as grenade launchers. For the purpose of disambiguation, we’re going to refer to them as “multi-launchers,” as some sites call them, because they fire a wide range of devices, not just grenades. These are also sometimes called “riot guns” or “less-lethal launchers,” but “riot gun” is often used in the US to describe lethal “riot shotguns.”

There are two common calibers of multi-launchers, 37mm and 40mm. Traditionally, 40mm launchers are seen as “military” and 37mm launchers as “civilian,” but the police employ both and the differences between the two seem to be minor. It can be legal for a civilian in the United States to own a 37mm launcher so long as the munitions they use with it are not anti-personnel; flares and fireworks are legal, while baton rounds are not. There are also 38mm munitions, and most 37mm less-lethal launchers we’ve seen are advertised as firing 38mm munitions as well. 38mm munitions might be more common outside the United States.

All 40mm grenades used in protest situations seem to fit the “40x46mm” NATO standard for low-velocity grenades, which is the standard used for handheld launchers, unlike the 40x53mm high-velocity grenades that are generally fired from mounted and crew-served weapons (i.e., guns that are designed to be operated by two or more people at a time). The ammunition is not interchangeable between these systems.

Many multi-launcher projectiles are fired with black powder, rather than more modern gunpowder, which causes sparks and smoke. This is done because these projectiles are more fragile than most modern ammunition. Some are available in “smokeless” models that, presumably, use EC smokeless powder, a slightly more modern variant of black powder that produces less smoke.

When people report with shock that police who work at public schools have “grenade launchers,” this likely means multi-launchers. The police probably don’t plan to fire live grenades at students; rather, they plan to poison them with chemical weapons that are explicitly banned for use in war by the Geneva Convention.

Pistol-style launchers exist, but are generally designed only for muzzle blasts.

Full-size launchers are usually either breech-loaded single-shot guns (in which the barrel hinges away from the handle and a single round is inserted) or drum-fed versions that look like gigantic revolvers. These revolvers are usually advanced by a pump action, rather than a trigger as in a conventional revolver. These tend to hold between 4 to 6 rounds, depending on the model. Some are rifled to spin projectiles for better accuracy. Internationally, many have wooden stocks and look more like traditional rifles, while most of what we’ve seen in the US are “tactical” style guns with pistol grips in addition to stocks as well as vertical fore grips—a style that is not legal for civilians without special permission.

Launchers can also be mounted under the barrel of a rifle, rather than operating as standalone devices. This style is in common use in military situations but does not seem to be common among law enforcement.

A multi-launcher.

Canisters and Grenades

For the purpose of this article, we are distinguishing “canisters,” designed to be fired from launchers, from “grenades” that are designed to be thrown by hand. In reality, there is no such clear distinction. Some weapons are designed to be thrown or rolled by hand, while others are designed to be loaded into multi-launchers—but some are designed for both.

Grenades are often used to disperse chemical agents and/or impact munitions, particularly rubber balls. Other grenades are “distraction devices,” generally referred to as flash-bangs. Many combine these functions.

We’ve found at least three body styles for police grenades. There is the ball grenade, which looks like a classic baseball-style military grenade, designed to be thrown or rolled. These often contain rubber ball impact munitions, possibly paired with chemical weapons, while others are traditional pyrotechnic tear gas grenades. There are the “low roll” body grenades, which are cylinders with large hex-shaped ends that minimize the distance the grenade will roll. Then there are the regular canister grenades, which appear to be the most common style. These can be of any diameter, but 37/38m, 40mm, 45mm, and 60mm seem to be the most common.

Gas grenades and canisters can disperse chemical agents through a number of methods. The most common is the classic pyrotechnic dispersal, which works by creating a fire inside the canister that releases the chemical agent as smoke. These canisters are very hot and can spark and start other fires.

Another dispersal method, used more often by OC canisters than CS canisters, is aerosol dispersal (sometimes called “flameless expulsion”). Releasing something more akin to a mist than a smoke, these are more commonly used indoors, where pyrotechnic canisters would be less convenient. As best as we are able to determine, these are generally not used as much outside because they produce less dense concentrations of chemical agents.

An instantaneous blast grenade.

Finally, there are instantaneous blast canisters, which explode all at once and release their payload as a powder. These are designed for inside or outside use, but as the dust is easily dispersed by wind, they are intended primarily for use against dense crowds of people, when pyrotechnic grenades are less effective, either owing to throwback potential or the risk of starting unintentional fires. These canisters are easily identified after the fact because they are split open along the sides.

Gas dispersal canisters are often designed to separate into a number of sub-munitions, like the “triple chaser” from Defense Technology that splits into three smaller tear gas canisters. This is done to make it more work for us to throw them back or douse them with water.

The “triple chaser” from Defense Technology that splits into three smaller tear gas canisters.

https://twitter.com/comradecamera/status/1352152555933978627

Less-lethal grenades are generally equipped with fuses like any military grenade: the user pulls a pin, which makes it possible to release a lever that is gripped in the hand. Once the lever is released, the fuse is ignited. While fuses could be of varying length, we have found two second delays to be common: a 1.5-second delay before the fuse is ignited, then .5 seconds for the fuse itself. On at least some models, the fuse assembly ejects itself before the payload is ignited so that it does not become a projectile.

Some grenades come with additional safety clips that prevent the fuse from being pulled while the grenade is being carried. Some come with water-resistant bodies for high-humidity environments. Some, particularly flash-bangs, are reloadable. People have reported seeing police combing the area after protests and picking up certain spent munitions. It’s possible they are doing this to conceal the use of some particularly egregious weapons (such as DM gas), but it’s also possible they are recovering reloadable grenades.

Grenades can also be “command initiated” instead of lit by a fuse. This system seems to be more common in tactical situations, such as house raids, rather than at demonstrations that are more dynamic. This system involves attaching a tube to the grenade to allow for instantaneous, remote detonation.

A federal officer using a fogger to assault a legal observer from the American Civil Liberties Union in Portland, summer 2020.

Sprays and Foggers

In addition to firing canisters that release chemicals as smoke, police also spray people directly with chemicals with handheld devices. The two chemicals we’ve found in our research are OC (pepper spray) and CS (a tear gas), but almost any chemical agent can be aerosolized and sprayed. Depending on the manufacturer, the chemical irritant, and the spray pattern, these can employ any number of propellants, such as compressed air, nitrogen, or the refrigeration chemical ominously named 134a. There are numerous spray patterns, from the simple “stream” pattern to cones, fog (or “vapor”), and even foam.

Chemical sprays, unlike pyrotechnic dispersal methods that disperse a powdered irritant, generally aerosolize a liquid form of the chemical. This can be water-based or oil-based; consequently, chemical weapon protection should be rated against oil-borne particulates (P100 filters instead of N100 filters). Foggers use a liquid formulation as well, but aerosolize this liquid pyrotechnically (the way a fog machine does) rather than by using an aerosol gas.

Chemical sprays come in a range of different concentrations and it would be difficult to anticipate which is ones law enforcement are utilizing without research. To make matters more complicated, the strength of OC (the most common sprayed irritant) is notoriously difficult to identify. Manufacturers’ claims are not regulated, and there are many different types of capsaicinoids that might be present in a given variant of OC gas. There is probably internal consistency within each manufacturer’s line of weapons, but that’s about it. One manufacturer’s 2% spray might be more powerful than another’s 4% spray. Those numbers are almost meaningless on their own.

Small handheld canisters with a button on top seem to be accurate from 10-12 feet, while larger canisters with a trigger assembly seem to be accurate up to 15-20 feet, although this differs from manufacturer to manufacturer. Many spray systems also contain visible or UV reactive dyes to mark targets. UV dye is particularly common in civilian self-defense spray, while police in Seattle and other cities are known to use visible dye to mark demonstrators for arrest.

There are larger canisters that operate on the same principles as the smaller ones. These often look more like full-size fire extinguishers. Then there are backpack devices with separate spray nozzles and tanks—the “Ghostbusters” variety, as some have called them. These can operate with either powder or liquid chemicals; at least one model has an effective range of 45 feet. Portland police have been seen to conceal backpack chemical foggers inside an unmarked black backpack with a spray nozzle attached to a hose protruding from the bottom.

https://twitter.com/PredatorFiles/status/1287725556453187590

There are also devices that look like a cross between a fog machine and a leaf blower that are gas-powered and are designed to fill large areas with poison. Like the backpack foggers, these are generally designed for use in prisons, not at demonstrations. As we’ve seen recently, however, riot police will often use any weapon available to them.

Finally, chemical weapons are sometimes mixed with water and dispersed through fire hoses or water cannons. None of us had seen this method in use in the United States until the 2020 protests in Portland. Chemical burns on a nearby tree were consistent with chlorine poisoning, which could be the result of expired chemistry. This means of chemical weapon dispersal has been used in Hong Kong, Thailand, and Turkey; it is presumably possible in any country that uses water cannons against demonstrators.

Federal troops poisoning downtown Portland with a fogger, summer 2020.

Candles

A hundred years ago, when chemical warfare was first emerging, some poisonous gasses were dispersed by “candles,” which would burn and release gas. Functionally, this is the same thing as a modern tear gas grenade, which uses pyrotechnics to disperse chemical powder; the phrase “tear gas candle” could be used to describe any pyrotechnic tear gas canister.

Yet in the summer of 2020, we saw either police or federal agents walking through the streets of Portland holding a burning object at the end of a stick. This looked, for all the world, like a censor at a Catholic mass with smoke pouring out of it.

Officers distributing tear gas in Portland, summer 2020.

We don’t know for certain whether this was a chemical agent (probably) or inert smoke, but it feels noteworthy that the only tear gas we’ve come across that was designed for dispersal in “candles” like this is DM gas, the vomit gas that protestors believe is in use in Portland. This would mark a major escalation in the form of chemical warfare employed against protestors.

A civilian pepper spray.

Chemical Weapons

As with all many other less-lethal weapons, the distinctions between categories of chemicals are actually quite blurry.

Conventional parlance divides chemical weapons in two categories: tear gas and pepper spray. While these distinctions exist, they’re not clear-cut. If we imagine “tear gas” as clouds of smoke or dust and “pepper spray” as chemical sprays, this is really a question of methods of dispersal, not the actual chemicals being used.

We will discuss seven different chemicals herein. Although something like fifteen varieties have been developed, we will focus on the most common ones that are either known to be used against demonstrators or at least widely suspected of being used thus. Of those seven, five of them are usually dispersed as gas, while two usually appear as a chemical spray. But it’s possible for almost any chemical to be dispersed by almost any means, and we have seen quite a bit of crossover.

The five tear gasses, in brief, are:

CS gas, far and away the most common tear gas;
CN gas, an outdated tear gas that is more toxic and less effective, but is still in production and commercially available;
CR gas, which is sometimes called “fire gas,” known for being incredibly hard to decontaminate—this makes your skin burn even worse than other gasses, and is in suspected use but not listed as commercially available;
DM gas (or Adamsite), the nearly-mythical “vomit gas” that the police are suspected of using, though there is not yet hard evidence of its use;
and MPK gas, which to our knowledge is only used in Russia but might be of interest to some readers.

The two pepper spray chemicals are:

OC, the common “pepper spray” that is made from chile peppers; and
PAVA, a synthetic form of OC that appears to act in very similar ways.

We will largely conflate these two throughout this article, as we’ve had a hard time identifying any significant distinction between them.

The first self-defense sprays were actually filled with CN gas, but OC is generally more effective at disabling a target. There are sprays filled with CS, CN, and OC. There are also tear gas munitions filled with OC and PAVA.

For the ostensible purposes of crowd control, OC (or PAVA) is the most effective tear gas agent. It is the fastest acting, the most debilitating, and the least toxic, and its victims recover faster. CS gas is in second place; it is more traditionally used, and the most widely available.

By any measure, no other tear gas agent besides OC or CS has any use even from a statist point of view except to punish and poison people. They are outdated and cruel technologies. We don’t say that in order to ask for sympathy or to appeal to the moral judgment of the state, but simply to point out that the cruelty is the point.

Common pepper spray.

Tactical Considerations

Chemical weapons are used for a number of tactical purposes. As we’ve found with impact munitions, police employ them in many ways that they were never designed to be used. In general, tear gas is designed to control the movement of crowds, or to disperse crowds. Tear gas clouds are meant to discourage people from occupying particular areas. Police can use tear gas to direct a crowd much the same way that lines of riot police can: most people will avoid the gas and will move in the direction of clear air. The same crowd control effect can be done, on a smaller scale, with pepper-balls and the focused remote deployment of chemical weapons.

Sprays tend to be used closer up. Outside of demonstrations, they are used to subdue individuals. Inside of demonstrations, they are often used indiscriminately, to disperse, intimidate, or incapacitate a crowd.

Tear gas and other chemical weapons are specifically not designed for punishment: they are not designed to be deployed against a trapped crowd or a restrained individual. Police use them this way regularly, of course.

To prevent the police from accomplishing their crowd control goals, we simply refuse to be crowd-controlled. This can necessitate a certain amount of advance preparation.

To mitigate the effects of chemical weapons, personal protective equipment is in order. Our guide to gas masks and goggles gets into this in detail, but the short version is:

Wear long sleeves and long pants, minimizing the amount of exposed skin;
avoid wearing contact lenses;
avoid makeup and moisturizers and other skin creams, especially fat-based creams;
wear a gas mask, or a half-mask respirator with goggles, or a wet bandanna and goggles and keep moving.

Umbrellas can block chemical sprays. On the day Trump was inaugurated president, in the fabled “umbrella charge,” a single umbrella protected dozens of anarchists as they escaped from a police kettle, eight felonies, and a years-long court case.

January 20, 2017: the umbrella charge.

In light or moderate chemical weapon attacks, it’s usually sufficient for a few people to deactivate or throw back the canisters while medics and others treat those affected by sprays. It’s also possible to keep moving, so long as this doesn’t interfere the goals of the demonstrators.

Unfortunately, the heavy use of chemical weapons will tend to thin out a protest of people who are less prepared. Having wet bandannas (stored in individual ziplock bags) or other PPE available for distribution can be useful to enable the crowd to stay around longer.

Throwing Back Tear Gas Canisters

“It is never polite to throw back the tear gas… But sometimes love Sometimes real love Is fucking rude.”

Andrea Gibson, “Etiquette Leash”

Protestors regularly return tear gas canisters to those who have deployed them. Since tear gas is pyrotechnically deployed, most canisters are quite hot—hot enough to start fires or burn your skin. Anyone hoping to handle gas canisters should wear insulated work gloves made from fire-resistant material. Cheap hardware store gloves are not adequate; canisters have burned protestors through them. Synthetic materials, if not specifically designed to be fire-resistant, can melt into a person’s skin. Leather work gloves are often the simplest and best choice, though those who choose not to wear leather should be able to find heat-resistant synthetics.

People have also employed lacrosse sticks and hockey sticks to return tear gas canisters without touching them.

https://twitter.com/plsnotmike/status/1286951807168598018

https://twitter.com/MrOlmos/status/1285110589606334465

Police may employ pepper spray without putting on gas masks, but if they are going to gas an entire area, they will almost always put on masks or rotate in a new line of officers wearing protective gear. This is important: it means that if you keep an eye on the police, you should be able to tell in advance when they are preparing to gas you. It follows that, if anyone must be subjected to tear gas, it should be the people who are best equipped for it—the ones who deployed it in the first place. Of course, we’re not lawyers, and laws about which burning objects one is allowed to throw at the police likely vary by locality.

You should only throw canisters when you are aware of your surroundings and have an open space behind you. Before you throw a canister, take note of which direction the wind is blowing and where people are likely to need to go shortly, as well as where they currently are.

https://twitter.com/Gian_Neon/status/1268060951846281216

Neutralizing Tear Gas Canisters

In recent years, protestors around the world have been learning to neutralize gas canisters rather than simply tossing them back. These methods have the advantage of being a bit less confrontational.

Since most canisters are pyrotechnically deployed, it’s enough to simply put out the fire inside the canister. One rudimentary method, which does not require touching the canister at all, is to put a road cone over the canister and then pour water in through the hole at the top of the cone until it is doused.

https://twitter.com/hkfp/status/1158399008261464064

A more refined method involves picking up the canister with gloved hands and putting it in a large water bottle or a bucket of water. In Chile and some other parts of the world where communities in revolt have honed their practices, extinguishing canisters has become a distinct role in street protests. People playing this role bring a water jug with a wide mouth, containing a little baking soda, dish soap, and/or vegetable oil—3 tablespoons of each to 1 liter of water. When a canister arrives, they drop it in the jug, and shake the jug while covering the top with one hand just enough to keep the gas from getting out. If you try this, don’t seal the bottle—you don’t want it to explode.

https://twitter.com/crimethinc/status/1265808184519864320

Failing all else, if you aren’t prepared to neutralize the canister, it could be enough to simply cover it with something like a cooking pot or an orange road barrel. Some gas will leak out, but this will diminish its ability to hurt people.

Being Prepared for What Chemical Weapons Do

In theory, riot control agents are designed to be as uncomfortable and debilitating as possible without causing permanent damage. They irritate the lungs, eyes, and skin. They are lachrymatory agents, causing your eyes to water. Your nose might run. You might have trouble breathing. You might be unable to open your eyes. Some chemical weapons take effect almost immediately; others can affect you minutes after exposure. Some continue to irritate you long after you move to fresh air; others dissipate faster. Some are more toxic than others; some can cause permanent damage. We’ll discuss the specific effects of each chemical separately. But in short: sometimes exposure to riot control agents can be painful and debilitating, especially when you’re directly exposed to them without protection. In other cases, they may be simply irritating.

Shortness of breath is a specific and common problem resulting from exposure to chemical weapons. When this is combined with the shock of getting gassed, the overall stress of the situation, and irritated lungs, some people may feel as though they are going to pass out.

If you are experiencing this, try to get out of the area where the gas is deployed, sit up or stand with good posture to open your lungs, and try to breathe deeply. Even if your breathing is still restricted, the additional oxygen will lower your ambient stress level, enabling you to address some of the effects of anxiety and decreasing your heart rate. If you see other people who appear to be on the verge of passing out, try to get them to somewhere safe outside of the area of deployment and encourage them to breathe as deeply as possible.

The other thing that chemical weapons are intended to do is intimidate us. They are used to keep us out of the streets, to keep us from accomplishing our goals. If you are still building your experience in the streets, we recommend that you speak with coolheaded people who have considerable experience in public order situations about what to expect and how to handle the stress of chemical weapons attacks. If you are experiencing large-scale police violence for the first time, and you have the option, it can be a good idea to pace yourself, leaving a stressful situation when it becomes overwhelming, in order to slowly, steadily build a skillset for dealing with it levelheadedly. If you are aiming for longevity as a participant in social movements, it’s better to err on the side of caution at first than to ask too much of yourself, have a bad experience, and withdraw from the struggle.

Some of us have been hit by everything under the sun over the years and survived. The fact that we have and the experience of being among comrades who have persisted in spite of intense police violence have both done a lot to demystify the weaponry of the police.

For Those Who Are Particularly Vulnerable

Asthmatics and others with breathing difficulties should be particularly careful about exposure to chemical weapons. This could mean bringing a gas mask or being prepared to leave the area as soon as you see police preparing to deploy gas. It appears that asthmatics account for most of the deaths caused by these chemical agents. To be clear, while these agents do occasionally kill people, being gassed as an asthmatic is rarely fatal.

According to Sven-Eric Jordt, Ph.D., a tear gas researcher, children are particularly vulnerable to tear gas because of their smaller lungs, which have a very different surface-to-volume ratio than adults. This has not stopped federal officers from employing tear gas against migrant children at the US border.

Immunity

Rumors abound about immunity to CS or OC, particularly in military circles.

Some people do appear to be naturally immune to CS gas, or at least more tolerant of it. It is indeed possible to build up the mental capacity to continue to function despite the pain and other effects. But there is no evidence that it is possible to develop a physiological immunity to CS or OC. In fact, on the contrary, repeat exposure to CS gas is known to cause sensitization—the opposite of tolerance.

US soldiers are exposed to CS gas during basic training as part of “mask confidence training,” aimed at demonstrating the effectiveness of their gas masks. During these trainings, it appears that some small portion of the population (perhaps 2-5%, according to speculation we’ve seen) is naturally resistant to the effects of CS. On one forum, we read that a soldier who was highly tolerant of CS gas let someone pepper spray him, erroneously believing that pepper spray (OC) is the same thing. It turned out that he was not immune to pepper spray.

The other common rumor within the ranks is that drill sergeants develop immunity to the gas as a consequence of repeated exposure. What is likely happening, instead, is either that the officers who display some naturally occurring tolerance of CS are put in charge of the CS exposure chamber, or that these instructors have developed a mental, rather than physiological, tolerance for the pain and discomfort that the gas causes.

In any case, it is ill-advised to routinely expose yourself to CS gas in hopes of building up a mental tolerance to it. Exposure to CS gas can cause a number of long-term health problems. Nor is there any evidence that eating hot peppers or the like can increase your tolerance of it.

Some police academies apparently teach racist myths about pepper spray, suggesting without evidence that Latin American and East Asian people are more tolerant of pepper spray—and therefore, it is implied, need to be sprayed longer—because of exposure to spicy food. This is just the latest in centuries of white supremacist pseudoscience justifying cruelty.

How to Treat the Effects of Chemical Agents

Depending on the agent, most of the effects of chemical agents will clear up after about 30 minutes of fresh air. Avoid rubbing your eyes. If you have contacts in, remove them as soon as possible.

Rinse your eyes with water—or, ideally, have someone else rinse your eyes. The best way to rinse someone’s eyes is to take a sports-style squirt water bottle and spray water into their open eyes. Bring a bottle for this purpose and use it only for flushes; do not drink from it, lest you contaminate it with saliva. You can open someone’s eyes with your thumb and forefinger; wear clean gloves, if you have them. It is enough to open their eyes just a little bit. Start rinsing from the inside of the eye, near the nose, and work your way to the outside. Do one eye at a time. Ask them to blink; remind them to not touch their face. Repeat as many times as necessary.

Spray the water from the sports bottle with some force: the goal is to flush the chemicals off the eye. Rinsing your eyes will not immediately alleviate the burning, but it will enable you to begin to recover.

To get tear gas and other contaminates off your skin, wash with soap and water. If the gas has dried as a powder on you (which is especially possible with expired tear gas), brush the powder off your skin and clothes before rinsing. While it’s been suggested that water “activates” the powder form of chemical irritants, experience has shown that removing it with water, or soap and water, is effective.

When you meet people after being gassed, if you are still wearing the same clothes or have remnants of the gas in your hair, warn them. You may not be affected by traces of gas that could still provoke a significant reaction in them, especially if they have asthma or similar conditions. This can also be a concern if you are entering enclosed spaces with others. Treat the risk of exposing others to tear gas secondhand as a consent issue.

When you have exited the conflict area after exposure, take off your outer clothes and double bag them until you have a chance to wash them. Shower, scrubbing your skin vigorously with soap. Be careful when you wash the chemicals out of your hair: if any get into your eyes, your genitals, or open wounds, it will hurt.

To deal with your clothes, wash them thoroughly, possibly through multiple cycles. Run the washing machine without anything in it afterwards to wash the inside of the washing machine itself. Drying your clothes outside on a line is preferable, so that any lingering effects can dissipate.

Tear Gas and COVID-19

Tear gas makes your nose run, and bodily fluids are effective vectors for COVID-19 infection. Concerned with minimizing the spread of a deadly disease, some medics who would otherwise be administering assistance to those exposed to chemical weapons have begun advocating that people treat themselves for chemical weapons exposure if they are able to. Failing this, you should wear gloves, eye protection, and a mask of your own when you are treating a person for chemical weapons exposure. Take care to clean and decontaminate as soon as you can.

Decontamination Wipes

Law enforcement use Sudecon wipes for decontaminating people from pepper spray and tear gas. Medics we’ve spoken to report that they haven’t seen a side-by-side comparison, but believe that Sudecon wipes might work at least as well as soap and water on skin.

Rosehip Medic Collective in Portland, Oregon has published a recipe for DIY decontamination wipes that were in wide use in the chemical-soaked streets there during summer 2020.

Begin with:

1 gallon warm water
9 cups white sugar
2 tablespoons citric acid

Mix this well, then combine it with 21 fluid ounces of baby shampoo and mix it gently. Soak high quality paper towels in the mixture, and pack them into ziplock bags a few of them at a time. These should keep for a few days, or a few months in a refrigerator.

Medics in Portland have been manufacturing these with the help of a small rolling machine to distribute the moisture more evenly; they hope it will enable the wipes to keep longer. It also helps the medics to manufacture them more quickly.

Other Remedies

People use many different remedies and treatments for chemical weapons—everything from milk to antacids and herbal concoctions. Based on our conversations with street medics and doctors, we recommend just using water for flushing out eyes and soap and water for washing skin. Why? After all, the doctor we spoke to pointed out that it doesn’t usually hurt, medically speaking, to use milk to flush out someone’s eyes.

We advocate for water because it’s readily available and it’s less likely to cause allergic reactions. We recommend it because it isn’t gross—getting arrested soaked in milk isn’t a pleasant experience—and because it doesn’t leave telltale white residue like antacid does, which appears more visibly on darker skin and has been used (for example, by police in the Ferguson uprising) to mark suspects for arrest. Perhaps most importantly, we recommend it because it demystifies chemical weapons.

The idea that we need some sort of special remedy to treat exposure to chemical weapons adds to their mystique and the fear they can inspire. But there’s nothing arcane about these irritants. Wash them off and get to fresh air. Even if you disagree with us that water is best, please do not interrupt experienced street medics who are applying water eye flushes. That is not helpful behavior.

There is an outdated protest technique (referred to as MOFIBA) that uses mineral oil to cleanse the skin of contaminants, but it has largely gone out of use because, if administered wrong (whether as a consequence of inexperience or of being applied in a tumultuous situation), it can do more harm than good. We won’t detail it here. Soap and water are effective for cleaning the skin. Decontamination wipes are good—possibly better—if you have them available, but they are not necessary.

Additional care can sometimes be useful, both medically and emotionally. As one street medic put it, they rub arnica lotion onto handcuff bruises because when someone shows you the bruising caused by police handcuffs, they’re showing you the physical evidence that they were assaulted and kidnapped. When you examine those bruises and apply a lotion, you’re showing that what happened to them matters and that the consequences are worth treating with care. The arnica lotion likely helps with the bruising, but the act of showing care matters too.

Some protestors in Chile have taken to spraying a room-temperature tea (made by boiling laurel leaves) into the eyes of those who are suffering from pepper-spray, and it seems to be effective. This is not a mechanical flushing of the eyes, but rather applied with a squirt bottle as an aftercare treatment to alleviate burning and to calm the person.

Some protestors in Hong Kong have carried spray bottles containing three teaspoons of baking soda for every 8.5 ounces of water. While the efficacy of this has not been directly studied, it lines up with the findings of a 2003 study to the effect that CS molecules are unstable and basic fluids like baking soda might accelerate that process of molecular breakdown.

https://twitter.com/nicole_froelich/status/1231084763412357121

The Geneva Protocol

Perhaps you’ve heard that the use of tear gas in war is a war crime, banned by the Geneva Protocol (which is distinct from and predates the Geneva Conventions). This is true. It’s not just that tear gas was accidentally swept up in a broad agreement not to employ chemical weapons, either. It’s in there explicitly by name.

In 1925, after the chemical horrors of the First World War, 38 countries signed the Geneva Protocol banning the use of chemical weapons. Most of the signatory countries assumed that this included tear gas and chemical herbicides dropped indiscriminately in remarkable quantities. The United States government decided not to share this interpretation. Throughout the 1960s, the US made extensive use of tear gas and herbicide (Agent Orange) in Vietnam.

Today, the Geneva Protocol makes it clear that tear gas is specifically prohibited.

Heads of state don’t want anyone else dropping chemicals on their civilians—but if that’s what it takes to maintain order internally, they’re all for it. So yes, international law explicitly forbids the use of tear gas in war, describing it as a war crime. But governments agree that it is fine to use it on us.

Types of Chemical Agent

We’ll review the properties and effects of the more common chemical agents here.

CS Gas

CS gas (2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile, C₁₀H₅ClN₂) is the most common tear gas agent. Two US scientists, Corson and Stoughton, were the first to synthesize it; they named it after themselves. It was not weaponized into tear gas until the 1950s.

CS gas is found primarily in tear gas canisters, but it also appears in sprays, or laced throughout impact weapons.

CS gas is perceived to be substantially less toxic than CN gas, while being more effective at disabling people. It’s probably more toxic, and less disabling, than OC.

We know that CS can cause heart and liver issues. We know that intense exposure can cause chemical burns and scarring. But there is more.

In terms of immediate lethality, it is speculated that CS could kill in an enclosed space; protesters blamed several deaths in Tahrir Square during the uprising on CS. But this has not been confirmed. CS gas does seem to be less immediately capable of killing than other chemical agents. Its long-term effects, however, are troubling.

Most toxicity reports on CS are over fifty years old; new studies are somewhat rare. The US military is increasingly finding links between CS gas and persistent lung problems by studying the incidence of lung problems before and after soldiers are exposed to the CS gas chamber.

CS gas is clastogenic—that is, it can change your chromosomes. This primarily affects people who are capable of menstruation. Science has been slow to study these effects, but a large number of stories describe miscarriages, excessive bleeding, cramps, blood clots, and seizures after exposure to CS gas.

CS gas (unlike OC and the Russian tear gas MPK) is not generally considered as effective against dogs, bears, and some other mammals owing to different tear duct structure and some resistance from fur. It certainly causes discomfort, and studies have shown it is capable of killing dogs. Anecdotal reports from Turkey describe it killing birds by the thousands and blinding street cats.

As with all chemical weapons, the police do not use CS in a “pure” form—and the other chemicals it is adulterated with can also be toxic. We believe that the liquid/spray version, at least the one that the UK police use, employs methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK) as a solvent. MIBK is itself toxic and can cause liver and kidney problems.

At least at the siege in Waco, the US government used CS aerosolized along with the solvent Dichloromethane, which has a sweet odor. It is carcinogenic.

Some comrades reported that at least some of the gas used during the G20 protests in Pittsburgh in 2009 smelled vaguely like banana candy.

A CS tear gas canister.

CN Gas

Phenacyl chloride is a common chemical used in organic chemistry. When it is weaponized as a tear gas, it is called CN gas (2-Chloroacetophenone). It was first developed as a tear gas during the First and Second World Wars, though it is not known to have been used during them.

CN gas is commercially available through any number of police weapon manufacturers, although there is no reason why it should be, considering that it is substantially more toxic and substantially less effective than CS gas. It is less common than CS or OC, but can be found in tear gas canisters, sprays, and laced throughout impact weapons.

CN gas was the active ingredient of “Mace,” the first brand of self-defense spray, before OC was developed.

CN gas has killed at least five people via heart damage or asphyxia. It has also caused contact dermatitis—sometimes permanently—in an unknowable number of police officers whose chemical weapons have accidentally leaked onto them. If it can injure police in that manner, it can injure us as well.

CR Gas

CR gas (dibenzoxazepine) is a tear gas agent that is suspected but not confirmed to be in use in the United States. It was developed in the UK in the 1960s and earns its nickname “fire gas” for its capacity to not just hurt your lungs and eyes, but to make your whole body feel like you’ve been thrown into a patch of nettles. It is said to smell sweet.

CR gas is allegedly 6-10 times more potent than CS gas, and while all the documentation we’ve found says that it is “less toxic” than CS, it is known to be capable of killing people by asphyxiation or pulmonary edema (liquid filling the lungs).

One of the worst things about CR gas is that it is substantially harder to decontaminate than other riot control agents. It can persist on surfaces for up to 60 days.

We have not found any manufacturers who advertise any products that contain CR gas.

Some protestors in Portland conjecture they might have been exposed to CR gas because some gas they were exposed to reacted particularly strongly to their sweat. The theory is that federal agents, tired of gas-masked protestors, utilized a weapon that causes suffering even to those who are masked. These federal agents might have access to old stores of CR gas, or perhaps do not need to go through public-facing commercial channels the way local police generally do.

However, CS gas (and perhaps especially expired CS gas, which might cause larger flakes that persist longer on the skin) also reacts to sweat to cause burning, and can be dispersed through sweet-smelling solvents. Chemists and others are currently trying to work out whether CR or DM have been in use in Portland.

One mysterious green gas officers utilized to assault protesters in Portland has been identified as HC gas.

DM Gas

DM gas (Adamsite, Diphenylaminechlorarsine) is another largely outdated and particularly vicious tear gas agent. Chemists in both Germany and the US developed it independently in the 1910s. It was originally burned in “candles” to disperse the gas.

DM gas is particularly ineffective as a riot control agent, as its effects take 5-10 minutes to set in. It would only be useful for inflicting punishment—for which purpose it would likely be effective, as its effects can easily last 12 hours. It starts like other tear gasses, with irritation to the eyes and lungs, but this develops into nausea, headache, and persistent vomiting.

DM gas was most notoriously used in the United States against the “Bonus Army,” a demonstration of 45,000 veterans of the First World War and their allies in DC in 1932. Eyewitnesses say that the gas suffocated two young children, though historians have been unable to confirm this.

Some people conjecture that DM gas was in use by federal agents in Portland in the summer of 2020, but it remains unproven. There were rumors describing green smoke that might have been DM gas, and reports that some tear gas had made people vomit. So far, no one has been able to prove or disprove this, though some green gas utilized in Portland has been identified as HC gas.

Toxic DM gas was used to target World War I veterans who participated in the “bonus march.”

Pepper Spray: OC

OC (oleoresin capsicum) is the only organically derived riot control agent we are aware of. It’s derived from capsaicin, the active component of chili peppers.

As far as the ostensible purpose of riot control agents go, OC seems to be the most effective: it is substantially more irritating and incapacitating than CS or CN gas, with a faster onset time than either, while apparently inflicting substantially fewer long-term adverse health effects on those exposed to it.

OC was first introduced as pepper spray, but has increasingly found its way into tear gas variants as well, appearing in tear gas grenades (both slow-burning and instant clouds of dust) and laced throughout impact weapons.

Lest we paint too rosy a picture of OC, it, too, can kill people—specifically, those who are exposed to a great deal of it, such as when police torture restrained arrestees with it, which is a common enough procedure. In particular, it can kill asthmatics by blocking off their lungs to air by “severe acute bronchospasm.”

OC in spray form is often suspended in propylene glycol, which is comparatively harmless by itself.

PAVA

PAVA (Nonivamide, pelargonic acid vanillylamide) is a (usually) synthetic form of OC that is more common in Britain, where it is the most common form of pepper spray, than in the United States. The only use of it we’ve identified in the US so far is in pepper-balls and FN303 rounds.

PAVA does appear naturally, but manufacturers generally synthesize it. It is more heat-stable than OC. It is edible in the same way that OC is. We have yet to find any particular differentiation between the toxicity of PAVA and OC.

Most PAVA spray is suspended in aqueous ethanol. This is sometimes called PAVA 1. In other cases, it is suspended in a mixture of mono propylene glycol, ethanol, and water referred to as PAVA 2. PAVA 1 is flammable, while PAVA 2 is not. Neither are made of chemicals we know to be particularly toxic.

MPK

Western readers are unlikely to ever be exposed to MPK (N-nonanoylmorpholine), a tear gas used in Russia that is reported to be effective against dogs and people who are too intoxicated to be easily incapacitated by other chemical weapons. It is not as strong as other chemicals, so it is generally mixed with CS or CN gas. It is presumably less toxic than the chemicals it is mixed with, as it is reportedly sometimes used as a food additive as well.

Smoke

Many canisters the police employ are just smoke grenades. Police use smoke grenades to mark areas with colored smoke, to hide their own positions and actions, to cause panic in the crowd, and, possibly, to refract lasers pointed their way (we are unsure of the efficacy of this, as there is a great deal of mixed information about lasers). Most chemical weapons manufacturers also offer smoke grenade versions of their various canisters and grenades.

Many military-style smoke grenades, called HC or HCE grenades, contain Hexachloroethane. Hexachloroethane is toxic through skin absorption, depressing the central nervous system; it is presumed to be a carcinogen. In mid-2020, federal agents in Portland, Oregon used outdated grenades containing HC. According to one researcher, HC is no longer manufactured in the USA, but is harvested as a byproduct of other chemical processes. While it is toxic, it seems considerably safer than the other chemical weapons police employ.

“Saf-smoke” grenades, the style manufactured by Defense Technologies, are advertised as less dangerous. The actual contents of Saf-smoke and other competing brands of smoke grenade are proprietary and not immediately available for review.

A “Saf-smoke” grenade.

Flash-bangs

These devices, which manufacturers call “distraction devices” or “disorientation devices,” are more commonly known as flash-bangs or stun grenades. They produce an intense flash of light and a loud bang as well as some concussive force. The light (upwards of 8 million candelas—as bright as eight million candles) blinds viewers for approximately five seconds and causes severe afterimages. The volume is around 160-180 decibels, substantially louder than any gunshot you are likely to ever hear; this deafens those in the vicinity, disrupting the fluid in the inner ear and sometimes causing dizziness.

Police occasionally use these in conjunction with baton charges or other impact weapons when they wish to knock demonstrators off guard. But at the end of the day, like so many police tactics, these are methods to intimidate people into complying, not methods that directly force people to comply.

Flash-bang grenades are generally made of solid steel or aluminum, designed not to fragment as a result of their detonation. Many of them are reloadable or refillable.

Some flash-bang grenades are “aerial warning/signaling” munitions designed to be fired into the air to explode over a crowd. These can come with or without chemical payloads; each round has a different range, ranging from 50 to 300 meters. There are versions for 12-gauge shotguns as well.

At least one manufacturer says that there should be a clear area of 5-6 feet around the site where a flash-bang will detonate; still, police regularly throw, fire, and roll these into crowds. While some are packed with rubber ball munitions, most are designed not to cause harm via impact. Yet they can maim or kill people, usually through burning. They’ve also been known to start fires, particularly when deployed indoors.

Flash-bang grenades.

Collecting Spent Munitions

Since there is so little oversight and so little information available about the weapons that taxpayers pay for police to shoot us with, protestors have taken to documenting spent shell casings to see what is being fired at them. Collecting spent munitions can contribute to useful pattern analysis. Some cities have people who are willing to come pick up munitions for this purpose. If your city doesn’t have anyone pursuing this, consider taking it on yourself.

The National Lawyers Guild is interested in knowing what people are being shot with; they are collecting information. So are we. Please contact us with photos and information.

Police in Portland seem to be convinced—or are trying to convince people—that picking up spent munitions is a crime and they have threatened to fire more munitions at anyone caught doing it. They have not managed to figure out exactly what crime it is, and we are not currently aware of anyone facing charges for doing so.

Police munitions are often found unexploded or unfired. It’s unclear to us if this is because these cartridges are firing without deploying properly, if they’re jamming the gun and being ejected unspent, or if police are simply dropping munitions on the ground by accident.

When opening a bag of spent munitions, it is possible to experience secondary effects from gas residue. Consider storing them double bagged in ziplock bags. Only handle them in open-air environments while wearing gloves and protective clothing.

Marking

The police sometimes attempt to mark those participating in demonstrations or suspected of crimes in hopes of arresting them later. In some cases, they may simply use marking to frighten us by making us believe that they will come looking for us, in hopes of limiting what we choose to do in the streets. We know of far more times that the police have used marking than times that this marking was later used to identify people for arrest or was presented as evidence in court. We would love to hear from anyone with more information about marking, whether through experience or research.

There are reports of police using pepper-ball rounds for marking at least as far back as the 2003 protests in Miami against the Free Trade Area of the Americas ministerial and the Iraq War protests of the same era.

We’ve been able to identify at least seven means by which police mark people:

Malodorants
Temporary powder
Washable paint
Indelible paint
UV dye
DNA marking

It is probable that colored, visible dye is used as well. These are often paired with other effects, such as 12-gauge beanbag rounds loaded with florescent green powder or FN303 rounds that add paint or dye to impact weaponry. We have also received reports that police in Portland have shined green laser pointers from the rooftops to mark protestors as targets for impact weapons or arrest.

There appears to be only one malodorant round on the market, the 40mm BIP Malodorant from Security Devices International, Inc. It is intended to mark people by smell and also to serve as a crowd deterrent. The smell was described by Fox News as “egg salad meets trash” and is said to disperse fairly quickly. None of us have heard of it being used at demonstrations.

Marking powder, paint, or dye can be applied via any means that chemicals are administered. Paintball guns, shotguns, and multi-launchers all have marking rounds available, and we’ve heard reports of police adding paint or dye to their water cannons.

We have yet to find information on the exact makeup of the paint or dye commonly included in marking rounds. Some manufacturers divide their products into “washable,” “indelible,” and “UV” or into “powder” and “liquid.” Security Devices International, Inc., for example, claims that their liquid marking round leaves a “semi-permanent stain” that “remains on the target and clothing up to 24 hours.” The data sheet for that particular round refers to its contents as a proprietary blend of inert materials. Other companies are no more forthcoming.

Removing Paint

The easiest way to deal with a mark on your clothes that identifies you as a suspect is to get rid of the clothes. You should make this decision according to how important they are to you and what you fear you might be arrested for. A court case is usually more expensive than a windbreaker. You may also be able to leave an item of clothing somewhere—for example, in a bush or trash can—and come back later to see if you can recover it.

Washable paint and chalk should be the easiest to remove. It should wash off of skin with water, or soap and water and scrubbing. One way to remove water-based paint from clothes is to let the paint dry, then scrape off as much as you can with a butter knife or the back of a spoon; then hand-wash the item, passing warm water through the fabric from behind the stain, blotting it with a rag or paper towel; then mix half-detergent and half-water and rub that into the stain. Then rinse, and repeat the last step until the stain is gone or you are no longer drawing paint out of the clothes. In a worst-case scenario, try using small amounts of acetone (nail polish remover) or rubbing alcohol—but be advised, this might damage the item.

Oil-based paint, which might be used in the “indelible” paint, can be removed from skin by mixing olive oil and dish soap, lathering up your skin, and rinsing it off, repeating as necessary. You can remove oil-based paint from clothes by putting your clothes inside out on a stack of rags or paper towels and then pouring turpentine or another paint thinner onto the fabric from behind the stain, blotting it with rags. Once no more paint comes out that way, rub dishwater detergent into the stain and then leave the clothing in hot, soapy water overnight. Rinse it thoroughly in the morning, then throw your clothes into a washing machine.

UV ink can also be removed from both skin and clothes. In some ways, it may be easier to clean than other inks because it doesn’t really dry except under UV light (we are unsure if the UV light in sunlight will cause it to dry). Most UV ink appears to be alcohol-soluble, so using rubbing alcohol or even hairspray should help remove it from skin. Other recommendations we have seen include washing with diluted bleach water or scrubbing your skin with an abrasive mixture of sugar and dishwashing liquid. Still other people maintain that hot soapy water and plenty of abrasion will do. You could try washing your clothes repeatedly in hot water, checking with a UV flashlight as you go.

There are cheap, small flashlights available that come with both regular and UV LEDs. Usually, they are used by employees working door security to look for hand stamps—or by people who are checking their bedding for bedbugs.

DNA marking

There’s paint, there’s invisible ink, and then there’s… DNA marking. Actually, there are two different things that are called DNA marking. The first is a chemical weapon, usually a spray, that contains a unique blend of different metals and other materials, acting as a sort of chemical fingerprint that can be identified later. This type of tagging uses the word DNA only as advertising jargon. Each can, or shipment of cans, might contain its own unique fingerprint, though we have not been able to confirm this.

The other style of DNA marking uses DNA, literally. This DNA marking is a system that marks a target with synthetic DNA that can live on clothes or skin for several weeks. Both systems of DNA tagging work the same way: if someone is identified later by way of these tags, this can provide concrete evidence in court connecting them to potential criminal behavior.

There is every reason to believe that police are using one or both of these methods, though it is hard to know which one and precisely when they are using it. The 40mm DNA Forensic Marking round, for example, made by Security Devices International, Inc, uses a “botanical encrypted taggant in water” which we believe refers to actual synthetic DNA.

All the DNA marking materials that we’ve been able to find seem to be suspended in UV ink for dispersal, although we know of no reason that they would have to be.

As of this writing, we have not heard of any arrests or court cases related to the 2020 uprising that involved DNA marking. Most after-the-fact felony arrests of protestors seem to hinge instead of livestream footage and social media posts. This does not mean that it is not in use or that it will not be used in the future.

On Twitter, Minneapolis police have openly discussed using DNA marking spray, although they have not specifically claimed to have used it on protestors. It’s possible that they were conflating “UV marking” with “DNA tagging.”

Removing DNA marking

Since all available evidence suggests that DNA marking is carried in a UV dye, it seems probable that it can be removed in a similar way as one goes about removing UV dye. Most manufacturers claim that the marking lasts for “days,” or “several washes,” although at least one claims it lasts for “weeks.”

One manufacturer, Security Devices International (SDI), claims that it lasts 3-5 days on a person but 2-5 years on clothing.

Rumors from Portland suggest that the synthetic DNA is degraded by UV light. Some people have suggested that any clothes that one might not want to destroy or throw away—for example, body armor—should be left in the sun for several hours, with someone turning them regularly to make sure all parts of the items are exposed. Sunlight is bad for the plastic polymers of armor, especially soft bulletproof vests, so this might not be recommended for some materials. People also suggest using alcohol or hydrogen peroxide to break the DNA tag down, but this might degrade the material as well, especially in the case of hydrogen peroxide.

It all depends on how important it is to destroy the evidence that you were in a particular crowd at a particular time. Depending on the severity of the risk, you might replace all of your affected clothes and spend considerable time washing and exfoliating—or you could simply wash everything a couple times, take a few showers, and check yourself with a UV light.

SelectaDNA

Perhaps the first company to develop synthetic DNA marking for police use was SelectaDNA in the UK. SelectaDNA sells DNA spray, gel, and other devices directly to consumers for the purpose of home security. They also sell less-lethal .68 caliber air-powered weapons, a rifle and a pistol, to shoot DNA marking rounds at rioters. Both of these guns have an effective range of 30-40 meters and use 8-round magazines and a 20-round disposable CO2 cartridge. They are semi-automatic and can fire six rounds in a second. Each comes equipped with a camera. It’s unclear if the SelectaDNA pellets can be fired by other .68 caliber air guns.

Each pack of 16 pellets is uniquely coded. In theory, this means that police can do more than argue “this person was at the demonstration where we shot everyone with green paint, you can tell by the green paint”—they can claim “this is someone I shot with one of these 16 pellets, as registered on the timestamp of my rifle camera.”

The synthetic strands of DNA are carried by a UV ink substrate. It can be detected on a suspect with a UV light or smelled by specially-trained dogs. Presumably, the dogs are smelling the UV ink, not the DNA itself.

SelectaDNA has already caused controversy in the UK.

Defense Technology’s barricade rounds, called “Ferret” rounds, come in 12-gauge (with 2.5” shells), 37mm, and 40mm. The 12-gauge rounds have a velocity of 1000 fps and an effective range of 50-100 meters. The 37mm reputedly has a velocity of 450 fps an effective range of 50-200 yards (though we question this 200 yard claim—it seems like a typographical error). The 40mm variety has a velocity of 325 fps (liquid) or 375 fps (powder) and an effective range of 54 yards. ↩
One chart we found compares a 22-inch barrel with a 28-inch barrel, noting that a round will fire at 1304 fps from the 22-inch and 1331 fps from the 28-inch, but this may not map to the difference in velocity of a beanbag round. ↩

A Demonstrator’s Guide to Understanding Police Batons : And How to Protect against Them

2020-12-15T21:21:54Z

This guide details the kinds of batons that police use, how they employ them, what kind of damage they can do with them, and some of the ways that demonstrators have historically protected themselves against baton attacks.

This is the fourth article in a series, following our guides to helmets, gas masks and goggles, and body armor. The contributors have spent countless hours gathering experience, data, and anecdotes and speaking to professionals in these fields. We will be updating this document on an ongoing basis as more information comes in. If you can offer suggestions or corrections, please contact us.

Cops often hit people with batons. Looking at footage, you’d think that the prospect of doing so is what gets them out of bed in the morning. Historically, batons are the bread and butter of policing to such an extent that the baton is often referred to as the officer’s “badge of office”—though lately, Tasers have supplanted batons as their go-to weapon.

Instructional videos and pamphlets give the false impression that police are martial arts masters who carefully study all the ways to injure people with big wooden sticks. If you go to demonstrations, though, you generally see the same few moves over and over. They swing wildly at people they already have on the ground. They jab people with the end of the baton, often without provocation. They hit people with wild overhand swings, often in the head—although in theory, they’re not supposed to do that unless they’ve been authorized to employ lethal force. They put one hand on each end of the stick, hold it horizontally at chest level, and shove people back while grunting “move”—often regardless of whether the people they are shoving are able to move and regardless of whether they were already moving.

https://twitter.com/justrinidad/status/1335660826363977728

Fundamentally, batons are compliance tools. They’re not specifically designed to kill or injure people, though they are capable of doing so. They are designed to hurt people in order to force them to comply with an officer’s command. Of course, police often continue to use them after a subject has complied, just to emphasize the power relation between the subject of the state and the mercenaries it employs.

Not everyone loves batons. Some officers don’t carry batons unless ordered to do so by their department. One ex-cop on YouTube points out that the overlap of the Venn diagram of “effectiveness” and “legality” is very small indeed. However, police are rarely held to any standard of legality. Batons are often the primary means by which police seek to control space in close quarters, especially against demonstrators.

During protests, police use batons to accomplish a wide range of tasks. There are baton charges in which large numbers of police charge, swinging and shoving, to disperse a crowd and incite fear. Officers use batons to clear a path for a snatch squad to enter a crowd to carry out arrests. Officers use batons to advance a police line, shoving people to keep them moving, often while pepper-spraying them for good measure. Officers use batons to injure people once they have them immobilized on the ground, out of pure vengefulness or cruelty.

There is a misconception that batons are only used against individuals who are not complying with police orders. In fact, police employ them against anyone they suspect might hinder them from accomplishing whatever their goal is, regardless of whether the target is breaking any laws or failing to comply with their orders.

Police use-of-force guidelines generally dictate that using a baton to strike major nerve centers on extremities is “intermediate force,” while striking someone on the head, neck, or clavicle is “deadly force.”

This is the cover illustration from a 1967 law enforcement training manual published by the FBI and the United States Department of Justice. This is how the authorities want police to see themselves.

Types of Baton

We’ll look at three types of batons: the fixed-length baton (or “straight stick,” including the riot baton), the collapsible baton, and the side-handled baton.

Riot Baton

A riot baton is a style of “straight stick” baton. The most common example is 36” long and 1.25” in diameter, made of polycarbonate or hardwood—usually hickory, but sometimes cherry, ash, or another wood. Some police are adopting thicker sticks, such as a 1.5” diameter baton, to apply more force. If you hold a 1.25” baton and a 1.5” baton in your hands, the difference in weight and girth is greater than you might have anticipated.

The thicker sticks are not inherently better weapons, but they are sturdier. We put sticks of both thicknesses into the hands of an experienced stick fighter, who was able to break the 1.25” baton against plywood shields but not the 1.5” batons. This person applied substantially more force than the average officer would be able to bring to bear.

Wooden batons are either clear-coated or painted black. Polycarbonate sticks are black. Riot sticks come with a variety of grips, such as rings or grooves carved into one or both ends, or a crisscrossed “knurling” grip. Some of these grips are designed to offer better retention if the baton is pulled, while others are intended to offer better retention in the case of twisting motions. Most come with a simple leather thong for retention. A well-trained officer is supposed to hold the thong in such a way that he can let go if the stick is grabbed and pulled into a crowd, but many cops hold them incorrectly, in such a way that if the baton is pulled, the officer will come with it whether he wants to or not. Polycarbonate sticks deliver more impact than wooden sticks but are substantially more expensive. Some police complain that polycarbonate sticks can warp in the summer or shatter in the winter.

The riot baton is used to strike people, jab people, and shove people. Broadly speaking, police use batons to strike people who are resistant or combative, while they use batons to shove people who are in their way, approach too closely, embarrass them, or look like they can be intimidated into leaving an area. They jab people for both of these purposes. In crowded environments, police are trained to fight with one hand on each end of the stick, for weapon retention.

Officers think about weapon retention in crowd situations quite a bit. Their training focuses on this. They are afraid that someone might grab the baton and use it to control the officer.

It would be hard to overstate the role of riot batons in intimidation. Police wield large sticks when they want to look scary; in some cases, they employ wooden batons to contrast with their uniforms, with the intention of inspiring fear. They hold them in two hands in police lines to look unapproachable. They use them unpredictably in order to keep people on edge.

The chief difference between the riot baton and the traditional fixed-length baton is that the latter is 26” or shorter. Many departments employ tapered sticks for everyday use, with a wider striking surface at one end and a smaller, more controllable handle. These provide greater leverage for striking blows. Learning to distinguish between these types of batons can help demonstrators figure out what tactics police are considering: if they are wielding the longer riot batons, they expect to employ more violence.

Extendable Baton

More and more police departments are using extendable batons as the everyday carry baton on their service belt. These batons are also called collapsible batons, or ASPs after the brand ASP. Extendable batons usually measure between 16”-31” with 16”, 21”, and 26” being the most common lengths. Most of them are made of steel, while some lighter-weight models use an aluminum alloy. The grip can be foam or plastic, or use some other texturing. Closed, they’re roughly the size and shape of a small lightsaber and they look a bit like one on a belt. Cops open them by flicking them and letting centrifugal force slide the segments into place. Most are held open by the friction of each steel segment against the next and can only be closed by slamming the tip onto concrete or some other hard surface. Some newer models have a push button lock that makes them easier to close and more effective for jabbing as well as swinging. One of the other reasons that police are moving to the push button lock is that a baton that is closed on concrete will quickly end up with a roughed up tip, which will occasionally cut those who are struck by the baton.

Police complain about extendable batons breaking when they are used to beat people all day—at unruly demonstrations, for example—and many cops who make heavy use of their batons treat them as disposable. Police literature explicitly mentions the intimidation factor involved in opening an extendable baton as an advantage of the weapon.

Extendable batons are somewhat common for civilians interested in self-defense. We’ve seen them most commonly among those who are in violence-prone situations and prefer not to defend themselves with bladed weapons or firearms. Their legality varies from state to state.

Side-Handled Baton

These are straight batons with a short handle protruding from the side about six inches up from the base. This is the Western adaptation of the tonfa, a Japanese weapon—though the tonfa wielder usually employs two of them. Side-handled batons are considered a more “defensive” weapon; they became common after the bad media exposure resulting from all the police violence against civil rights protestors in the 1960s.

Cops can hold these batons by the side handle, so the length of the baton runs down the forearm to the elbow. This position is used for blocking blows and executing pain compliance holds. They can also hold them at the base, so the side handle serves as a sort of a hilt that could stop counter-strikes. Most famously, these batons were carried by the Los Angeles Police Department and employed in the widely viewed assault on Rodney King in 1991. That episode shows that this “defensive” baton is just another stick, used the way police have always used blunt impact weapons, and its reputation as “defensive” is just a matter of branding.

A police officer employing a side-handled baton to attack demonstrators during the protests against the beating of Rodney King.

While side-handled batons are not designed to use the side handle as the point of impact, many of us have seen police hold them by the end opposite the handle and swing them like hammers. This concentrates more of the weapon’s force at a single point, inflicting worse injuries.

Over the past two decades, side-handled batons have fallen out of favor as the everyday carry batons for police in the United States, replaced by extendable batons. Many cops disagree with this transition; some still choose to carry their beloved “PR24”—a generic name for a side-handled baton named after the standard Monadnock PR-24 baton, which is 24 inches long and made of polycarbonate.

Twenty-five years after the Rodney King uprising of 1992, a former Los Angeles Police Department officer fondles his side-handled baton as he recalls how police behavior contributed to the unrest.

Common Injuries

We have not found many studies on the lethality of police batons, but it’s no secret that hitting people in the head with sticks can often kill them. Most of the information we were able to find was published in the UK. This is not surprising: their police often do not carry firearms, instead injuring or killing people the old-fashioned way, by bludgeoning them.

According to one doctor, a large number of baton injuries are fractures of the forearm resulting when a person raises an arm to protect their face. Blows to the head and, to a lesser degree, the chest are far more dangerous than blows to limbs, however, as these can cause internal brain bleeding, concussions, and fractures.

Broken ribs are common in situations in which police are swinging from the side into the target’s torso. Some of us have seen people end up with fractured hands and wrists from trying to catch baton blows. Two-handed stabbing strikes targeting the diaphragm can cause loss of breath; combined with shock and stress, these can make people lose consciousness or vomit.

Defending Yourself from Batons

To avoid sustaining bludgeoning damage in melee range, you have three basic options.

You can stay out of melee range.
You can prevent your opponent from seeing you clearly enough to strike you effectively.
You can protect yourself and others from the blows directly, most likely via some sort of barrier.

Police use violence for at least two purposes: to control space—dispersing us, herding us, preventing us from reaching our destination—and to subdue individuals. Sometimes, the simplest solution is to run away from a cop with a stick: to stay out of melee range by retreating. In other cases, the consequences of this approach are not worth it. You may not wish to abandon other demonstrators. You may not wish to abandon the objective that brought you out into the street in the first place. You may not wish to positively reinforce the assumption that all it takes to keep people in a condition of fearful servility is to brandish sticks at them every once in a while.

So another way to stay out of melee range is to compel the police to retreat, or at least keep them from closing the ground between you. Historically, protestors have accomplished this by using projectiles of their own—bottles, rocks, paint bombs, and the like. This can be effective, but its efficacy and advisability is situational—it depends on the objectives of the police and the factors limiting what they can do. Police in the United States are better equipped and less likely to back down than police in many other countries, which is one of the reasons demonstrators rarely employ this strategy here unless the stakes are high. When everything is on the line, however, people sometimes summon up the courage to do unbelievable things.

Another solution to this problem is to build barricades. To serve their purpose, barricades have to be suited to blocking the particular threat that they are intended to address; obstructing vehicles and hindering officers on foot are two very different objectives. Historically, some demonstrators have made barricades more difficult to pass or dismantle by setting fire to them; but once a barricade is burning, it will eventually consume itself, unless there is an unlimited supply of fuel. Common-sense fire safety measures apply; so may local laws. Even if it doesn’t impede foot traffic, the right kind of barricade might give officers something else to focus on, which is another way to keep them at a distance. As long as the situation is unpredictable and they have to keep an eye out in all directions for new developments, they may choose not to engage in a way that would leave their backs open.

The second strategy is to prevent police from being able to see you clearly enough to hit you accurately. Protesters have employed shields, umbrellas, smoke bombs, and sometimes even fire extinguishers to this end. We’ve seen protestors carry banners that are so tall that they block the view of officers on the other side—though even if you add eyeholes, these will also prevent most protestors from seeing what the police are doing, too. Police hate not being able to see what’s going on; this can cause them to step back and regroup, but it can also provoke them to escalate senselessly. If they can’t see clearly, officers may simply strike at random—which may not be an improvement.

December 2020: Demonstrators in Portland employ a fire extinguisher and projectiles to compel the withdrawal of police who had arrived to carry out a violent eviction.

Finally, if nothing else serves, there is the possibility of protecting directly against baton blows. This usually involves armor, shields, mobile barricades, reinforced banners, or other barriers. Armor designed to protect against bludgeoning impact is generally designed with a “shell/soft” framework: a hard shell disperses the impact of the blow across a greater surface area, while soft padding absorbs that impact. Nowadays the shell is usually some kind of plastic, though steel was used traditionally and wood may serve in some cases; likewise, the soft layer is usually comprised of foam, though in the past, padded clothing might have served. If you are considering wearing any sort of armor, start by thinking about a helmet. The more normalized wearing helmets becomes, the harder it will be for police to target individuals for choosing to protect themselves.

Head injuries are serious business, and repeated concussions can be exponentially dangerous. Even if you feel all right after experiencing a head injury, the risk of sustaining subsequent blows to the head increases significantly. People in the streets who suffer a blow to the head should consider themselves at heightened risk for up to a week afterward; a second concussion following an unhealed first concussion can lead to death. Consider avoiding danger for a week.

Sports armor is readily available from secondhand stores. By and large, it is designed for protecting against the same kind of impact police batons can inflict. Hockey and lacrosse pads are available used; they’re light, low-profile, and are designed to maximize mobility while protecting vital areas. Soccer shin guards can also serve as forearm guards. Being struck by a baton is never a good experience, but armor can mean the difference between a broken arm and a hairline fracture. Choose where to focus on protecting according to your threat model: knees are common targets for less-lethal munitions, groins are vulnerable areas, forearms are often used to block baton blows, the chest and abdomen are often vulnerable to jabs from batons or blows from impact munitions. The more you want to be able to stay on the front lines regardless of what happens, the more you should consider what kinds of armor will protect you.

Historically, some movements have employed “padded bloc” techniques to defend crowds against police violence—building incredible costumes out of foam, inner tubes and other inflatable swim devices, and whatever other large soft things they can access. This severely limits individuals’ mobility, but it may hinder police from breaking up a crowd. It can also create striking optics. The most famous example of this approach is the Tute Bianche in Italy.

Shields can be somewhat more flexible, tactically speaking. A person with a shield can often protect the people on either side of them as well. A group of people with shields can form a shield wall, which is much more effective than a lone shield.

Mobile barricades are effectively multi-user shields carried by several people. These can be especially useful at the front, sides, or rear of a crowd to provide cover and prevent police from easily attacking or dispersing the participants. A simple example would be a large piece of plywood with multiple handles or a single long handle bar along the back. In a pinch, demonstrators have improvised mobile barricades out of ladders and other freely available objects—for example, at the 2010 protests against the Olympics in Vancouver. We’ve seen other mobile barricades constructed from see-through steel grating or roofing stretched across wooden frames. We’ve seen them with stands on the back so that they can stand freely on their own when set down.

To make a reinforced banner, take a vinyl or fabric banner and line it with wood, plastic, or another hard material. Reinforcement is useful simply to make banners easier to carry, but they can also be used tactically to defend the edge of a crowd.

PVC pipe is easy to purchase, but breaks easily upon impact. As a means of reinforcing banners, it has repeatedly failed, perhaps most famously in Washington DC in 2005 during protests against the second inauguration of the second President George Bush. If you’re in a hurry, green bamboo may serve—it’s surprisingly light and flexible enough to be somewhat resilient against blows.

Mind you, armor, helmets, shields, mobile barricades, reinforced banners, and other protective gear can make you stand out—and it’s rarely a good thing to stand out at a demonstration. There is no airtight protest scheme, no tactic that is guaranteed to work, no gear that solves every problem or is ideal for every situation. Think about what you want to accomplish and how the police might try to prevent you from accomplishing it. Be pragmatic. Mobility, speed, initiative, the element of surprise, and the sense to quit while you’re ahead will usually serve you better in the streets than any item of equipment could—so make sure your gear doesn’t impede or distract you from making the most of any of those.

A Demonstrator’s Guide to Body Armor : Protecting Yourself against Blows, Batons, Bullets, and More

2020-12-15T01:49:04Z

Over the past four years, police and fascist violence against demonstrators has escalated around the United States, with well over a dozen demonstrators murdered in 2020 alone. This is not the consequence of Trump’s presidency, but the result of intensifying social pressures that will not be relieved by another politician taking office. Unfortunately, ceding the streets to fascists and police will ultimately only increase the dangers to all of us. By taking the proper precautions, we can mitigate the risks while continuing to take action to build a better world. This guide reviews a wide range of protective gear, exploring the advantages and disadvantages of each so you can pick out what’s best for you. The life you save could be your own.

This is the third article in a series, following our guides to helmets and to gas masks and goggles. The contributors have spent countless hours gathering experience, data, and anecdotes and speaking to professionals in these fields. We will be updating this document on an ongoing basis as more information comes in. If you can offer suggestions or corrections, please contact us.

We’re going to focus on three styles of armor: sports armor, for mitigating impact weapons like bean bag rounds and batons; soft ballistic armor, or “bulletproof vests,” which defend against handguns; and plate carriers, which are designed to protect your vital organs from rifle fire.

Our threat models—the risks we are seeking to protect against—are changing constantly. A few years ago, protest armor was intended to protect against Nazis with knives and sticks. At the beginning of the George Floyd uprising in the US, the chief threat model involved police using various impact weapons. By the end of summer 2020, police were still shooting baton rounds and pepper-balls, but fascists shooting live ammunition had become a more pressing issue.

All armor involves pros and cons. Most armor reduces mobility, which is one of our primary advantages against police who are weighed down by both bureaucratic command structures and heavy gear. Most armor makes us stand out, rendering arrival and departure more difficult. Some armor incurs the risk of legal penalties. Being the only person wearing armor is often a bad idea unless it can be concealed. Still, normalizing wearing armor can make it easier for others to do so, and the more people do, the safer we all will be—both from direct attacks and from police efforts to target us for protecting our bodies.

Which kind of armor is appropriate will vary from one situation to the next. In many situations—for example, when speed or optics is paramount—it may still be best not to wear armor.

Armor can easily give the wearer a false sense of security. Shortly before we published this, there was yet another incident in which a fascist shot a counter-protester; the survivor was wearing body armor, but the bullet entered their body at a point that was unprotected. No one is invincible, no matter what they wear.

https://twitter.com/mollyjsmith1/status/1287568008173371397

Executive Summary

If you want to protect yourself primarily against batons and other police impact weapons, get a skateboard helmet, some hard-shelled knee pads, some children’s shin guards to wear on your forearms, and possibly motocross chest armor or a plastic fencing breastplate. If you want to add more protection, consider a shield, full leg armor, and a HEMA gorget—plastic or padded neck armor for people who fight with swords for sport. A guide to shields will appear later in this series.

If you want to wear something that protects you against handguns, get a wraparound IIIA vest, either from the leftist armorer Red Star Defense or from eBay. If you are buying from eBay, consider purchasing a surplus vest to save money. If you’re worried about knives, pay a bit more for a vest with stab resistance.

If you want to protect yourself from rifle rounds, get a plate carrier and a pair of III+ ceramic plates from Red Star Defense or elsewhere. This is heavy and harder to conceal.

The Old Days: The Tute Bianche and the Padded Bloc

Not all that long ago, the chief threat that many demonstrators faced in the United States and Europe was the blunt impact of police batons. In response, some demonstrators—notably the Tute Bianche in Italy—took to wearing helmets and padding and reinforcing massive inflatable inner tubes and other flotation devices to protect their bodies from the fists and clubs of the police. Some demonstrators in the United States embraced these tactics, which came to be known as “padded bloc.” A widely distributed zine, Bodyhammer, explored helmets, body armor, shields and shield walls, and an array of defensive tactics and formations in this vein.

Today’s demonstrators still stand to learn a lot from the tactics developed at that time, especially where they can be deployed in contexts where there is little threat of lethal violence or fascist attacks. Essentially, padded bloc tactics are most effective as a sort of militant civil disobedience aimed at slowing or inconveniencing an adversary who is not prepared to escalate to potentially lethal force. They are more useful for distracting and delaying than for winning offensive victories, but they can play a valuable part in a larger ecosystem of interlocking tactics and strategies.

In this guide, we will focus chiefly on forms of armor that can protect against knives and guns, in order to expand the range of options at the disposal of the modern protester.

Anti-capitalist demonstrators opposing the G8 summit in Genoa, Italy in 2001.

Demonstrators from around Europe opposing the summit of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in Prague in the year 2000—including some employing the tactics of the Tute Bianche.

Legality

We’re not lawyers. You should do your own research.

In the USA, it is federally prohibited for violent felons to own or wear armor designed to protect against bullets (referred to herein as “body armor”), except by special dispensation from an employer.

In addition to the federal law, each US state has its own laws regulating armor. In most states, it is illegal to wear body armor while committing a crime; being caught doing so could occasion additional charges. In Kansas, wearing body armor is prohibited at demonstrations, too. In Connecticut, you cannot have it shipped to your home. We have yet to obtain a solid answer regarding whether minors can own or wear body armor.

The legality of body armor varies widely from country to country. In some provinces in Canada and some territories in Australia, you need authorization or a license to wear it. The UK seems to have no laws restricting civilian use of body armor. The European Union bans body armor that is for “main military usage,” but this implies that certain forms of body armor are legal. It appears that body armor is legal in Japan and Hong Kong but prohibited in Argentina, Brazil, and Thailand. If you can share information about the laws in your country, please contact us.

Motocross armor.

Sourcing Body Armor

As of this writing, ballistic armor is hard to come by. The deepening political crisis has all sides scrambling to protect themselves; most retailers of both soft armor and hard armor are reporting delays on orders of at least two months. This makes it difficult to recommend specific products or retailers. We suggest learning about what you need and keeping an eye out for deals—or even just for notifications that a product is in stock.

At the same time, as the crisis appears to be deepening, it’s probably worth ordering now rather than waiting.

We know of one left-wing armorer, Red Star Defense. They manufacture their own ceramic III+ plates for a good price—currently $300 a pair—and retail IIIA soft vests for a very good price ($225), as well as selling plate carriers and tactical gloves cheaper than you can find elsewhere. They currently have a 4 to 8 week lag on armor orders. We recommend Red Star Defense because their goal is not profit but to protect the bodies of working-class revolutionaries.

Most body armor retailers aim at some combination of three markets: police and military personnel, right-wing paramilitaries, and private security (and, by extension, those involved in illegal capitalism). A few retailers also focus on protecting civilians and schoolchildren, promoting “bulletproof backpacks” and similar products that cash in on rampant gun violence in the United States.

The best market we’ve found so far for fast-turnaround body armor orders is eBay. New IIIA vests can be sourced from the UK and Canada ready to be shipped; surplus vests from the US should ship quickly as well, though the stock of those varies. Most surplus vests are surplus Kevlar inserts placed within new vests.

Opinions vary about surplus vests, but for the most part, they are considered acceptable. Because Kevlar degrades from UV exposure, it comes with an expiration date—usually five years from manufacture. Police departments replace their gear after five years. But the armor remains effective long after—in every test we’ve seen, expired Kevlar vests continue to defend against all the threats they were rated to protect against. It’s impossible to recommend using expired vests, because there’s no way to guarantee their safety—but used vests perform favorably and are substantially cheaper than new vests. In addition, ironically, retailers of police surplus vests tend to be the retailers who least aim their sales at right-wing and police markets.

You can purchase vests, especially surplus vests, in person at army surplus stores. We have heard from people who negotiated good deals for bulk vest orders by sending one person—whoever is likely to be most agreeable to the owners—into a store with cash in hand, ready to purchase.

There is also a market for body armor on Armslist, which is like Craigslist but for guns. It appears that some enterprising folks, anticipating the current crisis, have stockpiled a lot of gear and are selling it directly. There are reportedly a lot of scammers on the site; if you’re purchasing anything online, it’s best to pay with a service that offers buyer protection, like PayPal, rather than through Venmo, which does not. If the seller doesn’t want to pay for buyer protection, that itself is a red flag.

There are rumors that people using ArmsList have been set up for robberies. Consider meeting in a well-lit, public place during the day and bringing someone with you, especially someone who can legally conceal a firearm. You may wish to make sure that your clothing and vehicle do not give away your politics or other details about you. If you are purchasing with cash, pay only after you have obtained the item. When possible, buy from verified commercial sellers vetted by ArmsList.

Sports armor remains readily available. You can often acquire it secondhand for very cheap, although COVID-19 has made it more difficult to obtain it cheaply at yard sales and secondhand stores. You may be able to find quality knee and elbow pads at gun shows, as decommissioned military gear from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is flooding the market and driving down prices.

A level IIIa vest.

Sports Armor

Sports armor offers a cheap and reasonably effective way to protect yourself from impact weapons, police batons, and, to some degree, knives. It offers no protection from gunfire. You can usually source it secondhand; much of it can be concealed under clothing. It will probably look better in court than ballistic armor. It’s legal for more people to wear it—it is less likely to occasion additional charges if you are arrested the way ballistic armor can. In the few instances we’re aware of in which people received “possession of criminal tools” charges for wearing padding, the charges were ultimately dropped.

The fundamental principle of sports armor is the “shell/soft” model of protection. A hard external shell (usually plastic) takes the impact of a weapon, preventing penetration and dispersing the force of that impact over a broad surface area. Beneath the shell, soft padding absorbs the impact. Effective armor requires both of these parts. Steel medieval armor, for example, relied on a thick layer of quilted cloth to reduce the impact of the blows. Some modern sports armor lacks a hard shell, including padded shirts and pants and boxing helmets; these are less appropriate for our purposes.

While ballistic armor is designed to protect your vital organs from gunfire, sports armor is designed to protect more of your body—for example, your shoulders, forearms, or joints, depending on the armor. Against police impact weapons, this can be crucial. Police are trained to aim most impact weapons at the navel or below; they often specifically target knees or limbs. Yet they also regularly shoot people directly in the chest, back, or head with impact weapons, and jab batons into the chest or abdomen or else swing at people’s backs or heads.

The top priority is to protect your head. After that, you can consider kneepads, as impacts to the knee are more disabling than strikes to much of the rest of your body. When impact munitions kill people, it is usually because they strike a person in the head or chest; chest injuries can break a rib, which can puncture a lung or heart. This is very rare, but protecting your chest isn’t a bad idea. Some people who anticipate close encounters with club-wielding attackers—such as far right demonstrators or police—also wear forearm guards, often repurposing youth shin guards. These can be used to block blows from a stick or a baton, although such guards hardly guarantee safety.

Fencing chest protection.

Do-It-Yourself Armor

It is possible to make your own effective armor, although secondhand sports equipment is often available so cheaply as to render this unnecessary. When making do-it-yourself gear, make sure it follows the shell/soft model. For the shell, plastic is the lightest and generally best, but sheet metal can also work—as can rubber, wood, or even thick magazines. We know one protestor who wears forearm guards made out of old license plates. While not particularly rigid, orange road cone material is better than nothing and often readily available. You can repurpose the plastic of barrels or buckets in a number of ways. We’ve come across one particularly promising method of creating simple breastplates from 5-gallon buckets that we’re excited to try, though for our purposes it would require foam padding on the back.

For the “soft” in your shell/soft armor, closed-cell foam is usually the best thing. Yoga mat material is often cheap and effective. The blue foam from the $5 camping mats from WalMart is considered cheap and good by people who make their own sports gear. Even packing foam can work. Try attaching it with spray adhesive or, better, contact cement.

Blue foam mat.

Some people have used the following method to make custom armor for free. Recover mattresses and 5-gallon buckets from the trash; cut the buckets into strips roughly matching the part of the body to be covered (thighs, shins, arms, and so on) and put the strips into an oven at low temperature. Don’t melt the plastic—just soften it a bit. Some people prefer to use scavenged ovens for this purpose rather than an oven they use to cook food. Meanwhile, rip foam out of the mattresses and tape that temporarily over the part of your body part to be covered. Take the plastic out of the oven and mold it over the foam; once it has cooled, use spray glue or contact cement to attach the foam to the inside of the plastic.

Contact cement.

Knife Resistance

In our experiments with making DIY plastic knife-resistant armor, we discovered that any hard plastic plate will be substantially slash-resistant, but that armor requires fairly thick plastic to be stab-proof. One of our testers was not able to get a knife through most sheet plastic, but another tester was able to get a knife through almost every piece of plastic we put in front of them. Still, most stabs in a tumultuous brawl will not be full force and a hard plastic layer will provide substantial resistance even if it is not knife-proof. This degree of protection might still be the difference between a painful cut and a punctured organ. We have yet to test sports armor specifically against knives and impact weapons.

Cut-resistant sleeves.

Medieval Armor

Medieval armor was generally designed according to the same principle as modern sports armor: a hard shell backed by padding. Those who wear medieval armor for sport today have done a lot of work updating medieval armor for modern purposes. Most of this can be adapted to protest use.

Steel armor tends to weigh more than plastic armor; its primary advantage over plastic armor is cut and slash resistance. This is less important to demonstrators who are looking to protect themselves from blunt impact.

Two modern groups that wear and understand medieval armor are the Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA) and those who study Historical European Martial Arts (HEMA). Both tend to wear a combination of steel and plastic armor, but the SCA in particular has developed DIY plastic armor designed to protect all parts of the human body. Their designs are likely to be effective for demonstrators.

We cannot recommend steel for helmets, as the impact munitions police use deliver far more force than hand weapons do and deformation (denting) of steel helmets could endanger the wearer. We have researched this hypothesis, but have yet to test it.

Medieval armor makes for interesting optics. If you wear it overtly, it is bound to attract attention. Of course, both historically and in the modern era, armor has often been designed to look like clothing or be worn beneath it. The idea that people used to run around in shiny tin cans is largely ahistorical.

Medieval armor is not bulletproof—nor even particularly bullet resistant. To withstand bullets effectively, steel must be at least 1/4” thick and composed of an almost unworkably hard alloy.

A demonstrator expressing opposition to the courts extending de facto impunity to murderer and former St. Louis police officer Jason Stockley on September 17, 2017, in St. Louis.

Soft Armor

Soft armor vests are lightweight, concealable, effective against handgun rounds, and variably effective against knives. Ideally, you want a vest rated IIIA, although level II vests are often more available in surplus and are better than nothing. Level II protects against the average 9mm round—the most common handgun round in the US—but not against the “self-defense” 9mm rounds that gun enthusiasts commonly use. Vests can easily be very expensive (some can be had new for $250 or so, but most are $400+). Used or surplus vests (which are still usually $200+) might offer less protection than new ones, although this is both debatable and difficult to test with any given vest. Soft armor probably offers the best balance of protection, weight, and concealability for most demonstrators who are concerned about handgun fire.

Soft armor employs many layers of strong plastic fabric. Each layer absorbs more and more of the ballistic energy of the bullet until eventually it becomes caught in the fabric itself.

Most soft vests use Kevlar (a brand name for aramid fibers, a type of plastic fiber), but Dyneema and Spectra (brand names for UHMWPE, another type of plastic fiber) are a newer and stronger material that is becoming more common in various types of armor.

This principle has been used in armor for millennia. The medieval gambeson was a quilted fabric made of many layers of linen; while those who could afford to do so wore it under other armor, some combatants—such as peasants in revolt—wore it alone. It was particularly effective against arrows, as layered fabric is specifically good at stopping penetration.

When you choose a soft vest, you must choose between a “wraparound” vest, which has large protective inserts that protect your sides as well as your front and back, and a vest that only protects you from the front or back—functioning almost identically to a plate carrier, except with soft fabric armor in place of the plates. Wraparound vests are preferable in almost every way except price—most of the cheapest IIIA armor only protects your front and back.

Like plate carriers, soft vests often come in both “covert” and “overt” styles [see below]. But since one of the primary advantages soft vests have over plate carriers is that they can be concealed, there seems to be little reason to consider an overt soft vest.

A IIIa wraparound vest liner.

Materials

Soft vests come in two different types of plastic fibers: aramid and UHMWPE. You can’t go wrong with either one. Aramid fibers (like Kevlar) are a slightly older technology; they are heavier for the same level of protection. UHMWPE fibers (like Dyneema) are fancier, newer, lighter, more UV resistant, and less resistant to temperature changes—this means they are less capable of stopping a “contact” shot, when a gun is held directly against the vest, as the fibers can melt. There is some debate about whether this is a significant problem.

Aramid fibers are the most common type of plastic used in bulletproof vests. The most popular brand is Kevlar, made by Dupont. Aramid fibers were the first plastics strong enough to make into ballistic armor. One other brand of aramid fiber used in armor is Teijin Aramid (previously known as Twaron).

Aramid fibers break down from UV exposure. The outer shell of a bulletproof vest generally protects them from this.

Ultra-High-Molecular-Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE, sometimes simply called PE) is a plastic fiber that is increasingly common for armor of all types. Soft vests are made of layered fabric; hard plates are often backed with it or made entirely from it; modern military helmets are made from it instead of aramid fibers. It is stronger by weight than aramid fibers, so that armor can be made slightly thinner and lighter.

The two most common brand names of UHMWPE fiber used in armor are Dyneema (made by DSM) and Spectra (made by Honeywell).

While UHMWPE is not inherently UV resistant, it can be made so reasonably easily and Dyneema is considered substantially more UV stable than Kevlar. We have not been able to find comparable information about Spectra besides the fact that it is advertised as more UV resistant than many other fibers, presumably including aramid).

UHMWPE has a much lower melting point than aramid; some speculate that it degrades from heat as a result. We found footage of one manufacturer lighting their vests on fire for a full minute, then testing them and finding that they continued to stop bullets. The same manufacturer also tests contact shots against their vests, although we don’t know whether all UHMWPE vests would produce the same results.

In any case, it is generally unadvised to leave any soft vest containing UHMWPE in any environment that might exceed 180 degrees Fahrenheit, and they are still considered more vulnerable to contact shots than aramid fiber vests.

Plate Carriers

Plate carriers are practically the only game in town if you are looking to protect yourself from rifles. For a plate carrier, you need two things: the carrier—a fabric vest with sleeves to hold hard plates—and the plates. Generally, you want plates rated III+, ideally ceramic or a combination of ceramic and PE (polyethylene, usually the UHMWPE mentioned above). Side plates are likely overkill and needless weight and expense, as are level IV plates, the most protective armor. Hard plates are ostensibly more knife-proof than other forms of armor, but an overt plate carrier is so obvious that a determined attacker would simply aim where you aren’t protected.

Plate carriers are only designed to protect the most vital areas of your chest, an area sometimes referred to as the “kill box.” Most shooters are trained to aim for “center body mass” because it presents the largest target and offers the most vulnerabilities. With the exception of head wounds, wounds elsewhere on the body are less likely to kill you, so most armor systems do not prioritize preventing them.

Plate carriers come in “covert” and “overt” models just as soft vests do, with covert ones designed to be worn beneath clothing and overt ones designed to be worn over it.

Plates

It’s considered good form to pick your plates first and then match your carrier to them, though you can do it in the opposite order as well.

There are several things to consider regarding plates, including composition, size, cut, and curves.

Composition

Plates comprise a range of things that stop bullets. We’ll cover soft plates, steel plates, ceramic plates, and PE plates.

Soft plates are made of layers of the ballistic fabric discussed above in the section on bulletproof vests. If you’re looking for modularity, you could keep a pair of soft plates that you can insert into your plate carrier instead of hard plates when you want a lighter armor. Advantages: light, flexible. Disadvantages: poor protection.

Steel plates are the most common, but are going out of style. Steel plates are slabs of steel, about .25” thick. The most common alloy of steel is AR500, a particularly hard steel. It’s used primarily for armor, plow blades, construction and mining gear, and the like. Steel plates are easily 8 or 9 pounds apiece. (There is also an armor manufacturer called AR500; they make armor of all types, confusing matters.)

Steel plates are less popular now that ceramic plates are becoming more affordable. Steel plates are substantially heavier. When struck at an angle, they can cause bullets to ricochet, and they’re capable of causing “spalling,” in which tiny shreds of steel go flying. Vertical spalling is the chief concern, as that can go up toward your face.

The only steel plates worth considering come with a buildup of “spall coating,” which is usually the same stuff that truck bed liners are made of (such as the spray-on Rhino Liner), though we believe that some manufacturers use fiberglass sleeves instead. Many manufacturers come with options regarding how thick you want your spall coating to be. A thick (“build up”) coating is more important for the front plate than the back plate. Spall coatings will usually protect the wearer from two or three hits before there is more vertical spalling.

Now that ceramic plates are affordable, the main advantage of steel plates is that they are thinner than ceramic ones and more capable of handling more rounds at the same point of impact.

Ceramic plates are sometimes called composite plates because they are not usually made entirely of ceramic. They work by breaking down upon impact, absorbing most of the force of the bullet, which is then stopped by a second layer. Once, this second layer was usually composed of steel, but nowadays polyethylene is most common. Ceramic plates are generally between five and six pounds and .75” to 1” thick; the cheaper plates tend to be thicker and heavier.

In order of increasing cost and efficacy, the three most common types of ceramic are Alumina, Silicon Carbide, and Boron Carbide. Alumina has to be thicker and heavier to offer the same amount of protection as Boron Carbide, but is substantially cheaper. It might be better to buy multiple sets of Alumina plates to distribute to friends than a single fancy lightweight set of plates that only you can wear, although thinner plates are more concealable.

There are fears that ceramic plates might degrade from rough handling, but current opinion is that this concern is overblown.

One danger with ceramic plates is that to save cost and weight, most manufacturers use foam rather than ceramic along the edge of the plate. This is usually mentioned in the item description. One plate we handled had a full inch of foam around the edge—reducing an ostensibly 10x12” plate to dimensions of 8x10” in full effectiveness—although the PE runs edge to edge beneath the ceramic and it’s generally considered to be IIIA rated (enough to stop handgun rounds) on its own. Red Star Defense advertises “edge to edge” ballistic ceramic.

We recommend ceramic plates because they are substantially lighter and don’t have issues with spalling. However, they will not survive as many shots as steel armor, and because they are less rigid, they are more prone to backface deformation (denting), which transfers more of the force of impact to the wearer. You can mitigate this danger by using trauma pads, which are essentially just extra padding.

A ceramic plate after multiple impacts.

PE (polyethylene) plates are plates made entirely of UHMWPE. As with soft armor, it relies on multiple thin layers. Unlike soft armor, the layers are heat-laminated together. When a bullet strikes the plate, it breaks apart each layer one at a time, and this delamination absorbs force each time. Because this process can cause a fair amount of back deformation, most PE plates are backed by a layer of foam.

PE plates are substantially lighter than other hard plates—often less than three pounds. They’re also buoyant in water. But they are much thicker (1-1.25”) and therefore less concealable. Most importantly, we have not been able to source any plate rated higher than level III—it seems that armor-penetrating rounds cut right through the plastic layers. Because the AR-15 is the most common rifle threat in the United States and some available AR-15 ammunition options can penetrate level III plates, we cannot recommend them for safety.

Any hard armor containing PE, such as ceramic or standalone PE, should not be exposed to temperatures above 180 degrees Fahrenheit.

UHMWPE plates.

Size

Roughly speaking, a plate should protect you from your collarbone down to a few inches above your navel and from nipple to nipple.

To make everything as confusing as possible, there are two different sizing standards in use in the USA. We’ll call them civilian and SAPI.

Civilian plates, which are what we are most likely to encounter, are available in 8x10”, 10x12”, and 11x14” dimensions. The 10x12” size is the most common.

SAPI (Small Arms Protective Insert) is the military acronym for protective plates. SAPI plates come in a very specific cut (the SAPI cut), but in five different sizes: extra-small (7.25x11.5”), small (8.75x11.75”), medium (9.5x12”), large (10.25x13.25”), and extra-large (11x14”).

The best way to size a plate is to measure your body, then choose the plate size that closest fits you. Of course, you may not have access to all the possible sizes.

A full cut plate.

Cut

Plates come in a number of different shapes: full cut, SAPI, shooter’s, and swimmer’s. The differences between these are minor, and each cut (besides SAPI, a military standard) differs from manufacturer to manufacturer. While most plates are sold in pairs, many people mix and match, with a regular SAPI cut back plate and a deeper shooter’s or swimmer’s cut front plate.

Full cut plates are essentially rectangles with the corners rounded off. They are not common but can be used for side plates or back plates. They may not fit in many carriers.

SAPI plates are the standard military hard plates. They have a nearly-45 degree angle cut from each part of the top. SAPI plates work well and offer a good deal of coverage. Actual military SAPI plates are not sold directly to the public, but manufacturers sell plates in “SAPI cut.”

Sapi plates, shooter’s cut.

Shooter’s cut plates are similar to SAPI plates but have slightly more of a cut away at the corners. Some manufacturers sell right-handed or left-handed plates and further accentuate the cut on the dominant arm for better mobility.

Shooter’s cut steel plate.

Swimmer’s cut plates have substantially deeper cuts away from the top corners, forming a vaguely teardrop shape. This sacrifices protection for mobility. Some people with breasts or other curves find a swimmer’s cut most comfortable.

Swimmer’s cut steel plate.

Curves

Plates can come in three different curve styles: flat, single curve, and multi-curve. Once again, each brand has its own interpretation of each of these.

Flat plates are just that—flat. Most people don’t like flat plates, though some people wear them, especially on the back. Sometimes flat plates are cheaper.

Single curve plates are the most common. These are curved on the vertical axis to better wrap around your torso.

Multi-curve plates curve in multiple ways to better fit what the manufacturer believes to be their average customer’s body. These are generally preferable, especially for people with breasts or other curves. They’re often more expensive. Not all manufacturers offer this option.

A multi-curve plate.

Stand Alone versus In Conjunction With

Most plates we’ve discussed are Stand Alone (SA or STA) plates. These plates are designed to perform at their rated level by themselves.

It’s also possible to get In Conjunction With (ICW) plates. These are generally thinner and lighter but only perform at their rated level when worn in conjunction with a IIIA soft vest.

The modularity of the latter system has a lot to recommend it, but you will have to source a bulletproof soft vest with plate inserts (which are often more expensive) or else wear a plate carrier over your vest. ICW plates are harder to come across. The whole system is likely to be more expensive.

This style used to be the more popular military style, as it offers more protection, but current trends favor mobility over protection, and military forces seem to be shifting towards standalone plates.

Trauma Pads

When you buy armor, you might encounter “trauma pads.” This phrase actually has two different meanings. Before standalone plate carriers, In Conjunction With plates were called “trauma plates” and were inserted into sleeves on bulletproof vests to increase their ballistic rating. Now, however, “trauma pads” are usually non-ballistic foam inserts you put behind your hard plates in order to soften the blunt force trauma of an impact.

The value of trauma pads is hotly debated. They seem to be more important for ceramic plates than steel plates. It’s also increasingly popular for people to make do-it-yourself trauma pads out of yoga mat foam.

We don’t have enough information to come down hard on either side of this debate, but it might be worth getting or making trauma pads, especially if you have ceramic plates. It can’t hurt, and some people wear them just because they make the armor more comfortable, although they do add expense and thickness.

Do-It-Yourself Ballistic Plates

It is possible to make DIY armor plates. It’s probably only worth doing as a last resort. YouTube is a magical wonderland full of people testing various DIY forms of body armor. Some are easy to make; others are labor intensive. Some are affordable; others are expensive. We have not personally tested DIY ballistic armor and cannot recommend it, but there are situations in which armor is needed and not commercially available.

We’ve seen two common methods. The first involves laminating lots and lots of layers of Kevlar (better) or fiberglass (cheaper) with resin. This is labor intensive and not necessarily cheap, but it makes it possible to form the plates into various shapes. There are arguments about what kinds of resin work best; some people argue convincingly that using less resin enables the layers to delaminate upon impact and absorb more force.

The second method, which is substantially simpler and often cheaper, involves layering ceramic floor tiles—using the hardest ones available—with various thicknesses of steel and rubber. This method seems to make stronger armor that is less subject to back deformation. Some people argue that ceramic mosaic tiles offer better multi-hit capability, while others say that single larger tiles absorb impact better. It’s possible that aluminum oxide ceramic panels can be sourced from commercial manufacturers, possibly from China.

Some people combine these various methods in various ways.

One person made a thick, light plate out of DIY recycled HDPE from milk jugs that seemed to be roughly level 2 or 3A.

Another person proved that thick slabs of non-laminated UHMWPE don’t do any good as armor.

The cheapest and strangest DIY plate we’ve seen is a $12 plate made from items from the dollar store: baking pans full of rocks and glue with a hardcover book as spall protection. This stopped some rifle rounds but not many.

One person we spoke to has had some success cutting steel plates from suitably strong and thick steel found in scrapyards. Steel that is too hard will shatter upon impact; steel that is too soft will allow penetration—and if bullets do pass through, they might leave additional jagged bits of metal. If you’re going to take this approach, it is absolutely crucial to get enough extra material to test these plates. You can cut the plates to the desired shape with an angle grinder. DIY steel plates should absolutely be backed with trauma pads.

If you possibly can, you should get well-engineered, properly tested gear. Failing that, you had better carry out your own thorough tests on the gear you make yourself. One person who does so described the process thus:

1) Extensively research core concepts involved in the project, to understand considerations, potential points of failure, and potential reasons for failure. 2) Develop a minimal viable product standard that you hope to accomplish. 3) Determine the most basic test conditions possible, with as many variables eliminated as possible. 4) Develop initial prototype. 5) Test initial prototype. 6) Disassemble prototype to determine what worked and what failed, and to determine cause of failure. 7) Build next prototype with knowledge gained from testing. 8) Repeat. 9) Once you achieve a minimal viable product standard, start testing under increasingly harsh conditions—different temperatures, using different rounds, and so on—to determine resiliency and point of failure.

For a project like this, make sure you have access to a workshop and someone who knows how to use the necessary tools safely and effectively. The proper tools will make production and testing faster; they can also help ensure standardized outcomes.

Carriers

Many vendors will sell you the carrier and plates as a set, in which case you’re ready to go. Otherwise, you’ll have to pick a carrier for your plates. Be careful to pick a plate carrier that accepts the specific size and cut of the plates you plan to wear.

Plate carriers generally consist of two parts: the vest itself, which goes on over your head, and a cummerbund—a velcro belt that connects the front and back panels at your side.

Plate carriers come in two primary styles, covert and overt.

The Slickster, a popular plate carrier.

Covert Carriers

Covert carriers are designed to offer the option of wearing them under other clothing. They don’t tend to come with as many pouches and loops and other tactical loadout options. For protestors, covert carriers are likely the best option. A black covert carrier under loose-fitting black clothing is unlikely to be noticed as body armor, especially in the dark or in a crowd.

This has several advantages. First and perhaps foremost, police are less likely to tag you as a troublemaker and target you for arrest or other violence. Just as importantly, armed attackers may be less likely to target you. With firearms, one of the primary arguments for concealed carry is that a trained attacker will target known threats first. Basically, if someone walks into a store and starts shooting, they are likely to target anyone they see carrying a gun first. The same principle applies to armor: a shooter is substantially more likely to consider someone wearing armor to be a threat, and therefore to aim at them first. Furthermore, if a shooter knows you are wearing armor, they might intentionally shoot you somewhere other than where you are protected. Overt plate carriers are designed with soldiers in mind, whereas “operators” (spec-ops) are more likely to wear covert vests for the aforementioned reasons.

You can wear covert vests modularly, with the option to swap in additional pouches and cummerbunds to switch the carrier to overt.

Unfortunately, the cheaper ceramic plates tend to be so thick that it is substantially harder to wear them covertly. If covertness is your top priority, consider saving up for more expensive, thinner ceramic plates. Although we cannot currently recommend steel plates, those are thinner as well.

Overt Carriers

By comparison, overt carriers are designed to be worn as the outermost layer and to function as a platform from which to hang gear. Traditionally, this means guns, magazines, communications equipment, first aid supplies, and whatever else a soldier needs for their purposes. We’re not soldiers, we’re protestors.

Overt vests still have a place, of course, for some people and some purposes. They convey militancy and preparedness and they normalize the use of armor. Overt vests in bright colors are often worn by first responders and others who need to protect themselves but are trying to identify themselves as noncombatants.

Plus, the ability to hang gear off a carrier is convenient for many purposes, such as radio communications and serving as a street medic.

An overt plate carrier.

MOLLE and Other Attachment Points

Military and tactical gear is often easily identified by the loops of webbing sewn all over it. This is called MOLLE (Modular Lightweight Load-carrying Equipment): a military system designed to allow the attachment of additional pouches, packs, sheathes, and the like.

Some MOLLE is laser cut, particularly on covert carriers: instead of webbing loops, slots are cut into the outermost layer of fabric.

Hook-and-loop (i.e., velcro) attachment points are also common on tactical gear, which are used to attach morale patches or even small pouches. Morale patches include the various emblems and signs that the military use to designate units and that tactically-minded civilians use to express political and subcultural affiliation. What 1” buttons are for punks, morale patches are for tactical gearheads.

Some specific manufacturers use other styles of attachment points as well.

For most covert plate carrier purposes, attachment points are not necessary.

DIY Plate Carriers

For anyone experienced in sewing, making a plate carrier is a reasonably simple affair, as it is not itself a ballistic product. We would recommend that any aspiring plate carrier maker get a simple plate carrier to copy.

You can make straps from webbing; 500D Cordura seems to be the most commonly used fabric for the vest itself. Most guides suggest double or triple stitching every seam.

Plates load into the bottom of the front and back sleeves and are generally secured by a generous flap of hook-and-loop.

Fitting Armor

If your plate carrier is well-fitted, the armor should sit at your clavicle. With your armor on, lift your arms and twist around to make sure the carrier moves with your body. Breathe in deep to make sure it’s not too tight; at the most, it should feel snug when your lungs are fully expanded. Then test the fit by doing a Burpee or some other athletic activity to make sure that it nothing on the carrier moves around or falls out. ### Fitting Armor to Different Body Types

Most armor is designed to fit able-bodied, athletic cis men. The further from that category you are, the more trouble you may have fitting body armor. It can be particularly challenging to obtain armor in smaller sizes and armor for people with breasts.

Soft body armor vests are substantially more forgiving than plate carriers, but can still be less comfortable for those with more curves. Some armor manufacturers design soft armor vests specifically to fit curvier bodies. These are less likely to be found at lower price points, although we’ve seen some surplus “female” vests on eBay.

Small vests in general seem to be hard to find on the surplus market, as surplus vests tend to come from police departments.

Plate carriers offer even fewer options for people with breasts. The best option we’ve been able to find is to get a multi-curve swimmer’s cut front plate and wear either a tight-fitting sports bra or a chest binder.

Likewise, plates simply aren’t made in sizes large enough for all people. It seems that most larger people wear the largest plate they can (usually 11x14”), even if it covers less of their torso.

Being Hit While Wearing Armor

There is a lot of contradictory information available about what happens to the human body when you’re shot while wearing body armor.

When you’re shot while wearing soft armor, the impact of the blow still hits you and can damage you, although the injuries are generally minor as the impact is spread out over a somewhat larger area. According to one study, 85% of those who are shot while wearing a vest rated for the right kind of impact suffer no injuries or minor injuries such as slight bruising. Yet one EMT says that the police they have treated who have survived shots to their vests describe it as being hit with a baseball bat full force.

Plate armor is something else entirely. It’s hotly contested whether injuries and fatalities are common when someone is shot while wearing plate armor. We’ve personally talked to experts and seen tests and studies that contradict each other.

In general, if you are wearing armor that is rated for the impact you experience, you are unlikely to suffer a major injury. Unless you’re caught off balance, you’re unlikely to be knocked back or over. Steel, in particular, is effective at transferring the force of the bullet across its large surface, minimizing the force that is passed on to the wearer. Ceramic armor defaces more dramatically, but this effect can be minimized with trauma pads; it should not cause grievous injury to the wearer.

This is not universally the case, however. People do suffer cracked ribs and other blunt force injuries when bullets strike them while they are wearing armor.

People are likely to experience the same impact differently according to body mass. Larger plates disperse impact over a larger area.

Chest anatomy as it relates to plate coverage.

Penetration

Ballistics is a remarkably complex subject. We’ve spoken to a number of engineers and tactical enthusiasts about how to understand the risk of penetration.

Broadly speaking, rifle shots penetrate substantially more effectively than handguns or shotguns. They’re also considered substantially more deadly—though gun violence is a highly politicized subject and data is often skewed to support one position or another, and we’ve found contradictory reports about lethality claims according to caliber. The only exception to this rule is that .22 caliber rifles, which are common for small game hunting and for beginning shooters, are closer to handguns in terms of their penetration capacity than they are to other rifles.

Armor penetration is very different from overall power (the kinetic force transferred to the target by the bullet), which is different from “stopping power” (the ability of the bullet to neutralize a threat). Penetration is greater for faster bullets with a greater “sectional density”—that is, bullets that are heavier in relationship to their width. Thinner bullets are sharper and penetrate more effectively than larger bullets of the same mass. Armor penetration and stopping power actually work against each other: bullets that mushroom or fragment upon impact cause far more severe wounds, whereas bullets that maintain their shape more effectively are more capable of penetrating armor.

Most armor piercing ammunition works by using a steel or other hardened core that survives impact more effectively than lead. This ammunition is not generally available to civilians in the United States, although it is available to the military and police. This makes it less likely that militia groups and other non-state actors will be using it against demonstrators. It is not in common use by the police for a number of reasons: first, it involves greater risk of going all the way through the target and hitting someone else unintentionally, in what is called overpenetration; second, hollow point bullets (which mushroom upon impact) are more effective at killing unarmored targets, like the people that the police are usually trying to murder. The most common exception is 7.62x54r steel core surplus ammo, which has significant armor piercing capability, and anything in the 50 caliber range, which we are unlikely to see in domestic civilian conflict.

There are two types of bullets worth knowing about that are available to civilians and are likely to be carried by non-state actors who seek to harm demonstrators. First are steel-tipped (not steel-cored) bullets, generally referred to as “green tip” bullets. These were designed for the military to offer greater accuracy and penetration at long distance, but they are in common civilian use, especially in AR-15s. The second are the “+P” style of bullets, generally 9mm—the most common handgun round—though not all 9mm are +P. These are not designed for armor penetration, but pack a “hotter” load of more gunpowder that provides greater power and therefore more effective penetration.

Both of these threats can be stopped by appropriate and available body armor, such as what that we recommend herein. It’s worth being aware of these threats in order to understand why you might need an appropriate level of armor. Older and cheaper soft vests might stop most 9mm rounds, but not the +P rounds that are commonly carried by self-defense and gun enthusiasts.

Green-tipped .556 ammunition.

Ballistic Ratings

Armor can be tested against several different standards to determine its efficacy. For products available in the United States, the most common by far are the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) standards, which we use throughout this article. These were designed with US law enforcement in mind. Many other countries use the NIJ standards for armor that is available to civilians. There are other standards in use throughout the world, as well.

The US army does not use level ratings, instead offering specific armor items that must meet a certain threshold. These tests are not as simple as “this armor protects against handguns” or even “this armor protects against 9mm handguns.” The ratings designate the specific cartridge, down to its composition and how much gunpowder it is loaded with.

Again, in short, if you are looking for soft armor, you want it to be rated to IIIA. If you are looking for hard armor, you want it to be rated at least III+, or “III special threat,” if it is to protect you against the common steel-tipped AR-15 rounds. Neither of these are officially part of the NIJ standards.

9mm Luger+p ammunition.

NIJ Standards

The NIJ standards are revised from time to time.

Current Standards

Level I: This level is no longer part of the standards. It protected against some .22lr (small game hunting rifle) rounds and .380acp (handgun rounds).

Level IIa: This protects against some handgun rounds, including some 9mm, .40, and .45 rounds.

Level II: This protects against more handgun rounds, including 9mm as well as some .357 rounds.

Level IIIa: This protects against nearly all handguns, including more .357 rounds and .44 magnum rounds as well.

Level III: This level is rated to stop most 7.62x51mm NATO rounds, a common military round. It is not rated against the AR-15, but will stop many AR-15 rounds (5.56 or .223, which are roughly the same).

Level IV: This level is rated to stop 30.06 (thirty-aught-six) armor-piercing rounds—the rounds fired by WWII-era battle rifles, which remain common for hunting.

The Coming Standards

The new NIJ 0101.07 standards will likely be released at some point soon. This revision will address the major holes in the current system, such as the gap filled by III+. It will replace the numeral system with two separate categories: HG (handgun) and RF (rifle). HG will have two levels HG1, which will map to the existing level II, and HG2, which will map to the existing IIIA. RF will have three levels: RF1 which will map to the existing level III, RF2 which will fill the hole currently met by III+, and RF3 which will map to the existing level IV.

Ballistic Helmets

Please read our full article about helmets here.

Most ballistic helmets are rated to the IIIa level and are designed to stop handgun rounds. A few newer military helmets can stop some rifle rounds, sometimes, from long distances. There are also rifle inserts available for some helmets to increase the protection level of the helmet, although these are not in common use, as most soldiers seem to prefer weight reduction to an extra level of protection.

IIIA glass visors are also available, which attach to helmets and protect the eyes. These are made of thick polycarbonate, the same plastic used in the manufacture of bulletproof glass.

Ballistic Shields

While we will cover protest shields at greater length in a future article, it’s worth touching on ballistic shields: shields designed to protect the user from gunfire.

Most ballistic shields are rated IIIA for handgun protection or IV for rifle protection. They can weigh anywhere from 15 to 40 pounds. It’s very difficult to wield them in the ways that an ordinary shield is wielded.

While they’re somewhat common equipment for police, they are not generally used by the military or militias, nor are they generally applicable to self-defense or community-defense situations. They seem to be chiefly useful for raiding buildings.

A ballistic shield.

A Note on Cut Resistance

Cut-resistant gloves and sleeves are available and affordable, but they are generally designed for the kind of incidental contact with sharp knives one might experience in a commercial kitchen. These are generally made of aramid (Kevlar) or UHMWPE (Dyneema) fabric, though some also contain woven wire. Cut resistance does not translate to stab resistance. A truly cut-resistant sleeve would be useful for defending against knife attacks, but the testing we’ve seen has not led us to believe the current products would be much help against determined attackers rather than workplace accidents.

Cut resistance is measured in the USA by the ANSI standards rating scale, running from A1 to A9, and in the European Union with the CE/EN standards rating scale, running from A-F (previously, 1-5). The ANSI standard rates to a higher level of cut resistance than the CE/EN standard.

May we live to see a better future.

EVERYBODY OUT! : Resources for a Season of Post-Election Unrest

2020-10-27T23:03:33Z

Whether Trump tries to steal the election or Biden wins and tries to continue the same policies, we can come together to stop them. Here, we offer a selection of resources to prepare for post-electoral unrest, including posters, primers on protest and security skills, and information about what different groups are organizing around the country. Everybody out!

If Donald Trump leaves power in January, the credit will not be due to Joe Biden, nor simply to those who voted in the election, but to the social movements that have demonstrated that the United States will be ungovernable under four more years of Trump. Whether or not Trump leaves power, we cannot count on any government or political party to look out for us—we have to do that ourselves.

If protesters had not filled the streets, if anti-fascists had not shut down the white supremacists who were trying to build a movement to silence Trump’s opposition, if angry and heartbroken people had not forced the issues of police killings and detentions and deportations to the forefront of public discourse, the ruling class would probably have thrown all its weight behind supporting Trump’s presidency, giving him the money and support he needed to hold on to power regardless of how unpopular he is. Only our resistance has set a limit to what he can do; the rulings from judges and pushback from local politicians came after our mobilizations—and we can’t count on them, anyway, especially not as Trump continues to stack the judiciary. Trump is still trying to figure out how to hold on to power, but he is in a much weaker position than he would have been if people had stayed at home and waited for voting to take care of everything.

If Trump tries to hold on to power, it will be up to us to stop him—regardless of what disinformation appears in the media, regardless of Democrats’ intentions to cede power to him once again. That could mean mass protests like the ones that took place in Portland over the summer when Trump sent in federal forces in an unsuccessful attempt to suppress dissent. It could mean coordinated disruptions. Rather than focusing on symbolic marches and displays, go where your actions will be most effective in exerting economic pressure. Be careful not to present a vulnerable target to far-right attackers.

Some people have been speaking about the possibility of a general strike. In 2020, when the market already treats most of us as expendable, a general strike has to look very different than the strikes of a hundred years ago. If the idea is to carry out a general strike, refusing to show up to work is not enough—we have to intervene to interrupt the functioning of the economy itself. Identify infrastructure and activities that are essential to the circulation of commodities, the accumulation of profit, and the maintenance of control. Study previous efforts to interrupt them, such as the November 2, 2011 general strike in Oakland at the height of the Occupy Movement and the port blockades that accompanied it.

If there is going to be a movement powerful enough to change the outcome, it will not be the property of any particular organizing group, nor will it be limited to any particular strategy or code of conduct. It will have to draw together all the different participants in all the existing movements—against police violence, against prisons and deportation, against colonialism and ecological destruction and capitalism and war—along with all the tactics and perceptions they have developed throughout years of experience. It will have to be diverse and inclusive—a movement in which many movements fit.

Everybody out means this is not just about Trump or “preserving democracy.” If Biden wins the election, we must not permit his administration to continue Trump’s policies, we must continue to fight against every imposition on anyone’s liberty or well-being. If Biden wins, there will still be police, prisons, deportations, ecological destruction, capitalism—a Biden victory is not the end of this struggle, it is just the beginning of a new chapter. If Biden becomes president, on January 20, we should mobilize at ICE detention facilities and police stations and prisons to show that our opposition to all of these racist and oppressive institutions will continue until they are abolished.

Everybody out means we don’t trust any politician to control our future. It means we won’t legitimize institutions that have never looked out for us or kept us safe. It means coming together to determine what our lives should be, ourselves, directly.

Posters

We have prepared a poster promoting this effort. Please print these out and distribute them widely this week, to let people know what’s coming!

Click the image to download the PDF.

Learn about how to make wheatpaste to put up posters here.

Organizing

We will update this list shortly as more events and organizing efforts are announced.

In New York City, people have planned three months of events between the election and January 20.

In Portland, people have planned a week of events between November 4 and 11.

Denver, Chicago, Washington, DC, and Raleigh are also organizing to prepare for electoral unrest.

Labor unions have also called for a general strike in the event that Trump attempts to steal the election. The 70,000 member AFL-CIO Rochester Labor Council became the first regional AFL-CIO body in the US to call for a general strike. The Western Mass Area Labor Federation AFL-CIO had passed a resolution calling on labor movement to launch general strike to ensure a “peaceful transition” of power. The 100,000-member MLK Labor Council, an AFL-CIO regional body of labor groups representing more than 150 unions in the Seattle area, is also calling for general strike. While our own values and political objectives may differ from the leadership of these unions, their interest in this indicates the scale of disruption that could occur.

https://twitter.com/GrimKim/status/1323479807687036930

A centrist coalition under the banner “Protect the Results,” claiming to represent millions people, aims to mobilize if Trump “interferes” with the results, though it is not clear exactly how they define “interference.” It’s likely that any institutional reaction will follow a grassroots response, chasing behind popular momentum rather than galvanizing it. Of course, electoral politics generally functions to keep people in a state of paralyzed spectatorship, waiting to see an outcome rather than taking the initiative; if the news about the election results is confusing, it is possible that unless unaffiliated rebels immediately take action, nothing will happen at all.

You can read an overview of what the government is planning in the way of repressive violence around the election here courtesy of It’s Going Down.

Trump’s term is ending as it began, with a likelihood of street conflict.

Resources

The following guides offer a great deal of information about how to participate in effective protests while protecting yourself and your community.

Getting Connected

How to Form an Affinity Group
Find a Local Mutual Aid Network
Where to Find Your Local Medic Collective—This is not comprehensive, but offers a good starting point.

Security Culture

What Is Security Culture?
Bounty Hunters and Child Predators: Inside the FBI Entrapment Strategy
When the Police Knock on Your Door—Your rights and options: a legal guide
If the FBI Approaches You to Become an Informant—An FAQ

You can find a lot of important information about general security in protest situations here.

Digital Communications and Security

Your Phone Is a Cop—An OpSec/InfoSec primer for the dystopian present.
Communications Equipment for Rebels
Burner Phone Best Practices—A user’s guide
Doxcare—Prevention and aftercare for those targeted by doxxing and political harassment

This thread spells out how to protect your privacy via proper phone safety at demonstrations—before, during, and after the protest.

Dressing for Success and Security

Fashion Tips for the Brave
The Femme’s Guide to Riot Fashion—This season’s hottest looks for the discerning femme.
Staying Safe in the Streets
Blocs, Black and Otherwise

Safety Gear

A Demonstrator’s Guide to Helmets
A Demonstrator’s Guide to Gas Masks and Goggles—Everything you need to know to protect your eyes and lungs from gas and projectiles.

You can read some more tips about protest gear from protesters in Hong Kong here.

Strategy, Planning, and Tactics

A Step-by-Step Guide to Direct Action—What It Is, What It’s Good for, How It Works
Tools and Tactics in the Portland Protests—This text offers an overview of a wide range of options from leaf blowers and umbrellas to shields and lasers.
Creative Direct Action Visuals—Making banners and more.
Blockade Tactics—courtesy of the Ruckus Society.
Tips about Blockading—from Beautiful Trouble.
Lock Boxes—How demonstrators can lock themselves together to create a blockade.

This thread covers how to extinguish tear gas canisters.

Jail Support

Jail Support
Jail Support Form from the Rosehip Collective—Fill this out in advance of any event at which you might be arrested; leave it with your attorney or a support contact.
NLG National Support Hotlines and Other Resources

When Things Go Badly

Making the Best of Mass Arrests
How to Survive a Felony Trial—Keeping your head up through the worst of it.
I Was a J20 Street Medic and Defendant—How we survived the first J20 trial and what we learned along the way.

Basic First Aid in the Streets

Protest Safety—An excellent safety and care guide for actions.
First Aid for Protestors
Eye safety at protests—You can read more on how to do an eye flush here.
How to Protect Yourself from Audio Attacks—LRAD, sirens, etc.
COVID-19 Safety at Protests

You can obtain more graphics on this subject here.

For Experienced Medics

Protocols for Common Injuries from Police Weapons—For street medics and medical professionals treating demonstrators.
A Demonstrator’s Guide to Responding to Gunshot Wounds—It can also be useful to read these accounts from people who have experienced gunfire at demonstrations.

These zines from the Rosehip Medic Collective include a range of useful information.

This collection of resources that appeared shortly before Trump took office includes more topical material, addressing non-violence, solidarity, white supremacy, colonialism, patriarchy, capitalism, and more.

A Demonstrator’s Guide to Responding to Gunshot Wounds : What Everyone Should Know

2020-09-24T18:19:34Z

Gunshot wounds are becoming more common at demonstrations. This is not to say you should panic—millions of people have participated in demonstrations over the past four months, while only dozens have been shot. Still, as political conflict escalates in the United States, it is important to think about how we can care for and protect each other. The good news is that even if you have no medical training, there are things you can do to maximize the likelihood that a person who is shot in your vicinity will survive—simple things like learning the location of the nearest trauma center. Though this subject can be stressful to contemplate, the following guide may equip you to help save lives.

While many demonstrators have learned how to prepare for tear gas, pepper spray, rubber bullets, LRADs, baton blows, and arrests, few are currently prepared to respond to gunshot wounds. This guide is drawn from the experiences of several people who have witnessed or treated gunshot wounds in the course of political and social conflict. In order to demystify the subject and help readers imagine how they might employ this information, we’ve included two personal narratives describing experiences with gunshot wounds at demonstrations.

Although this text draws on the practical knowledge of a number of people with both institutional training and street experience, it does not represent professional medical advice. It includes some information that will chiefly be useful to experienced street medics, but most of it is relevant to any reader. It is not intended to stand in for actual training in gunshot wound response or other medical interventions. We encourage readers to seek out additional training, skills, and life-saving critical response tools.

What Is a Gunshot Wound?

Gunshot wounds involve traumatic injuries and serious puncture wounds. Their impact on the body varies according to the type of weapon, the distance of the shooter, and the location of the entry wound. Depending on the size and speed of the bullet, gunshots can inflict different types of harm—including severe bleeding, muscle and bone damage, and destruction of organs. They can damage bodies in unpredictable ways.

While some calibers of ammunition may pass directly through a person leaving easily identifiable entry and exit wounds, other calibers are more prone to “tumbling,” or ricocheting, inside the body. This can cause more internal damage and less predictable exits. Worse still, some types of “self-defense” ammunition for handguns are designed to “mushroom” out on impact, causing severe harm.

Treat any gunshot wound as a potentially life-threatening injury, regardless of the details. If an artery is compromised, a person can bleed out in as few as three minutes. Once a person loses half their blood, their chances of survival decrease dramatically. It is up to you to act quickly.

Pay Attention

First and foremost, pay attention to what is going on around you. Street demonstrations can be chaotic and loud. Police may employ tear gas, flash-bang grenades, LRADs, and other noisy weaponry, while protestors sometimes set off fireworks—which can sound an awful lot like gunfire. When you are surprised by loud bangs in the streets, try to identify the source and what kind of risk it represents.

Stay aware of the location of anyone who is openly carrying a firearm, as well as anyone you have reason to believe may be carrying a concealed weapon. People have been hit by friendly fire at demonstrations as well as hostile fire. If you are working with an affinity group, you could designate one person to keep an eye out for potential threats. Take turns occupying this role, so one person doesn’t become exhausted from being constantly vigilant. In any case, all parties should stay aware, as things can shift rapidly.

Communicate clearly and concisely, especially when you are describing individuals with firearms. This can help others to make wise decisions rapidly in an emergency, without contributing to undue panic. Here are two communication models you can employ to convey what you see.

Use the mnemonic device “S.A.L.U.T.E.” (Size, Activity, Location, Unit, Time, Equipment) to identify potential threats. For example, rather than shouting “They’ve got a gun!” you might report, “I saw three men (S) guarding the convenience store (A) at the intersection of Main Street and City Avenue (L). Possibly militia (U). This was at 11:15 pm (T). Two had long guns, I don’t know about the third (E).”

In emergencies, or when time is of the essence, you can use another tool called the “three Ds”: Direction, Distance, Disposition. For example, “Four unknown white men with rifles at my 1 o’clock, one block up, scanning the crowd with binoculars.”

Be Prepared

Much of what you can do to treat a gunshot wound takes place long before the shot is fired.

Street Medics

Depending on the type of event and where it is taking place, there may be medics around. You could investigate in advance whether there are street medics in your area, whether they will be attending, and where they will be positioned. During demonstrations, one often sees medics milling around in the crowd or stationed at the margins, carrying gear and wearing a red cross or a similar insignia identifying them as medics. If you believe it could become relevant, you can ask them whether they are prepared to deal with gunshot wounds and other severe injuries. Many medics have experience responding to tear gas, pepper spray, and rubber bullets, as well as exhaustion, dehydration, and panic. Currently, it is less likely that a medic who responds to a gunshot wound will possess the relevant skills and experience.

If you are assessing the extent to which local medics are trained to deal with gunshot wounds and you learn that they are prepared to offer “first response” care, you can also inquire as to whether they have the capacity to offer prolonged care in the event that EMS services cannot reach an area. This can give you vital information about the potential risks you may be taking on if you remain in an escalating situation.

Street medics in the Bush era.

Before the Demonstration

Before going to a demonstration, assess the security and health needs of your comrades—including ability and willingness to call for emergency services, which are usually accompanied by police. Are there any needs that should be addressed before someone reaches the emergency room? Who would you like your friends to contact first in the event of an emergency or injury?

In addition to learning whether trained medics will be around, make sure you know the location of the nearest emergency room—preferably one with a trauma center. Not all hospitals are equipped to deal with life-threatening wounds. If you will not be near a hospital with a trauma center, at least learn the location of the nearest hospital. With any luck, they should be able to stabilize a victim before transferring them to a hospital that is prepared to deal with mass physical trauma.

Equipment

There are several items you can carry with you that can be useful in the event of a shooting. Consider procuring or building an Individual First Aid Kit (IFAK) to carry with you. An IFAK is a trauma kit containing essential life-saving materials to help you control bleeding and treat major wounds. It is usually a small pouch containing items such as a gauze (regular or hemostatic), pressure dressing, personal protective equipment (gloves, face shield), and a tourniquet. An experienced medic has compiled a thorough list of what to put in an IFAK and where to obtain it, which is included in an appendix below. With the exception of PPE, which protects you and the person you are assisting from blood-borne pathogens or other communicable diseases, all of these intervention tools share the same purpose: to stop bleeding as quickly as possible.

Gauze is a basic part of an IFAK, but a crucial one. It is used to absorb blood as you apply direct pressure to a wound. It can also be used to “pack” inside of a larger wound.¹ Hemostatic gauze (often known by brand names such as QuickClot, Celox, and Hemcon) is gauze impregnated with a mineral agent that helps blood clot more quickly, which is critical in the case of a major bleed.

A pressure dressing (also referred to as an Israeli bandage, emergency bandage, or emergency trauma dressing) is an elastic wrap, similar to an ace bandage, with an attached non-adherent absorption pad and a Velcro or clip closure system. When holding pressure on the wound with your hands is not enough stop the bleed, a pressure bandage is used to apply stronger, constant pressure to a wound. There are many different models of pressure dressings; if you carry one, make sure you know exactly how it works. Online training or gear review videos are great for this.

A tourniquet is the cornerstone of an IFAK. If you carry only one intervention tool, invest in a quality tourniquet. When purchasing a tourniquet, it is ideal to acquire one approved by the Committee of Tactical Combat Casualty Care. These tourniquets have undergone rigorous pre-manufacturing testing and have been thoroughly vetted through field use. We recommend a CAT-7 Tourniquet. One can cost around $35; you and your comrades may be able to buy them in bulk to save money. Beware of fakes! Many cheaper versions are in circulation; these can fail under pressure. You can usually recognize a fake by the absence of a factory stamp by the red pull tab; a skinny windlass (i.e., the rotating rod) can also be a giveaway, instead of a beefier one with extrusions. Finally, and most obviously, no black CATs produced before 2009 have white “time” straps. Fakes notoriously have these white straps.

The one on the top is a cheap knockoff that could fail under pressure.

The one on the right is a cheap knockoff that could fail under pressure.

It is good practice to keep your tourniquet with the band already threaded through the buckle, creating a large loop you will then pass over the foot or hand, rather than attempting to thread the buckle in the heat of the moment if you need to use it.

Finally, carry sharpies to mark the time that a tourniquet was applied or any additional information that first responders—street medics or otherwise—may need to know. Black sharpies work for white people or lighter-skinned people of color, while silver sharpies work better for Black comrades.

Even if there is a trained and experienced medic collective local to you, carrying an IFAK, or even just a tourniquet, is a great idea. In the scope of emergency casualty care, many properly trained medics will seek to use the injured comrade’s equipment on them first, in order to save their specialized equipment for those who did not carry anything. Because of this, be sure to mark your IFAK or blowout kit clearly and carry it somewhere that is easily accessible. Failing this, make sure to have your tourniquet easily accessible, in a marked, visible location that is known to everyone in your affinity group. Normalize the practice of letting your trusted comrades know where your medical equipment is located.

If a Shooting Occurs

Several things can happen in the immediate aftermath of a shooting. If police are nearby and intervene, it is possible that you will rapidly lose control of the situation. Despite their general lack of medical training, they will typically form a cordon around the victim and prevent a medic or anyone else from treating them. This does not necessarily mean they will act quickly in response to the injury. Put pressure on the police if they aren’t doing enough, or doing it fast enough. Demand they seek proper medical care for the injured.

https://twitter.com/crimethinc/status/1300285181530640391

The flip side of the scenario is just as possible—you and your comrades may have to make do without state intervention. If the situation is chaotic or deemed dangerous, even if you are willing to call emergency services, an ambulance may not enter an area. Police may spend an inordinate amount of time trying to clear the area with tear gas or other means before they bring in an ambulance—they might even simply prevent an ambulance from reaching you. In such a situation, depending on the severity of the wound, survival may depend on quick thinking and action. In that case, you will have no one to depend on except yourselves to care for the wounded and organize your evacuation.

Continually assess what’s going on around you. Are there still gunshots being fired? Is there traffic in the area? Are people running past you fleeing from a shooter, police, or fascists? Don’t let panic, haste, or inattentiveness cause additional misfortunes.

A small Individual First Aid Kit (IFAK) containing a tourniquet and trauma dressings.

Immediate Treatment Options

Nothing you could read here can substitute for proper medical training. However, if you own an IFAK or tourniquet and possess a basic understanding of how to stop a bleed on an arm or leg, some action may be better than nothing.

If gunshots ring out, try not to panic. First, get to a safer place. In the system of Tactical Emergency Casualty Care, the first step is to maintain scene safety, so you do not become a casualty as well. Find cover from which to assess the situation. “Cover” designates anything that can stop the rounds you are facing, which depends on the situation and the caliber of weapon. Consider a brick wall or the engine block of a car.

If you determine that someone has been shot and you are equipped to provide aid, make sure the scene is relatively secure. If you can determine this, communicate to your friends that you intend to move to the person who has been hit. While moving, ask the person questions to determine how to care for them: “Where were you shot?” or simply, “What is your name?” If they answer these questions before you reach them, this will indicate that their airway is open and they are conscious, and you may obtain enough information to start preparing your equipment and mindset.

Your first thought will likely be, “That’s a lot of blood!” Initially, you may have a difficult time identifying exactly where the wound is, especially if the individual is wearing long-sleeved dark clothing. Quickly expose the injury, using trauma shears (special scissors designed to cut quickly through clothing) if you have them. In general, it is important to expose an injury at skin layer to understand the exact scope and extent of the wound.

Immediately apply direct pressure to the wound. Ideally, you would use a gloved hand and a gauze pad (preferably hemostatic gauze), but in an emergency, you can use a t-shirt, scarf, or extra mask. If blood soaks through the gauze, add more gauze or another cloth layer and apply more pressure. If holding direct pressure with your hands does not stop the bleeding, apply a pressure dressing. Place the sterile absorption pad over the wound, and over any gauze that has already been applied (never remove gauze—this could disrupt any clotting that may have started). Wrap the elastic bandage firmly around the injured part of the body. It should apply a lot of pressure, but not enough to cut off circulation.

With a life-threatening bleed, time is of the essence. If the wound is clearly on an arm or a leg and you can see a lot of blood, you may choose to apply a tourniquet immediately. Unlike holding direct pressure with gauze or using a pressure dressing, which stops bleeding from a specific wound, a tourniquet cuts off all distal circulation to the limb, meaning that it should stop all bleeding that is further away from center body than where the tourniquet has been applied. If applying a tourniquet over clothes, quickly check to ensure that you are not fitting it over items in a pocket or anything else that could obstruct the pressure.

Many people have been taught that using a tourniquet is likely to result in the loss of the patient’s limb, due to complications from cutting off circulation; in fact, this is still commonly taught within many wilderness/remote medicine and street medic frameworks. Data garnered from combat zones across the globe, however, has shifted the understanding of tourniquet safety. Certified tourniquets such as the CAT-7 are now understood to be highly effective and safe live-saving devices, rarely resulting in long-term damage or side effects. Used correctly, they are considered an appropriate first line of intervention, rather than solely as a “last resort.” As the everyday demonstrator’s threat model changes—especially if the streets increasingly take on the contours of a combat zone—models of intervention based on armed conflict scenarios, such as the Tactical Combat Casualty Care framework, will gain increasing relevance.

For a succinct step-by-step guide to using a tourniquet, see Appendix III.

To apply a tourniquet, open your CAT-7 and make sure that the band is passed through the single routing buckle and the red tip is pointed towards the heart. Then slide the tourniquet up the extremity as high as you can possibly go, while taking the individual’s genitals into consideration if applicable. If the wound is clearly below the knee or elbow, and you can easily see there are no wounds higher on that limb, you can place the tourniquet just above those joints. Once you have it in position, make sure the strap is as tight as you can make it—think “ratchet strap.” If you can stick even one of your fingers beneath the strap, it is not tight enough. Turn the windlass until the flow of blood stops. Pull the “strap” closed through the windlass clip and mark the time applied on the time strap. This process will hurt your comrade immensely, though likely less than the initial wound, depending on its location. Talk to them while you are applying the tourniquet and afterwards as you are able.

Prior to ever using a tourniquet, you should get a sense of how tight it has to be to be effective. Try placing it on yourself briefly just above the elbow before the demonstration and tightening it until you no longer feel the pulse at your wrist. This is a good exercise in empathy, to know what kind of experience a person you treat will endure. Never leave a tourniquet in place for more than a few seconds except when treating an actual wound.

As soon as you have stopped the bleeding—by using direct pressure, a pressure dressing, or a tourniquet—immediately being to look for other wounds. Sweep underneath all parts of the body with gloved hands. Check your hands for blood regularly during the sweep so you can immediately identify which part of the body is injured. If the injured person is wearing waterproof clothing, make sure to remove or sweep inside of those layers, as a rain jacket or rain pants can keep blood next to the body, concealing a major bleed. Do not wait to apply a tourniquet if you find a major bleed on an arm or leg. Pause the sweep, apply direct pressure, a pressure dressing, or a tourniquet, and resume sweeping once that bleed is controlled.

Bleeds that are in junctional areas (i.e., the groin proximal to the inguinal ligament, the buttocks, the gluteal and pelvic areas, the area under where the arm connects to the shoulder, the shoulder girdle, and the base of the neck) can be controlled by “packing” the wound, which applies direct pressure to the severed artery or vein. If you are in an unsafe area, or if you are not equipped with wound packing material, direct pressure on the wound, ideally with a gauze pad, can do for the time being.

If you are not equipped with an IFAK or tourniquet, call loudly for a medic. Call out landmarks to guide them quickly to you, as well as crucial information such as whether the casualty is bleeding considerably: for example, “I need a medic! I’m behind the red sedan—someone has been shot in the leg!”

While you wait for them to arrive, use direct pressure to slow the bleeding. If the bleed is capillary (slow and even flow, bright red in color) or venous (steady flow, dark red in color), you may be able to control the bleed with direct pressure. If the bleed is arterial (spurting or pulsing flow, bright red in color), direct pressure won’t be enough—you will have to apply pressure at an arterial pressure point. If the wound is in the leg, consider applying pressure in the upper thigh, near the pelvic region—but be careful. If there is a wound in this area, try applying pressure in the lower right abdomen. If the wound is in the arm, try applying pressure underneath the armpit. If the bleeding is on the neck, try applying pressure on the side of the neck generally underneath the point of the jawline, keeping in mind to apply pressure only on one side. Only do this in an extreme emergency, as it is of limited value for bleed control.

Regardless of where the wound is, once you apply pressure, do not remove pressure to check if the wound is still bleeding. Continue to apply pressure until a medic can place a pressure dressing or other hemostatic intervention.

If the wound is in the chest, it is acceptable to cover the wound with your gloved hand, but applying too much pressure can potentially inhibit their respiratory system. Chest wounds generally present with less bleeding, but run a high risk of air entering the chest cavity, leading to a buildup of pressure that can cause a lung to collapse. Some medics carry vented chest seals in their kits, which serve the same general purpose as a gloved hand over the wound: preventing air from entering the chest cavity. If the wound is in the trunk—i.e., between the chest and the navel—there is probably little you can do to help besides notifying a medic or other higher care immediately.

If you can control the bleed, you or a friend should prepare the victim for a possible ER visit or another situation in which they may have their possessions confiscated. Remove any potentially incriminating items from their backpack, pockets, and person. Dispose of these or give them to a trusted friend who can remove them from the scene.

When higher care arrives, whether that is EMS or street medics, give them a report to the best of your ability, using the MIST acronym: the Mechanism of injury (M), the Injuries sustained (I), the Symptoms (S), and any Treatments (T) given. For example, “They were shot with a rifle from about two blocks away, they received two bullet wounds in their left leg. Their skin is cool to the touch, and their breathing seems slower than normal. I applied a tourniquet high and tight and the bleeding seems to have stopped.”

If it takes a while for medical care to arrive, consider writing symptoms or other things you notice on the patient’s arm with your marker.

A small IFAK that can be worn on a belt, marked with a cross for easy identification.

Evacuation

Know your options for evacuation. Are you behind a police line that an ambulance cannot pass through? Does the local medic collective offer transport to hospitals? You can try calling for an ambulance if you think you are in an area they can enter. When you place a 911 call for an ambulance, you can request that they do not send police in tandem, but they may well ignore your request. If you do decide to call EMS while you are in a group actively trying to assist someone who has been wounded, designate one person to make the 911 call and report the wound and location while the rest of you stay focused on assisting the victim. It is possible—but not guaranteed—that a 911 dispatcher can walk you through basic trauma response until you receive help or can transport the wounded.

If you or your comrades have driven to the demonstration, it can help if a car is parked nearby with immediate access to the road. Make sure the location of the keys is known and accessible to more than one person. Other people will likely wish to assist in the event of a shooting. If you cannot transport the patient yourself, seek aid from those around you.

At the Hospital

In some cities, hospitals place shooting victims in protective custody to eliminate the threat of violence against them.² If that occurs, you will not be able to locate your friend inside the hospital system. If the person is unconscious and unable to tell healthcare workers who to contact, the workers will try to contact a family member. If you are entering a situation in which it is possible that you will be severely injured, you could write an emergency number in sharpie on your skin with the instruction “call in case of emergency.”

While this may not be uppermost in your thoughts in the event of a shooting, it is important to know that most large hospital systems offer programs via which you can apply for aid to reduce or forgive your bills. If someone’s life is on the line, you can work out the financial details later.

Back at Home

When bringing someone home from the hospital, evaluate their home situation. Do they live alone? With friends or family? Is their bedroom up a flight of stairs? Depending on the severity of the injury and the forecasted length of their recovery, they may need to change their living situation.

Because there is very little semblance of a public health system in this country, people are often released from the hospital very rapidly—sometimes before they are ready to go home. This can be intimidating, but the good news is that home is usually a better recovery environment than an institution. You can rent a hospital bed from a hospital or home-care equipment rental company—they are surprisingly inexpensive and can be enormously helpful in the case of a long-term recovery.

If necessary, organize community care so people are present or available around the clock. Even if that is not necessary, try to organize a caregiver schedule involving a rotating cast of friends and loved ones to ensure that care does not fall solely or mostly on a partner. In addition, you can create a meal schedule for people to drop off food and groceries or cook for the wounded and the caregivers.

Trauma

While it should go without being said, being shot—or responding to someone getting shot, or witnessing someone getting shot, or having someone you love get shot even if you weren’t there—is a traumatic event. You may experience a range of responses including nightmares, anxiety, flight/freeze/fight responses, self doubt, jumpiness, fear, and depression. Seek help! Form a community care circle and meet weekly to process the pain, confusion, and trauma.

If many people in your community were affected by the event, you can seek out a friend or loved one from outside your circle to help you process what happened. Find a therapist in your town to help you work through your feelings. While therapy can often seem cost prohibitive, there may be a non-profit, a clinic system, or a university where counselors in training can offer services for free or a reduced price. If there are ongoing protests in your city, local non-profits may offer counseling specifically for those affected. This guide written in response to the COVID-19 pandemic offers some tools you can apply to coping with trauma.

There has been a longstanding tendency in anarchist milieus to emulate tough attitudes and bravado. Analyzing and overcoming these cultural norms and eschewing a dichotomy between “passivity” and “militancy” can help us to build sustainable long-term movements. Remember, we want a thoroughgoing social revolution, not just periodic street violence.

In the Context of a Long-Term Struggle for Liberation

There is a long history of state-sanctioned violence in the United States, against both ordinary people and movements for social change. Alongside this extends an equally long history of extra-state violence, from the lynchings of the not-so-distant past to contemporary equivalents like the murders of Trayvon Martin and Ahmaud Arbery. Since before the American Revolution, extra-state forces have worked in tandem with the state to uphold patriarchal white supremacy. It is well documented that police continue to cooperate with white supremacists. They are two sides of the same coin.

The current clashes between white supremacists and anti-fascists are reminiscent of the rise of Nazism in Germany. In the early 1930s, when the Reichstag election campaigns were in full swing, fascists repeatedly baited their adversaries into street fights, injuring many while framing themselves as “victims in a lawless country.” They used this violence to bolster their campaign for “law and order,” a pretext to impose a dictatorship. Sound familiar?

There have now been many instances of lethal violence during demonstrations, including the murders of Heather Heyer in Charlottesville, David McAtee in Louisville, Garrett Foster in Austin, and Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum in Kenosha. It is vital that we learn how to navigate these increasingly violent and contested spaces. If we are to sustain a culture of resistance, we’ll have to be prepared to respond to a wide array of scenarios. We can learn to deal with violence and mitigate its effects while refusing to glorify or romanticize it.

As social conflict deepens, more and more people are becoming familiar with the violence that the state has long meted out overseas and against Black and Indigenous communities inside the United States. This must not deter us from action—it is better for us to confront these threats together, head on, than to try to hide from them until they reach each of us in isolation. Generalizing care and aid is an essential part of staying safer in the streets, which, in turn, is part of creating safer communities and, ultimately, a safer world for all of us.

As frightening as this situation is, you are not alone. The same dynamics that are destabilizing our lives and our society offer us the opportunity to connect with each other and reinvent our lives on a new basis. Thank you for everything you have done to become part of the momentum towards a better world.

On May 15, 1970, policemen in riot gear fired more than a hundred and fifty rounds in twenty-eight seconds, murdering two young Black men at Jackson State campus in Mississippi and injuring a dozen more. While the murders at Kent State a few days earlier remain widely known, the subsequent murders of young Black demonstrators in Jackson and Augusta, Georgia are often forgotten.

Appendix I: Personal Narratives

The following accounts may help you to visualize how you would conduct yourself in similar circumstances.

The Line between Life and Death

It is a dark and stormy night, the first night it has rained all week. People are milling around under the awning of a barbecue joint, hanging back from the police line, waiting to see what will happen. More than a few folks have guns tucked in their waistbands. Some people scuffle with the police, some break up chunks of concrete to throw at the tanks; others listen to heated arguments about whether we should go home, stop violating the curfew, and leave the fight for another day. Then, out of the blue, a lone cop car comes squealing in from behind, sirens blaring.

The crowd scatters, people panic, running in all directions, as tear gas canisters skitter across the street and flash-bang grenades explode from the police lines. Choking smoke and chaos and fear everywhere. Gunshots ring out as people fire through the crowd at the lone cruiser, which has turned around to retreat. I dive to the ground by a blue mailbox, confused and separated from my friends. A tide of people flows down the street away from the police lines, as the cops start to push the crowd forward, hoping to clear it. Swept up in the sea of people, I take perhaps twenty steps down the sidewalk before I come upon a knot of people gathered around a figure on the ground.

Time slows down. Two of my close friends are clustered around a body on the sidewalk. That body is one of my oldest and dearest friends. Someone is screaming, “He’s been shot, he’s been shot!” One of my friends is shouting for people to back up, pushing people back, when he looks up and sees me. I look from him to my friend on the ground, who has been shot in the leg. But the light is fading in his eyes as he clutches his torso and moans. Getting shot in the leg isn’t enough of an explanation as to why my friend is crashing. We’re so confused—there’s no blood, there’s no blood. What the fuck happened? Where else is he hurt? There’s no blood, just a stumbling, haunting groan from his mouth. I am a mother, I have birthed a small person into this world. I know what it sounds like at the line between life and death, and all I know in this moment of despair and confusion is that this person I love so much is straddling that line before my eyes.

I still don’t know what the fuck is happening, but I do know that we have to get him out of there ASAP. No one is coming to help us and no one is coming to save him. I run to my car—thank goodness I parked only a few blocks away. I speed around screeching cars that are doing donuts in the street. When I get back, I find people lifting my friend’s body into an already packed car. I scream and scream that he is coming with me as my friends wrest his body away from the well-intentioned strangers. We race down the street into a rabbit warren of loopy suburban streets. I know what hospital I want to go to, but it’s dark and I’m confused. Riot angels pull up next to us and ask if we need to be led to the hospital.

When we arrive at the hospital and pull my friend from the car, his shirt slides up and there it is: an entry wound with no exit wound. He is immediately transferred to a trauma hospital. Over the following days, we hear over and over the words “should have died.”

Before this, I didn’t know that I didn’t know what it meant to get shot. What getting shot means is that a bullet rips through muscle, maybe through bone, maybe destroys some organs—quite possibly some that are essential. It could destroy the left kidney or the spleen; it could collapse both lungs, clip the esophagus, fill up the inner cavities with blood as the body bleeds out internally. A bullet could end up in the heart. You could find yourself in a hospital in the middle of the night, being coaxed through a series of legal documents by a very patient and very kind cardiologist who is preparing to do a second open heart surgery on someone you love to fish out the bullet that is lodged in his heart.

Luck was on our side that night, absolutely. But we responded to the situation quickly. I found out later that many different friends had passed by, that I wasn’t the only one running for a car—I just got there first. And well-intentioned strangers were trying to evacuate my friend on their own—so many people get shot in this city that people recognized what they were looking at and how important it was to respond.

What happened to my friend hasn’t stopped me from returning to the streets, and it hasn’t stopped him or other people in my community. Because the hospital placed my friend in protective custody, only one other friend and I could be there with him. Many of my friends sought comfort in the street battles that continued to rage, glad to have an opportunity to turn their grief, fear, despair, and anger into action.

I’m thankful that I happened to be parked close that night. I’m thankful that so many people around us wanted to help. I’m so thankful that people realized we needed them to lead us to the hospital. I’m thankful that the transfer to the trauma center happened quickly enough and I’m thankful for adept and willing surgeons. I’m thankful that my friend’s inner will was strong enough that he survived. I’m so thankful he lived. I’m thankful that there are things you can all do, too, to make it likely that things will turn out as well as possible if you ever find yourself in a similar situation.

And I am thankful for riot angels. May they be by your side if you ever need them.

A Single Pop

We all heard it. A single pop. It rang through the night, oddly out of place after hours and hours of hushed scuffles and the rustling of an agitated crowd. Hundreds of people were in the square—many lined up to get inside the event, and possibly an equal number trying to stop them. Red hats sailed above the crowd like short-range fireworks as people snatched and threw them. It was a mess, the conflicts impossible to follow; eggs, paint bombs, pepper spray, and punches coming at odd angles and from all directions. The few police that were on hand didn’t intervene. Stepping back from the square into the dark campus streets, the entire situation looked like a poorly directed fight scene in a low budget play.

But we all heard the pop. Just the one. Instinctively, the black-clad crowd dispersed throughout, the red hats all looked up. Given our knowledge up to that point of what happens at demonstrations, we assumed it was a flash-bang grenade. That was the only thing we thought could make that noise. But there was no second bang. Everyone’s eyes refocused on the stalemate around them. Pushing and shoving, some reinforced banners and phones being snatched, but a relative calm.

Looking up across the square, I caught a glimpse of something out of place. It was someone I recognized, someone I knew was in trouble. He had been trying to ensure that no one would get hurt, mixing distraction and de-escalation. Now something was wrong, but it was impossible to tell what it was.

A comrade and I pushed our way through the crowd to where he was. To get there, I walked through something hanging in the air—my brain wouldn’t put it all together for a while. It wasn’t a smell, it was more of a taste, a cloud in the air that had a tang of metal. Once we reached him, the look on his face told me that I was in over my head. That, and the sound. He was making a sound that you just don’t make. A scream and a gurgle mixed into one. I don’t know how he was still standing. I got to him first and he leaned into me, all dead weight. The smell of his leather jacket and the press of him onto my smaller frame in that moment of desperation is one of the things that would enter my dreams and wake me for years after. It was as if I was carrying a dead but still living body.

He stared right at me, but looking past me. I realized he was dying. But I had no idea why. Reasons flashed through my head; there was almost no blood and I couldn’t find anything. We didn’t walk that far—twenty feet at very most—and the best I could come up with was that he must have hit his head, only a head injury would make him incoherent like that.

And then as quickly as I had taken his weight, the medics took him. His weight left mine and we were uncoupled from that moment. I stared at the medic, who I thankfully trusted, and all I could get out was “He’s hurt, I don’t know,” or something like that. Besides walking him out of the danger of the immediate moment, I felt totally useless. The medics began doing their part, on the ground where there was a fair amount of blood now, trying to run through what their training had taught them. I heard the crowd as a low din—that thing that happens when you’re about to pass out and the audio goes to the end of a tunnel. But that was when I finally put it together: pop, metal, gurgle.

Someone had shot him.

The police swooped in and took him, pulling the trained trauma medics away by force as we all screamed from the other side of a police line. Now everyone knew he was dying, that something had gone wrong. I wanted to scream that he had been shot; I started to, but then I realized that it might cause people to panic. I was just barely aware that I was already panicking. I found one of the medics; they confirmed that someone had shot him.

The police loaded him into the back of some kind of open-air vehicle—campus cops with a golf cart. And the demonstration continued. I panicked openly at that point, finding my crew and demanding that we leave, that “they” were shooting at us and we had to go. But at that point, I didn’t even know where the threat was coming from or if leaving was safer. So we pushed back along the line of people trying to see Milo talk, well after the event had been closed off. The police never moved in, the “active shooter on campus” alert was never activated, and we stayed in that crime scene—for hours.

Appendix II: Additional Resources

Live Like the World is Dying podcast recently aired an interview with an experienced street medic who gives detailed instructions about responding to gunshot wounds at demonstrations.
In this podcast, Hex, who survived a shooting attack by a fascist at a demonstration on January 20, 2017, discusses justice, violence, patriarchy, and compassion, the critical importance of healing, and how to redefine resistance.
Protocols for Common Injuries from Police Weapons—A guide for street medics responding to non-lethal police munitions and chemical weapons

Appendix III: Using a Tourniquet

Locate the wound.
Apply tourniquet, over clothes if wound is clearly on an arm or leg and you can see a lot of blood.
Make sure the red tip is pointing towards the heart. Place the tourniquet as high as possible. If the wound is below a knee or elbow, place the tourniquet just above the joint.
Pull tail tight. Tighten the strap as tight as you can.
Turn the windlass until the flow of blood stops.
Mark the time.
Keep talking to the person you are treating.

Appendix IV: Building an Individual First Aid Kit (IFAK)

IFAK Build—Current lowest price per kit: $95.25, not including tax, shipping, or a bag or pouch for the kit. Here are the recommended contents, with links to sources:

CAT Gen 7 (1) $30/each: available from NAR, Chinook, Rescue Essentials
ETD (2) 4” flat, $7 each here
Chest seal (2) Hyfin twin pack, $15/pair here
Hemostatic gauze (1)—your options include ChitoGauze z-fold, 3”x4yd, $32/each (on sale) here, Celox rapid Z-fold, 3”x5’; you may need medical authorization to purchase. $34 each here, and QuikClot combat gauze z-fold, 3”x4yd, $43 each here
Sharpie (1) Staples 12 pack, $8/12 on sale (.66/each) here
Gloves (2 pair) Nitrile exam gloves size L, $13/100 ($.52/kit) here
Shears (1) 7.5” stainless Shears, $3 each here
Zipper bag for gloves (1) “sandwich size”, $3.50/50 ($.07/each) here

“Packing” means applying internal direct pressure to a severed vessel by creating pressure on that vessel with gauze, filling the wound with more gauze, holding direct pressure when the wound is filled, and finishing it with a pressure dressing. ↩
In this case, if someone has been shot, the hospital assumes that they may still be a target and aims to reduce the possibility of continued harm. ↩

A Demonstrator’s Guide to Gas Masks and Goggles : Everything You Need to Know to Protect Your Eyes and Lungs from Gas and Projectiles

2020-09-02T19:12:09Z

One of the basic ways that police maintain violent control of our society is by interfering with our ability to breathe—and sometimes with our ability to see. Nowadays, regardless of whether you employ confrontational tactics, you could be exposed to tear gas or hit by a rubber bullet just by being is in the vicinity of a protest. By taking the proper precautions, we can mitigate the risks while continuing to show up for each other. This guide explores a wide range of options for protecting your eyes and lungs from chemical agents and projectiles, detailing the advantages and disadvantages of each, so you can pick out what’s best for you.

This is the second in a series of guides exploring how demonstrators can protect themselves. The contributors have spent countless hours gathering experience, data, and anecdotes to prepare this series—including carrying out impact testing on various masks and goggles. We will be updating this document on an ongoing basis as more information comes in. If you can offer suggestions or corrections, please contact us.

The previous installment in this series details how to choose a proper helmet.

Executive Summary

The best respirator is the one you have access to. Respirators are good at what they do—filtering air—and most of them will serve you well enough in a pinch. If you don’t have time to read the entire text and you need to get some gear in a hurry, here are some options:

The No-Compromise Expensive Option ($260-340)

If you want a new high-quality full-face mask that will work in the apocalypse, the MIRA CM-6M costs $220-240. The 7M is similar, but has a more “tactical” look. You can purchase this mask with two MIRA-brand CBRN cartridges for $50 each; otherwise, filters will cost $70 apiece.

This is all you need. If you don’t want to use $100 worth of filters at a single demonstration, however, leave the CBRNs in their packaging at home (or skip buying them entirely) and get two expired-but-unopened CBRN filters for roughly $20 each via ebay.com. These should work for tear gas and pepper spray, but not for apocalypse-level threats. Each filter should work for approximately eight solid hours of full chemical exposure, which could mean 30-40 hours in the street during demonstrations that involve a lot of tear gas. You should change the filter as soon as you begin to smell gas leaking through.

If you wear glasses, this mask is compatible with the 3M Safety 6878 Spectacle Kit designed for their 6800 mask. You will need to get prescription lenses for that.

MIRA CM-6M gas mask.

The Cheaper Full-Face Protection Option ($40-150)

Civilian style full-face respirators such as the 3M brand 6800 ($150 with filters, using the same ones from the modular option below) offer protection for a much cheaper price. In our impact testing, we’ve also found that the JJKK and HAOX brand Chinese imports ($40, with filters) serve just as well to protect your eyes and offer an adequate seal against gas.

An example of a cheap mask.

The Cheaper and Modular Option ($75)

If you want an affordable option that offers the best combination of ballistic resistance and chemical weapons protection, get a 3M half-mask respirator from the 6000 series for $25. The 6100 is the small, the 6200 is the medium, and the 6300 is the large. Attach a pair of 60926 cartridges ($35 for the pair). If the mask comes with 60921 or 60923 cartridges, you don’t need the 60926 cartridges. In addition, get a pair of Pyramex V2G Plus goggles for $15 and seal the vents on them with hot glue. If you wear glasses, get the RX insert and prescription lenses.

The biggest downside of pairing a half-mask with goggles, however, is that it’s hard to maintain a good seal between the two, as the goggles and the mask compete for the same real estate on your nose.

The Gambler’s Choice ($60)

A surplus Russian PMK-3 will be less than 20 years old. If you can find a version that comes with the full kit, it has ballistic outsert¹ lenses and an adaptor for attaching it to the more common NATO-threaded filter system. Surplus masks are always hit-or-miss; we have not found specific documentation on the ballistic rating of the outsert lenses yet.

If you want to double down on your gambling, a Russian PMK-2 can be as cheap as $25, though it could be 30 years old. The PMK-2 can come with ballistic outserts and an expired filter that ought to work for a while—but it will be difficult to replace the filter and who knows what condition the mask itself will be in. The cheapest of these masks ship directly from Russia with a fairly lengthy transit time.

A Russian PMK3 mask.

Live Dangerously (Cheap)

Most of the time, you don’t get shot in the face with a rubber bullet or a tear gas canister. None of the people who contributed to this guide have been shot in the face yet. Tear gas drives everyone back who isn’t protected, whereas impact munitions only kill or blind people every once in a while. Lots of people are getting shot in the face, though. It isn’t safe to be on the receiving end of police violence.

We can only recommend eyewear that has impact-rated plastic. But if you don’t have access to it and you have to go out anyway, you need either a full-face gas mask (army surplus or otherwise) or a half-mask and goggles. Make sure your filters are either military-style (expired or not) or rated to handle both organic vapors and P100 particulate filtration. Make sure your goggles are sealed as best as you can. Make sure it all stays tight to your face.

Good luck. Don’t blame us if anything bad happens—we told you not to.

If you want to improve on something you already have access to, or if you have different tactical needs than we’ve outlined above, read on.

Protect Your Lungs, Protect Your Eyes

We are addressing two distinct goals here: protecting your lungs and protecting your eyes. You protect your lungs with respirators that filter chemicals out of the air. You protect your eyes with goggles, glasses, or visors—whether they are independent of your respirator or combined with it in one full-face system.

Protect Your Lungs: Respirators

A respirator—technically, an APR (air-providing respirator)—is a device that filters the air you breathe before you breathe it.² There are several classes of respirators or gas masks, including two that we’re going to pass over completely: SCBA (self-contained breathing apparatus), which come with oxygen supplies and are used by divers and some emergency personnel, and PAPRs (powered air-providing respirators) that force air through filters via electrical power. We’re going to focus on full-face respirators, half-mask respirators, and, to a lesser degree, disposable respirators. We’ll also discuss impromptu air filtration and the current speculation about DIY respirators.

We’ll look at two general, non-technical categories of respirators: military/tactical respirators and civilian/workplace respirators.

Military Respirators (Gas Masks)

Military and tactical respirators are chiefly used by the military and militarized police forces around the world. These are all full-face respirators—what you picture when you hear the term “gas mask.” Almost all of them use the same kind of filter: a threaded 40mm filter that is NATO-standard, sometimes referred to as a STANAG filter. Current-issue US military (and presumably law enforcement) masks use a proprietary bayonet mount³ instead that is self-sealing, making it easier to change filters in the field.

These gas masks are often rated for a full range of threats from chemical weapons to nuclear fallout. Newer military models often include features such as speech diaphragms that make it easier to talk, multiple ports for filters that allow maximum airflow and enable you to swap out filters without removing the mask, and water systems that can be hooked up to a canteen or water bladder. Most models in use (currently or previously) by armed forces can accept ballistic lens or visor outserts that clip onto the outside of the lens or visor. You’re going to want these if they are available for your mask. Military gas masks can be purchased for quite a lot of money new, or outrageously cheap on the surplus market. New military or tactical masks start at $200+ and most are in the $500 range. Some worthwhile surplus ones can be found for $30-100.

The surplus market for gas masks is notoriously hit or miss, and things are often mislabeled. Some, such as some of the old Russian gas masks, can be dangerous: some use glass eyepieces instead of impact resistant plastic, while others might come with expired cartridges that contain asbestos.⁴ Below, we will list some common surplus models and discuss whether they meet the needs of modern demonstrators. Yellowed lenses can be fixed, but decayed rubber seals cannot. Older plastic lenses are substantially less impact resistant—in our impact testing, we shattered the lenses of an Israeli gas mask with nothing more than a BB. Surplus masks can range from $30-500 depending on the rarity or usefulness of the mask. Good-enough masks (minus ballistic rating) seem to be consistently available for $80-120.

40mm filters.

Civilian Respirators

Civilian/workplace respirators come in both half-mask and full-face styles. They are manufactured by a number of companies, many of which use their own proprietary filter attachment systems. We will be focusing on the masks made by 3M because they are the most plentiful and because some other companies employ their “bayonet”-style mounting system for filters (which they call “cartridges”). If you already have a mask with a proprietary filter system, such as the ones made by Honeywell or MSA, make sure your filters are rated to OV and P100 protection. Some of the low-priced Chinese models flooding the US market in response to COVID-19 seem to have their own filter systems, while the ones we’ve tested use 3M’s bayonet system. These cheaper masks could enable you to save money, especially if you are buying them in bulk.

If you are using a mask with a proprietary system, read on to the filter section to identify which filters will work for you.

The half-face COVID-19 masks that are made of cloth but include exhale valves and replaceable carbon filters are unlikely to be much use against chemical weapons. They likely don’t protect people around you from viruses, either, since they don’t filter on the exhale.

We have not been able to find any civilian-style full-face respirators with visors that meet ballistic impact standards (discussed below in the “Protect Your Eyes” section), but the 3M models and some others are rated for general impact resistance and seem to use the same plastic as ballistic-rated masks do, based on our initial impact weapons testing. One street medic we spoke with prefers to wear a 3M 6800 full-face respirator on the grounds that its civilian styling puts patients at ease more readily than a military look would. Full-face civilian respirators range around $60-70 for generic imports and up to $150-200 for name-brand items. Half-masks are substantially cheaper—as little as $8 for generics and $30 for a name brand.

3M manufactures three different models of both half-mask and full-face respirators. Any of them are adequate to our purposes, though some people we’ve talked to find a better seal with the slightly more advanced silicone facemasks. It’s probable that the 7500 series are the best half-mask respirators for our purposes and the FF-400 series is the best civilian full-face respirator for our purposes. The FF-400 series comes equipped with a speaking diaphragm, so your voice will be less muffled.

Each of the 3M models comes in three sizes, but “medium” will fit 80-90% of people and the sizes overlap with each other. To some degree, sizing is more important for comfort than efficacy.

For $15, you can buy an adaptor to shift from 40mm threaded filters to bayonet filters or vice versa—so don’t limit your choice of masks based on what filters are available alone.

The 3M Ultimate FX Full Facepiece Reusable Respirator FF-402.

Appendix: 3M Respirators—A Taxonomy

Half-mask models

—6000 series [basic]:

6100: small
6200: medium
6300: large

—6500 series [silicone rubber]:

6501: small
6502: medium
6503: large

—7500 series [silicone rubber and better breathability]:

7501: small
7502: medium
7503: large

Full-face models

—6000 series [basic]:

6700: small
6800: medium
6900: large

—FF-400 series [more advanced]:

FF-401: small
FF-402: medium
FF-403: large

—7000 series [substantially more expensive]:

7800S-S: small
7800S-M: medium
7800S-L: large

Fitting a Respirator

Whether you are wearing a half-mask or full-face respirator, it is important to check the fit every time you put it on. To do this, start by blocking the cartridges with your hands and breathing in. You should create negative pressure in the mask, with no air seeping in. Then put your hand over the exit valve and breath out. It should create positive pressure in the mask, with no air escaping. When it comes to performing this test, some masks are easier than others; with civilian masks, it can be difficult to use your hand to block the filters effectively.

Some workplaces test fit by putting something that smells strongly—like ground coffee—or some kind of mild irritant under the wearer’s nose to see how they react.

Respirators are not designed to fit over beards, though people with beards have learned that if you coat your beard and the rubber seal with an awful lot of Vaseline, it will form a seal. This seal is hardly permanent, and it appears that CS powder is fat-soluble, so it might mix painfully with Vaseline the way it does with skin moisturizers and makeup. A doctor we consulted argued that a chemical burn at your beard is probably better than getting chemicals in your eyes. Regardless, shaving your beard is the safest option. Even a few days of stubble might be a problem, necessitating Vaseline or shaving.

We spoke with one person who does not want to shave their beard; they simply accept that the air will be a little bit “spicy” and still find their mask to be very useful even without a proper seal. We cannot recommend this, but it may be relevant to your own cost-benefit analysis.

It is difficult to source gas masks for children. They exist, but they are not produced in the same quantity. MIRA, the only supplier we were able to find that stocks them was sold out at the time of writing. Sometimes you can find Israeli surplus masks for children, as well. MIRA also makes a gas mask carrying bag that enables the user to safely transport infants or pets.

The biggest disadvantage to pairing a half-mask respirator with goggles is that it becomes hard to get a proper seal on both at the same time. This is especially true with larger masks and larger goggles. The second biggest disadvantage is that it doesn’t protect all the skin of your face from chemicals, and chemical weapons burn on your skin as well as in your eyes or lungs.

Filters

You need to make sure your filter is rated for both oil-based particulate matter (P100 filtration) and organic vapor.

If you have a NATO-threaded military mask: For a 40mm threaded NATO cartridge, you need either a CS/CN/P100 filter, which can be difficult to come by as a civilian but seems to be what is commonly issued to police, or a CBRN filter, which is more commonly available but also more expensive. A CBRN filter is overkill for demonstrations, as it is designed to protect against chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear threats. Fortunately, expired-but-unopened CBRN filters should do the job and are much cheaper.

If you have a 3M mask, you need either 60921, 60923, or 60926 filters.

If you have something else, read on.

If it is likely that you are going to be exposed to riot control agents, you want your mask to filter two things: airborne particulates and organic vapors.

Particulate filters in the USA are rated by how oil-resistant they are—N are (N)ot, R are somewhat oil (R)esistant, and P are oil (P)roof—and what percent of airborne particulates they filter out—95%, 99%, or 99.97% (called 100). This explains the name of the N95, the mask commonly worn to protect against COVID-19. You’re looking for P100, the highest level of protection. These aren’t substantially more expensive and there seems to be little reason to use any other particulate filter, unless your particular mask setup only allows access to N95, which is still substantially better than nothing. The European standard does not rate for oil resistance, only particulate filtration: P1 masks filter at least 80% of particles; P2 masks filter at least 94% of particles; P3 masks filter at least 99.95% of particles.

While all of the common tear gasses and pepper sprays are comprised of particulate matter rather than gasses or vapors, the airborne particulates themselves can release organic vapors. You need the particulate filter (generally made of fiberglass paper) to stop the particulates, followed by an organic vapor barrier (generally a bed of activated charcoal). The NIOSH certification for organic vapor protection is “OV”—look for this on your filter or its documentation. Some other OV irritants include pesticides, solvents, and paint fumes, all of which masks often reference in their sales information.

We’ve seen guides for protestors based on front-line experience that claim only OV filtration is necessary. We’ve seen other guides that claim only P100 is necessary. Most seem to agree it is the combination that is necessary, but we suspect that one alone would do in a pinch.

Particulate filters do not become less effective at filtering out particulates over time. Rather, it is necessary to replace them when they become so clogged that they cause difficulty breathing.

Organic vapor barriers do become less effective over time with use, as the charcoal becomes saturated. Both heat and humidity reduce the effective lifespan of charcoal filters. Heat causes the charcoal to separate, while water vapor can saturate the charcoal and prevent it from absorbing active agents. You should replace your organic vapor filter as soon as you can smell chemicals leaking through the filters into the mask from outside. Unopened-but-expired filters are generally considered usable—for organic vapors and particulates only—if they were vacuum-sealed, but if humidity was able to reach the charcoal, they are probably ruined. Multiple comrades who are military veterans told us that the military uses expired filters all the time for the tear gas chamber without any problems. In any case, use expired filters at your own risk.

NATO-Threaded Filters

With 40mm threaded filters, you need “CS/CN/P100” filters at the minimum. AVON, Honeywell, and MSA make versions of these, but they can be hard to source as a civilian—especially amid a pandemic. If you’re going for overkill, get a CBRN filter—basically, a single filter that protects against almost any potential threat. MIRA Safety makes a high-quality filter of this kind; 3M also makes them. Be careful buying CBRN filters off of ebay or the surplus market: many are “new” in that they have not been used or opened, but were manufactured decades ago. Look for the manufacturing date, or roll the dice and buy cheap expired ones. Don’t trust these for anything but riot control agents.

For all masks, you need at least one filter. Some masks can optionally take two or even three at a time in order to increase airflow, an advantage for situations that might involve running or other strenuous exercise.

3M Bayonet Filters

3M masks and their clones use a three-prong bayonet style filter attachment. Some other proprietary attachment systems are similar but not interchangeable with 3M, but 3M are the most common. If you use these, you’ll likely end up with 3M-brand filters/cartridges, though clones of both the masks and cartridges exist. Note that 3M distinguishes between cartridges (the part that absorbs gasses and is usually made of activated charcoal treated with various chemicals) and filters (the part that blocks particulate matter). Make sure you get both. You can do this by buying separate cartridges and filters as well as the adaptors that connect them together, or by buying combination cartridges that come with filters pre-installed. Obviously, the latter is simpler.

Hats off to comrades in Hong Kong who have done the work to figure out what cartridges and filters you need, as they lack easy access to the combination cartridges. We’ve heard that they are not available in the UK either.

If you want a combination cartridge, your options include the 60921 (organic vapor + P100), 60923 (organic vapor and acid gas + P100), or 60926 (multi-gas + P100). As this goes to press, these are all about $15-20 each on ebay. You need two, and they usually come in pairs.

If you want to build your own, whether because you already have stock available or because you live somewhere without access to the 6092x filters described above, start by buying a set of cartridges—the 6001 (organic vapor), 6003 (organic vapor and acid gas), or 6006 (multi-gas). Next, purchase one of the various P100 filters, which come in two styles. Some, like the 2091, have their own bayonet connectors, as they are intended for mounting directly onto respirators. Other filters are simple pads, such as the 5p71—which is only a P95 filter and therefore not advised (though we have not tested a P95 ourselves). If you choose a bayonet-connecting filter, you need a 502, which is an adaptor that snaps onto the cartridge and provides a bayonet mount. If you choose a pad filter, you need a 501, which is an adaptor that snaps onto the cartridge and holds the filter directly.

Two 3M half-mask respirators showing several filter setups. Left to right: a p100 filter attached to an OV cartridge with a 502 adaptor; an N95 filter attached to an OV cartridge with a 501 adaptor; a blank bayonet attachment point; a p100 filter attached directly to the mask. Missing: an all-in-one cartridge, often identifiable by a bright pink outside shell.

3M marks their P100 cartridges by making them neon pink. Some people have expressed concern about this making the user identifiable, as it violates the all-black black bloc aesthetic—although if enough people are using pink filters, it will be somewhat less of a problem.

Replacing Filters

Studies have shown that under stress, even trained soldiers struggle to replace filters while holding their breath. The current US military model mask, the Avon M50, has self-sealing bayonet-mounted filters that enable the operator to change one filter at a time while continuing to breathe through the other.

Most masks you have access to will not have this feature. To change filters, you’ll probably have to hold your breath or exit the impacted area.

A comrade in Portland reported that they prefer the 3M cartridges with separate particulate filters (6001 cartridges with attachable P100 filters) because the P100 filters can be swapped out without taking the mask off, relying briefly on the cartridge alone for filtration.

Another comrade says that they have been using the same gas mask cartridge (a military-style 40mm one) since 2011 and have never tasted spicy air through it. This supports the theory that most of the important filtration is being done by the particulate filter, which is never used up, only clogged.

Others, in Portland, report that they their filters are lasting about 30-40 hours each.

Some surplus masks employ “cheek” filters located inside the mask. Changing these filters is a laborious process, and some YouTubers have found it’s easy to rip the rubber of the mask while doing so if the mask is old. Still, one person we spoke with prefers these masks, having seen police grab people by the external filters of other masks, since cheek filters do not present an easy handle for grabbing.

Cleaning and Storing

You should clean your respirator after each time it is exposed to chemical weapons. 3M sells a product for this: “504 Respirator Cleaning Wipes.” These are affordable, but likely unnecessary. What they contain is a trade secret. Most people just use soap and water, to good effect. Don’t soak your filters in water, just wipe down the outside with soap and water. Then remove the filters and store them in a ziploc bag or other airproof container so they do not absorb moisture from the air.

A Note on COVID-19

Unlike cloth and surgical masks, respirators do not protect the people around you from your germs. However, much more so than cloth or surgical masks, they do protect you from the germs around you. One protestor reported wearing a cloth mask over the exhalation valve in order to block droplets for the sake of other demonstrators.

A cheek-filtered gas mask in use in Baltimore in 2015 during the uprising in response to the police murder of Freddie Gray.

Visors and Lenses

Full-face masks either use full-face visors or individual lenses over the eyes. Lenses are more common in military models, while visors are more common in civilian models. A full visor offers much better visibility. It’s possible that it is harder to make a full visor more impact resistant, although we’ve found both ballistic and non-ballistic examples of both types.

A mask with lenses can be more convenient for those who are going to be using the optics of a long weapon (like a scope, red dot, or iron sights on a rifle or grenade launcher), as it permits one to shoulder the weapon better to get what is called a cheek weld and view down the barrel more clearly. Of course, this is not generally useful to demonstrators. All in all, a full-face visor seems preferable.

Off-Brand Civilian Masks

We will continue researching off-brand masks, most of which are from China. Some are rated as impact resistant; some use commonly available filter styles. So far, we have tried the JJKK and HAOX models. Both form an adequate seal against our faces in fit testing, though we have not taken them out into tear gas yet. Both have impact-resistant visors that performed identically to the American brand 3M when we shot them with various impact munitions—which is to say, they performed well. It’s been suggested that purchasers should buy from BangGood or Amazon rather than Ali Express, Baidu, or eBay for these types of masks because the quality control is slightly better. A few comrades dealt with a nightmare with a mask order early on in the pandemic as a result of poor quality control.

It might conceivably be possible to work directly with manufacturers to produce masks to your specifications, or at least to purchase them in bulk. Ambitious groups could consider trying to do this for their city or region.

Surplus Masks

Surplus military masks are another cheap option for full-face gas masks. They can be hard to source reliably, as many retailers (or else distributors serving retailers) lie about dates and potentially about features. This is also true for filters, and especially true on ebay. Both the rubber used for the seal and the plastic used for lenses and visors degrade over time, particularly when exposed to sunlight; both in our experience with testing and in anecdotes gathered from the street, they seem to be notoriously prone to breaking. Most surplus masks come in three sizes—small, medium, and large (generally numbered 1, 2, and 3, respectively, with the number displayed in the rubber of the mask)—but often, you cannot choose the size of mask when you purchase it online. Whatever mask you get, make sure it seals tightly to your face. Even a low-quality or wrong-sized mask will protect you as long as it seals to your face and is supplied with an adequate filter.

If you can get a model number and a country of origin, you can cross-reference seller claims with online military gear sites.

Tracking down the ballistic rating of the lenses and visors has been challenging. It would be very useful to identify a surplus mask that accepts 40mm NATO-threaded filters and includes ballistic lenses or visors (usually as a separate outsert). For those willing to forgo ballistic-rated lenses or visors, surplus masks are often the best option.

The primary current US military model is the Avon M50; it can be found for $250. While we generally don’t recommend masks that use proprietary filters, the M50 filters are reasonably cheap (currently $50 for a pair) and, as previously mentioned, you can swap them out in the field without exposing yourself to gas. Ballistic outserts are available cheaply for this mask as well; we found one for $20. The C50 model is the civilian model of the same mask, though it is used extensively by law enforcement.. The main difference is that it accepts 40mm NATO filters. For better or worse—usually worse—wearing this mask will make you look quite a bit like a soldier or a cop.

The Avon M40, which the US military used from 1986 to 2009, accommodates ballistic outsert lenses but does not come with ballistic lenses otherwise. 3M produces a civilian clone called the FR-M40 that is identical in every way. 3M also produces protective outserts for the lenses, but we have not been able to determine their impact rating.

The US Air Force and Navy has used the MCU-2P since the 1970s; any surplus option might be from any year in that range. They range from $150 to $300 on ebay. You can learn how to identify models and years here. While some documentation claims the MCU-2P visor is ballistic, a specific ballistic outsert is available for around $75. This implies that the visor alone is not ballistic.

The Russian PMK-3 (used from 2000 until recently, available for $70) and PMK-4 (in use since 2017, much more expensive) can make use of ballistic outserts as well, which often come with the full kit. Also included in the full kit is an adaptor to connect their proprietary filter system to the NATO-threaded system. The PMK-2 is even cheaper—around $30—and often comes with ballistic lenses, but can only use the 40mm-GOST filter system (used by Warsaw Pact countries).

A National Geographic filmmaker was wearing a Czech M10 (a clone of the US M17) iin Portland, Oregon in July 2020 when federal agents shot him in the face with a .68” round from an FN303 air gun, shattering the plastic lens of his mask and severely damaging his eye. Both of these masks can optionally be used with ballistic outserts, which the filmmaker did not have. These are the two models of mask we’ve found that use cheek filters, discussed above.

The Israeli M15 is used by the Israeli Defense Forces and its civilian model, the 4A1, is distributed to Israeli citizens. Both are affordable on the surplus market. Most are simply labeled for sale as M15 masks, but you can tell the difference because the 4A1 has round eye-holes instead of the odd-shaped ones used on the M15. The manufacturer, Shalon Chemical Industries, claims that the plastic lenses are impact resistant, and they don’t appear to be sold with ballistic outserts yet are used by a modern military force. We have not been able to determine if they are rated at a ballistic level, and all plastic lenses degrade with time and UV exposure. These two masks appear to be the most affordable, readily-available, fully-featured surplus gas masks. The 4A1 is the only mask we have impact tested so far—and the lenses shattered easily upon light impact—but we are not sure the age of the mask, as we bought it surplus.

We carried out impact testing on this Israeli 4A1—with dismaying results.

What the Police Use

Police use a mix-and-match array of gear because they source it from military surplus and various funding agencies. As far as we can tell, the two most common masks are the Avon C50 (though it’s possible that the federal police are using the M50 military version instead) and the MSA Advantage 1000 (or its military-grade equivalent, the MSA Millennium). The C50s are often seen equipped with the Avon mask comms unit, which gives them their distinctive mouthpiece. Witnesses have reported seeing police in Portland wearing Honeywell North full-face respirators, presumably the 7600 series.

Impromptu Masks

A bandanna, ideally wet, will filter out enough tear gear to get you out of a situation. This is better than nothing. Some sources say that because CS adheres to water, a wet bandanna will only make it worse, but others, including people who have actually been exposed to the stuff, say that the wet bandanna diminishes the number of particulates that can reach your airways. It’s possible that a wet bandanna will become saturated sooner—but it will be saturated with all the stuff that would otherwise have been in your lungs, and that’s a good thing.

For decades, protestors have argued about whether the wet bandanna should be soaked in vinegar, lemon juice, or some other acidic solution. This has not been studied in a laboratory, and the mechanism by which it would work is not clear. However, people have been doing this for a long time, and those who practice it report noticing a difference. A 2009 Pentagon-funded report did mention that a bandanna soaked in lemon juice could mitigate the effects of tear gas.

Comrades in Portland report that some people are using the larger sneeze-guard-style facemasks common in COVID-19 protection and pulling their hoods up, probably with the drawstrings brought in tight around the face. Of course, this is not a perfect seal. One user reported that it delayed the effects of tear gas until after many unmasked people had been compelled to leave the area, that it made it difficult to talk with people, and that the facemask was too large to easily conceal on the way to and from the demonstration.

Do-It-Yourself Masks

It’s possible to make DIY gas masks. While we have not tested them ourselves, YouTubers have, and report some success. The idea is to fashion DIY filters out of activated charcoal (to filter organic vapors) and cotton (to filter particulates). These can be attached to anything from repurposed two-liter bottles to SCBA masks. If anyone has experience testing these, please let us know.

Of course, a poorly-made mask might be worse than useless.

An improvised mask.

A Final Note on Masks

In most situations, you don’t need a perfect gas mask to participate in a protest. Even if you are gassed, often all you need is something that can protect you long enough for you to get to the gas canister and deactivate it or throw it back. You don’t need to have all the right gear to go out and try to change the world.

To put it differently: changing the world is never going to be completely safe. No mask will make it safe.

Wearing a respirator can be uncomfortable, particularly in the heat, as sweat rolls down your face and the mask digs into your nose. Tight straps can give you a headache. Some masks limit your vision or your ability to communicate. Respirators make you more identifiable: even if everyone is wearing a mask, they might not be wearing the same kind of mask you are.

But the long-term effects of tear gas can be significant, so it’s important to be protected. We don’t need more martyrs—we need more people who can continue to live and fight.

In some places and times, the police use a lot of tear gas and other chemical weapons. In other places and times, they use kettling tactics or impact munitions. As with all decisions about what you need to be safe and effective, consider the specifics of your terrain.

It may be necessary to protect your eyes against projectiles as well as gas.

Protecting Your Eyes

It’s also important to protect our eyes— both from chemical weapons and from impact munitions. This generally involves an impact-rated full-face respirator or a pair of goggles paired with a half-mask respirator. The goggles should be rated for ballistic impact (or at least impact resistant), fully sealed (without open-cell foam), and anti-fog. Unfortunately, all three of these aspects work against each other; it is rare to find goggles that meet all of these requirements at once. In some cases, you might have to seal up the vents on your goggles yourself.

We’ve heard a few other suggestions worth considering, such as wearing a ballistic-rated visor attached to a tactical helmet over regular, non-ballistic sealed goggles. Demonstrators have sometimes worn masks from baseball and other sports, but many of the projectiles police use can fit through the wide grating such masks employ.

For Those Who Wear Glasses

If you wear corrective lenses, do not wear contacts into a situation in which you might be exposed to chemical weapons. Wear glasses. Some who prefer to wear corrective lenses but don’t absolutely need them have found it simplest to take their glasses off when it’s time to put on their ballistic and/or chemical-proof goggles. Others don’t have that choice. There are options available for those who wear glasses, though this consideration does limit your choices and increase the cost of eye protection.

There are OTG (over-the-glasses) goggles, but we have yet to find a pair that seals adequately. Most use foam sealing, which is not airtight. Some comrades we’ve heard from just accept that their goggles will not be perfectly tight.

Most prescription goggles, including those made by sportsRX, are not ballistic-rated. We’ve found only one model of ballistic prescription goggle—the Wiley X SG-1. It’s unclear how much of a seal they establish around the eyes, however, and they are nearly $300 a pair. There are probably better options.

Many cheaper ballistic glasses, including the Pyramex V2G, can be outfitted with prescription inserts. The V2G, like almost every pair of ballistic goggles we’ve found, are not sealed against chemical weapons, but that can likely be addressed with tape or glue, as we discuss below. Most full-face respirators can be outfitted with prescription inserts as well. Protestors have been creating their own glasses inserts in gas masks, often using tape or suction cups.

One veteran told us that when he was in the army, when he distributed gas masks to civilians in the countries that the army was occupying, his unit told those who wore glasses to cut the stems of the glasses off just long enough to fit inside the rubber gasket of the mask (or goggles) and then glue them into place. Hot glue might work. We’ll experiment and edit this text with our findings.

Another style of “universal” prescription insert is a glasses frame with the stems bent down to fit inside the seal of the gas mask.

Prescription inserts can be filled by taking them to an optometrist or by mailing them to some places online.

Pyramex V2G Plus goggles

Sealed Eyewear

Goggles come in three major classes: fully-vented, indirectly vented, and non-vented (sometimes called “sealed”). Fully-vented goggles offer the best protection from fog; they are used for a lot of sports. For most purposes, indirectly-vented goggles offer the best of both worlds: the vents allow enough air in to keep the goggles from fogging, yet the vents are inaccessible enough that they are reasonably safe from chemical splashes and things like sawdust. Unfortunately, they let in tear gas, so they’re not ideal for protests. You want fully sealed goggles. Sealed goggles rely solely on chemical treatments and the thermo-conductive properties of the lenses to fight fog, which are not always sufficient.

Be careful: sometimes goggles are listed as “sealed” yet use an open-cell foam for their seal, with the idea that the foam itself vents air to the inside. Open-celled foam is a bad idea for situations involving police repression because it absorbs chemicals. The other two means by which goggles form a seal against your face are rubber and close-celled foam. We have not tested the practical difference between those two methods. Our speculation is that rubber seals, like the seals on gas masks, offer better protection against chemical weapons and would get less contaminated, while closed cell foam might protect against the problem of suction.

What problem of suction? The idea is that, if goggles are attached to your face in a sealed manner (especially through suction, like swim goggles), if something hits those goggles, first, positive pressure might damage your eye, then, if air escapes, negative pressure could also damage your eye. Worst-case scenario, this could permanently blind you. We’ve looked into this a little bit, and talked to an anarchist doctor, and the general consensus regarding whether this is a real risk is… “maybe.” Some studies have shown swim goggles causing bruising and some eye damage, and it seems likely—though we have not confirmed this—that this explains why swim goggles are not permitted in full-contact water sports like water polo. It’s also possible this is why we’ve had such a hard time finding fully-sealed ballistic goggles available for sale. Of course, as the aforementioned doctor pointed out, if you get shot in the eye with a projectile, it’s better to have the problem of suction than the problem of the projectile hitting your eye. Also, we have yet to find any evidence of ballistic impact causing problems with suction.

We speculate that some do-it-yourself methods of sealing vented goggles could mitigate the dangers of suction, as the DIY sealing would likely fail upon impact, normalizing the air pressure. If this is true, DIY sealed goggles could be safer than fully-sealed goggles.

Protestors have been employing at least two strategies to seal the vents on vented goggles—hot glue and duct tape (ideally applied to both the inside and outside of the vents). Hot glue is far preferable, as most tape loses adhesiveness as it gets wet. Fabric-based tapes do not seem to provide enough of a seal, while plastic-backed tapes trap moisture, which loosens the glue, causing it to fall off. Use tape only in an emergency. Even hot glue can sometimes work itself loose.

We haven’t tested other glues or epoxies. There are likely additional methods besides hot glue and tape.

Goggles sealed with hot glue.

Ballistics

Unfortunately, in addition to spraying us with chemicals, the police also shoot impact munitions at us. While every impact munition in production is specifically designated not to be shot at anyone’s face, police officers routinely shoot them at our faces. Police have inflicted severe eye injuries on dozens of people in the US in 2020 alone, and many of the victims have permanently lost their vision. Some of them were wearing safety glasses when they were hit, too.

It’s probably safest to find eye protection that is rated to offer “ballistic” protection, rather than simply the “impact resistance” designed to mitigate workplace hazards. While this limits your selection of available glasses, goggles, and gas masks, ballistic-lensed eyewear can still be found cheap if you know where to look. Admittedly, in our experience testing different styles of goggles against various impacts, we have yet to find any noticeable difference between the performance of those that are rated only to the civilian impact resistance rating (ANSI Z87.1+) and those that are rated against the higher standard mil-spec (PRF-31013). We also obtained the same results testing one pair that was unrated but was advertised as “shatterproof.” While our experiments are ongoing, our current hypothesis that most shatterproof, impact resistant, and ballistic plastic lenses are constructed in the same way. Still, the higher testing standard also tests whether the entire goggle stays together during impact, even if it breaks.

In any case, some level of impact resistance is vital. Anecdotally, we spoke with a protestor in Puerto Rico whose eye was saved when a large splinter of wood embedded itself in their ballistic goggles after police munitions shattered a nearby tree. While ballistic goggles are not rated to take direct fire from firearms—and we cannot promise that they will protect you from every possible impact munition—their rating exceeds the force projected by pepper balls or even baton rounds. On YouTube, you can see people shoot ballistic goggles with birdshot from a shotgun without breaking the goggles.

We tested unrated lab safety goggles for comparison. They shattered dangerously at impacts that didn’t even dent shatterproof lenses.

Regular lab goggles shattered when shot with a BB.

Some people have been using clear tape to reinforce their goggles and gas masks, hoping that if a munition breaks the plastic, the tape might keep the pieces from splintering dangerously, a premise based on the way automobile glass breaks. To test this theory, we taped just one lens on several pairs of goggles and one respirator with Gorilla tape—the strongest clear tape we could find—and shot them with pellets. The areas that were taped had worse penetration, presumably because the tape trapped the pellet and prevented it from bouncing away. Yet pellets are not a particularly realistic threat at demonstrations. So we shot a few with rubber pellets from a 12-gauge shotgun. One shattered, but more safely than those that were untaped, while one did not shatter at all when we fully expected that it would. This is not conclusive research, but it’s possible that tape might help.

Ballistic rated goggles. The side on the wearer’s left was laminated in Gorilla tape.

ANSI-rated goggles after impact testing. The side on the wearer’s left was laminated in Gorilla tape.

Impact Standards

The plastic (usually polycarbonate) lenses of respirators, goggles, and glasses are rated to various standards of impact resistance. In the US, civilian goggles can be rated to the ANSI Z87.1+ standard, while military and tactical gear is rated to MIL-PRF-31013 or another MIL ballistic standard; in Europe, EN168A (or, slightly less great, EN168B). Presumably, there are comparable standards in other parts of the world.

Impact standards are generally established by shooting a small steel BB at the glasses, goggles, protective visor, or gas mask at various rates of speed. To qualify for the standard, the lenses must not break or detach from the frame. Most “ballistic” ratings require the lens to survive projectiles striking at a velocity of at least 500 feet per second (fps). The main “impact resistant” standard, ANSI Z87.1+, is only 150 fps. We shot goggles at 630 and 840 fps and found no difference between the two standards.

Some manufacturers brag about the standards they meet on their sales pages, but failing that, it can be a lot of work to work out what gear is rated for ballistic impact, especially regarding older equipment like surplus masks. Fortunately, ANSI rated gear has Z87.1+ stamped somewhere onto the frame.

We cannot say for certain which standards are necessary to protect against which particular threats, because these standards were designed with workplace hazards (in civilian models) and shrapnel (in military models) in mind, not impact munitions. We spoke with engineers who suggested that testing is more important than the application of abstract math, since the angle of impact, distance, wear and tear on the plastic, and shape of the visor are all significant factors in determining what will and won’t break a specific piece of plastic. Regardless, wearing impact-resistant eye protection will greatly reduce potential damage to your eye, face, or skull, even if it does break on impact.

Anti-Fog

Glasses and goggles fog up, particular in humid environments. Foggy goggles are annoying—and in a protest situation, potentially dangerous. Manufacturers (and protesters) employ three basic anti-fog measures.

First, and most effective, is airflow. Full-face respirators that are designed to fight fog direct fresh air across the visor before you breath it in, while ensuring that exhaled air escapes the valve immediately. Vented goggles—which we don’t use—also rely on fresh air to fight fog. Sealed goggles present a disadvantage.

The second most effective anti-fog measure is to use “thermal lenses” or “dual lenses.” These goggles employ a dual pane system of lenses with an air gap in between, creating a thermal break (insulation, essentially) that reduces condensation on the lenses.

Finally, the most common anti-fog measure is a hydrophobic surface on the inside of the goggles. Most goggles that say they are “anti-fog” use this method, which consists of a thin layer of oil over the inside of the lens. Oil is hydrophobic, so moisture beads up and falls. The chief weakness of most of these anti-fog coatings is that they eventually wear out, especially if the lenses are washed with soap. Some manufacturers claim that their anti-fog coatings are chemically bonded to the plastic and do not degrade, but we have yet to test their claims ourselves.

One researcher for this article lives in a region where humidity hovers around 80-90% all summer. In these conditions, relying on a regular hydrophobic anti-fog coating is far from adequate, even when using vented goggles; the goggles fog up very quickly. By contrast, indirectly vented thermal goggles can be worn for hours without fogging up. The difference between the two methods is significant.

Anti-fog sprays are available and reasonably cheap, though DIY solutions are just as common. Many swimmers swear by using saliva as a thin coating on the inside of their goggles to prevent fog, while others use baby shampoo (not adult shampoo, which would irritate the wearer’s eyes). We consulted an anarchist long-distance swimmer who reports that baby shampoo has been effective for hours at a time in the ocean, while saliva seems to last from 10 to 45 minutes at the very most.

Comrades in Portland have submitted the following anti-fog recipe, which we have not personally tested.

Materials: Toothpaste/baking soda, water, Dawn anti-grease dish soap, Johnson & Johnson baby shamboo, spray bottle (other brands of similar quality can be used).

If your lenses have an anti-fog coating, wash them with water and a soft rag and let dry. If your goggles do not come with an anti-fog coating:

Wash your hands well.

Use a non-whitening and non-gel toothpaste, or baking soda and water. Spread it over the entire lens and the skirt inside the goggles/mask.

Use your fingers or a soft-bristled brush to scrub the lens, then rinse it thoroughly with water.

Repeat this step again if your goggles get dirty, oily, or greasy.

Next, mix your anti-fog solution:

Use a clean spray bottle

Fill with 40% dawn, 50% baby shampoo, and 10% warm water.

Mix thoroughly.

Finally, treat your goggles/mask:

Wash your hands well

Spray solution on the inside of the mask/goggles

Scrub lenses and frame with clean fingers

Let sit for 30 seconds

Rinse briefly with warm water, making sure to leave a light layer of solution on the lenses, and let it dry.

If it stings your eyes when you put the goggles on, use less Dawn and more water in your next batch.

Repeat before every action.

Visors

It is also possible to gain impact protection from a visor mounted to a tactical helmet. This is covered in greater detail in our guide to helmets.

Asian-Fit Goggles

Many people of Asian descent find that goggles do not contour well to their faces. Manufacturers make goggles that sit higher on the nose, labeled Asian-Fit goggles. We are currently looking for Asian-Fit goggles that meet the standards we’ve outlined, but the ballistic pairs we’ve found so far use foam as the seal. If anyone has suggestions, please let us know.

Work glasses: Some work glasses with ballistic lenses also come with straps to turn them into goggles. All three of the models of this style that we’ve researched do not really form a seal around the eyes.

Fire goggles: Fire goggles are designed for wilderness firefighters, but tend to make use of thick open cell foam for ventilation. This is intended to filter smoke, but not tear gas.

Swim goggles: Swim goggles offer the advantage of being small and providing a good seal, so they pair well with half-mask respirators. However, it is hard to find impact-resistant swim goggles and it’s worth considering the potential problem of suction.

Ski goggles: Most ski goggles use open cell foam, rather than rubber, to form a seal. As mentioned above, open cell foam can absorb chemicals

Some Specific Goggles You Could Try

None of the authors have tested the following goggles against tear gas or police munitions, though at least one of us has handled and worn each type. These recommendations are based on a mixture of research and conversation.

Our number one recommendation so far is the Pyramex V2G Plus. These are less than $20, ballistic rated, and use dual-lens thermal anti-fogging—one of the more reliable anti-fogging measures. There is a prescription insert available for those who wear glasses. These goggles are indirectly vented, however, so you’ll have to seal them with hot glue or tape. The only potential problem is that the two-lens thermal system makes it harder to adequately seal. There is a thin layer of foam between the lenses, allowing moisture to pass through, and if you live in a humid environment, you might trap moisture between the lenses permanently.

Another option is the Pyramex Capstone. These goggles are less than $20 and ballistic-rated. They use regular hydrophobic anti-fogging. Like the V2G Plus, they are indirectly vented, so you need to seal them.

SolidWork Safety Goggles are slightly more expensive, $30 or so. They use a large rubber seal and seem more capable of sealing securely to your face. These are also indirectly vented, so you will need to seal them.

There are many, many more goggles that can work, and something is almost always better than nothing.

Workarounds

One person we spoke with wears swim goggles under vented ballistic goggles. The swim goggles provide a good seal despite being paired with a half-mask respirator. This approach could also work for those who own prescription swim goggles or are willing to buy a pair. It’s more to carry, it’s presumably uncomfortable, and we have not yet received word from this person as to how it has served in the thick of chemical weapons. If anyone else has experience with this method, please let us know.

Most military gas masks can be equipped with ballistic “outserts” that attach to the outside of the lenses—without these outserts, the lenses are not rated for ballistic impact. ↩
If you look at the hazardous chemical specifications of various chemicals, you’ll notice that they list certain “protection factors” that are necessary to interact with them. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) rates various types of respirators according to protection factor. SCBA masks are rated at 10,000, PAPRs are rated at 50-100, full-face APRs are rated at 50, half-mask APRs are rated at 10, and disposable APRs are rated at 5. ↩
The bayonet mount is the same model by which lenses attach to cameras: three tabs fit into three slots, then you twist it into place to lock it down. ↩
Realistically, this is only a danger if you manage to find an 80-year-old filter from an Eastern bloc country. ↩

A Demonstrator’s Guide to Helmets : Everything You Need to Know

2020-09-01T18:21:32Z

As violence intensifies from police, federal officers, and fascist groups around the country, it’s important to think about how to protect ourselves. No one should have to choose between preserving bodily safety and organizing in our communities—yet batons, impact munitions, and street attacks are designed to force us to decide between the two. It’s not a question of whether you employ confrontational tactics—nowadays, anyone who is in a protest situation could become a target. By taking the proper precautions, we can mitigate the risks while continuing to show up for each other. This guide explores a wide range of protective headgear, detailing the advantages and disadvantages of each, so you can pick out what’s best for you. The life you save could be your own.

This is the first in a series of protest safety guides that we will be publishing over the coming days. Contributors have spent countless hours gathering experience, data, and anecdotes to prepare this series. We will be updating this document on an ongoing basis as more information comes in. If you can offer suggestions or corrections, please contact us. For more information about how to choose personal protective equipment such as ear protection for protests, you can start with this article published by the Indigenous Anarchist Federation.*

Aaron Cantu’s helmet after a police officer in Portland, Oregon intentionally fired an aerial flash-bang grenade directly at his head. If he had not been wearing a helmet, he would probably have been killed.

Executive Summary

If you don’t have time to read the entire text, here’s what you need to know:

If you anticipate that no one else will be wearing a helmet, wear something concealable or inconspicuous—a bump cap baseball cap, a low-profile skate helmet under a hood, or a bicycle helmet—so as not to make yourself a target. If you anticipate that many people will be wearing helmets, wear the best helmet you can get your hands on, such as a tactical bump helmet or ballistic helmet.

Some Options

High-end: Level IIIA ballistic helmet, such as the $500 Hard-Headed Veterans ATE, or a discount Chinese-made model that is still tested to a high standard, such as the $200 LongFri model.

Cheaper tactical: Either a name brand “bump helmet” for $100-200, or an airsoft helmet that looks like one for $40. If you go with the latter, swap out the pads for real pads, which cost another $40, and do not expect it to provide nearly as much protection.

Dirt-cheap option: Find the cheapest skate helmet you can that still advertises meeting various certifications. It should be about $20.

Low-key option: $20. Buy a “bump cap” (not a “bump helmet”)—a bit of a hardhat built into a baseball cap.

In an emergency: A half or three-quarters motorcycle helmet, a half-mask hockey helmet. A lacrosse helmet with the facemask removed. Any other helmet you can find.

Hard-Headed Veterans ATE helmet.

A bump cap.

Why Helmets?

Our heads are fragile. Police know this—so they aim for them. Fascists do the same. It is smart to wear a helmet in a lot of protest situations.

As with all gear, it’s always important to think in terms of tradeoffs. If you’re the only person with a helmet, you might attract more attention to yourself than you want. If no one else will be wearing a helmet, consider wearing a concealable helmet. If you anticipate that everyone will be wearing helmets, make sure you’re wearing a good one.

Mobility, visibility, and flexibility are important—whether we’re talking about a particular item of gear or our movements as a whole. The police will almost always have more access to resources than we do; it’s usually a mistake to get drawn into head-to-head confrontations under static conditions. Their weaknesses are that they tend to react slowly to new information and that they often lack motivation and creativity. When choosing equipment and tactics, we should always aim to stay fluid and mobile, being careful not to weigh ourselves down attempting to hold a fixed position.

All that said—you can’t really go wrong wearing a helmet to a protest. Cheap bicycle helmets have saved people’s lives this year. If you don’t want to spend any money, then wear whatever you have available. A skate helmet is great. A bicycle helmet is better than nothing. A full-face motorcycle or motocross helmet is expensive, limits your vision and hearing, and presents a variety of other downsides—but if you catch a tear gas canister to the brow, you’ll be glad you wore it.

There is no helmet that will protect you entirely from blows or shots to the head. There is no “concussion-proof” helmet available to football players: it would require a tremendous amount of foam. Like all protective gear, all a helmet can do is mitigate certain risks.

People tend to fixate on the shell of a helmet—assuming, for example, that since a ballistic shell that can withstand gunfire, it will protect your head better than a hockey helmet. But a ballistic shell is only intended to protect your head from gunfire—it might not be as effective at protecting your head from a hockey puck. And a hockey helmet might not protect your head in a road accident the way a bike helmet could.

With helmets, both the shell and the padding matter in roughly equal proportions. If a projectile penetrates the shell, the padding won’t do much. Yet the padding is what protects against blunt impact, presuming the shell itself is not penetrated.

Ballistics is a complicated field. We spoke at length with an engineer in the process of preparing this series. The long and short of it is: it is very hard for a layperson to predict which objects will penetrate which surfaces and how much force will be transferred. We can learn the kinetic energy (in joules) of various less lethal munitions and we can learn the standards that various helmets are certified according to—but it is difficult to draw reliable conclusions on the basis of this information. In short, non-ballistic helmets are certified to resist substantially less kinetic energy than might be imparted by a less-lethal weapon.

Helmets mitigate risk. They don’t nullify it.

Fitting a Helmet

Helmets come in a variety of sizes and each manufacturer employs different sizing patterns. It’s worth getting a tape measure to measure the circumference of your head before shopping for a helmet, especially if you’re buying it online. If you don’t have a tape measure, use a piece of string, then measure the length of the string.

A lot of helmets are adjustable—you can fit them either by adding or removing padding or by tightening or loosening a headband. Hard hats in particular are eminently adjustable, though we don’t particularly recommend them. Regardless, it’s best to buy a helmet that fits you well. If you’re between two sizes, you should probably go with the larger size; but a helmet that is too loose can fall into the wrong position at inconvenient moments, even blocking your vision. A helmet that is too loose will likely absorb less impact, because the force of a blow can push the side of the helmet into your head, essentially making the helmet itself impact you.

With padded helmets, you want it tight enough that it takes a bit of effort to get it on, but not so tight that it feels confining. To test the fit of a tactical helmet, shake your head from side to side with some force without the chinstrap on: the helmet should not move.

Types of Helmets

For the purposes of this article, we’ll divide helmets into three basic categories based on how they’re designed. There are suspension helmets, which use a hard layer on the outside and a suspension system inside to absorb impact. This category includes most construction hard hats, older military helmets, and some climbing helmets. There are crash helmets, which rely on crushable foam, usually paired with a hard layer. These are generally designed with the assumption that they will be destroyed on impact. Bicycle, skate, ski, motocross, and motorcycle helmets are all crash helmets. And finally, there are padded helmets, which use a hard outer shell and non-crushable padding inside to mitigate impact. This includes modern military and tactical helmets as well as some sports helmets, including football, lacrosse, and hockey helmets.

Crash helmets generally provide the most protection from a single impact, but they lose their protective capacity after one blow. Suspension helmets are light, cheap, and durable, but are often not rated for side impact and generally less protective overall. We recommend padded helmets, which are often designed for repeated blows. There’s a reason soldiers wear them.

Suspension Helmets

Suspension helmets have the advantage of being cheap and of allowing air to flow over the head, but are generally less effective against blunt impacts. We don’t recommend them.

Hard Hats

First, and most common, is the hard hat. Most hard hats are good for protecting your head from falling objects, but not as useful for mitigating other threats. Many lack even a chinstrap, which makes them unreliable in situations that could involve running, falling, or grappling. Worksites are increasingly replacing hard hats with “safety helmets,” some of which use suspension systems, some of which use crushable foam or padding for the sides, some of which use a combination. If you’re going to use a hard hat, look for a “Type II” helmet, which includes non-crushable padding on the sides and is rated for side impact as well as top impact. These are much less common.

Hard hats have a very “civilian” look, which can be useful for optics.

The classic hard hat.

Climbing Helmets

Climbing helmets are similar to “Type II” hard hats in that they are rated for side impact as well as top impact. They also sit closer to the head than a hard hat. Generally, they are more comfortable and offer better mobility.

Anecdotally, we hear that climbing helmets that are tested to the European ASTM F1492 standard offer effective protection against baton blows.

Some climbing helmets rely on suspension alone, while others use a hybrid system that incorporates crushable foam. As far as suspension helmets go, climbing helmets seem like a good choice.

A typical climbing helmet.

Antique Military Helmets

Unfortunately, we cannot recommend the medieval helmet or a steel 20th century war helmet for protests, though some of us might wear ours anyway. Most medieval helmets and early modern military helmets use a leather suspension system, called a helmet liner, to hold the hard shell away from the head.

The Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA), who fight with steel swords and armor for sport, requires steel helmets to be at least 16 gauge or thicker steel; many SCA fighters prefer 14 gauge steel. Anything thinner might be considered “decorative” only. We have not tested steel with impact munitions, and the deformation of a helmet could be very dangerous to the wearer if, you know, the helmet crushes your head. Many re-enactment fighters, rather than using traditional suspension systems, build foam liners from ½” or thicker closed-cell foam (yoga mat foam is thought of highly for this). Others use modern military helmet padding. To the best of our knowledge, a human arm with a steel bar (like a sword) delivers substantially less force than the more powerful impact munitions used by police, so we cannot recommend medieval helmets in good conscience until we’ve tested them properly.

A demonstrator expressing opposition to the courts extending de facto impunity to murderer and former St. Louis police officer Jason Stockley on September 17, 2017, in St. Louis.

Some people wear surplus early modern helmets, which are plentiful. Most of these are not rated against bullets, but were designed to protect soldiers from accidents and shrapnel. A few have a Kevlar liner and approach a ballistic-rated degree of protection. We’re curious what would happen if one were to replace the suspension liner with modern military padding and a chinstrap harness, but we have not spoken with anyone who has tried this yet.

An M1 helmet—the helmet of the US military from the Second World War until 1985.

Crash Helmets

There are more types of crash helmets than we can easily cover here. Crash helmets tend to be the most readily available helmets and they usually look “civilian” and unthreatening. Someone in a bicycle helmet can look like they were on their way home from work when they were swept up into a crowd. Also, some crash helmets can be concealed under a hood. For these reasons, as well as their relatively cheap prices, we recommend them—especially skateboard and snowboarding helmets.

Crash helmets, unlike suspension helmets or padded helmets, are less likely to be effective when purchased used. Fortunately, they tend to be very cheap new.

Bicycle Helmets

Bicycle helmets are probably the most inconspicuous helmets you can wear apart from something completely concealed like a bump cap. They’re also dirt cheap. Those are their main two advantages. The disadvantage is that bicycle helmets are substantially less penetration-resistant than many other crash helmets, as the plastic shell is basically an afterthought. The plastic shell is so thin, in fact, that some of us have seen police batons shatter them entirely, sending shards flying that have cut people.

In the United States, bicycle helmets—unlike skate helmets and other sport helmets —are required to meet certifications using the CPSC standard. However, they are only required to survive a single impact. In short, they’re designed to be disposable.

One study we read indicated that $10-20 bicycle helmets meet the certification standards (on the basis of various impact tests) roughly as well as $100-200 helmets.

We’ve seen an FN303 pellet (an impact .68” airgun pellet) embedded deep in the foam of a bike helmet, implying that it sufficed to stop the pellet.

A bike helmet.

Skate and Snowboard Helmets

Skate helmets cover more of the head than bike helmets, since they aren’t designed to be aerodynamic. Snowboard helmets are functionally the same as skate helmets; the chief difference is simply that they lack ventilation holes entirely, as they are designed to retain heat.

Skate helmets, unlike bicycle helmets, require no certification to be sold as such. Some companies apparently certify only certain sizes of the helmet, because they use different amounts of padding in different sizes. If they are certified, these helmets are certified to ASTM F1492 standards, meeting a higher standard than bicycle helmets in that they are rated to survive multiple impacts.

Some snowboarding helmets come in with a built-in comms systems, which could be useful to a protestor.

Skate helmets are one of the best cheap options for helmets. Be careful when buying skateboard helmets online, as the listings are sometimes for children’s helmets in children’s sizes.

Aaron Cantu was wearing a helmet of this kind when a police officer in Portland, Oregon intentionally fired an aerial flash-bang grenade directly at his head in 2018. Police are supposed to fire that kind of flash-bang into the air, to explode above the crowd—though in practice, they routinely aim them at our heads. The grenade penetrated Aaron’s helmet and became lodged in it, shattering his skull. He survived—and credits the helmet with saving his life.

Skateboard and snowboard helmets.

Motorcycle Helmets

Motorcycle helmets are designed to survive much higher levels of impact than other crash helmets. They’re also more expensive. If you’re buying something specifically for protests, they aren’t necessarily the best choice. If you have one around, however, it’s a helmet—a very good helmet. And if you ride a motorcycle or scooter to the demonstration, then you already have a helmet with you.

Full-face motorcycle and motocross helmets offer much better protection for a motorcycle accident, but this does not translate well to protest situations. They’re cumbersome, they limit visibility, and they make it much more difficult to wear respirators or ballistic goggles.

Three-quarter (open-faced) helmets and half helmets are much more useful for protest situations, as they are more compatible with masks and goggles. Half helmets are substantially cheaper than other styles.

When purchasing motorcycle helmets, our friends at Indigenous Anarchist Federation-Federación Anarquista Indígena (IAC-FAI) remind us in their own article about protest gear that

“DOT certification is not worth the ink its printed with since it is a ‘self-certified’ safety standard. For real safety, especially ballistic protection from the visor, be sure to get a helmet that meets ECE or Snell safety standards.”

A variety of motorcycle helmets.

Equestrian Helmets

Equestrian helmets are similar to skate helmets, but those that are certified to the ASTM standard F1163 are also tested against the sharp impact of a horse hoof. This is good for protestors.

An equestrian helmet.

Padded Helmets

Suspension and crash helmets are just-in-case helmets, but padded helmets are worn by people who expect to be hit in the head: athletes, soldiers, cops, and, increasingly, well-dressed demonstrators. Let’s separate this category into two sub-categories: sports helmets and tactical helmets.

Sports Helmets

More than any other category of helmet, sports helmets are designed specifically to protect against blunt impact; an incredible amount of engineering has been invested in this lately. Sports helmets are also the most readily available helmets on the secondhand market. In some cases, you’ll have to remove the facemask so it doesn’t interfere with your ability to wear masks and goggles—and so it won’t offer an opponent an easy opportunity to grab hold of your face and control your head. Other sports helmets are designed in such a way that they are not compatible with gas masks and goggles at all.

Make sure the padding of your sports helmet is in good shape.

Hockey Helmets

Hockey helmets are designed to protect against fast moving hockey pucks—which are a lot like the impact weapons used by police. Half-helmets are preferable, without a chin bar or face mask. Hockey and lacrosse helmets are two common and effective protest helmets.

Lacrosse Helmets

Lacrosse helmets are a lot like hockey helmets, but they are lighter and offer good ventilation as well as good peripheral vision. Although you’ll probably have to remove the facemask and chin bar, lacrosse helmets are a solid choice.

Whitewater Helmets

According to whitewater rafters we’ve spoken to, whitewater helmets are similar to other padded sports helmets, rather than to crash helmets. Although we lack direct experience with them, it appears they would serve well for protests.

Football Helmets

Football helmets are specifically designed to protect the head from repeated blunt impact. Some football helmets employ a two-shell system, utilizing what one company calls a “shock bonnet” in which plastic shock absorbers between the inner and outer shell absorb the impact. Apparently, this dramatically improves the protection these helmets offer against concussions. However, it doesn’t appear that this technology has been widely adopted yet.

Batting Helmets

Worn in baseball, batting helmets are cheap and strong. Traditional models are designed to survive baseball impacts of 70 mph, while newer models are rated up to 90 or 100 mph. The official helmet of Major League Baseball—the Rawlings S100 Pro Comp—uses this newer design, though some players complain it offers less mobility than the older models. We’ve yet to test how batting helmets fit with respirators—and many don’t use any kind of chinstrap, so they can easily fall off or be removed in a scuffle.

A variety of sports helmets.

Tactical helmets

Tactical helmets are designed for combat. That’s why cops use them: police constitute an occupying military force. Tactical helmets are intended to protect soldiers and other professional fighters from the hazards of their job, such as bullets and shrapnel. Many of them are also designed to stick gadgets onto. Gadgets are useful: in particular, activists might be interested in being able to mount ear protection or visors. Journalists might be interested in the ability to attach cameras, though we cannot in good conscience recommend that anyone film protests in such a way as might incriminate fellow protestors.

A note on buying tactical helmets securely—a lot of tactical gear manufacturers are explicitly politically opposed to various social movements, and many donate money to police organizations. While sometimes it’s necessary to let capitalists sell us the rope to hang them, it’s worth considering where your money is going—and what information you are giving to a manufacturer when you purchase from them. Consider shipping your purchase to a post office box at the very least.

Also, it is illegal in the US for those convicted of violent felonies to own body armor designed to protect against bullets. Some exceptions can be found through workplace requirements. This law likely only applies to ballistic helmets.

Tactical helmets can be distinguished by their ballistic rating, their style, and whether or not they are designed to carry gear. They are available in a wide range of prices and combinations of features. For that reason, we’ll discuss the different categories of features that can be mixed and matched, rather than mutually exclusive types of tactical helmets.

Ballistics

There are four ratings of tactical helmets available. At the lowest end are airsoft helmets, which are often less than $50. These are generally not certified at all; functionally, they are just plastic replicas of higher-quality helmets. The next step up is bump helmets (which are distinct from bump caps). Bump helmets are tactical helmets that are not rated to protect against gunfire, though they are often well-made and certified to decent safety helmet standards. They are half the weight of ballistic helmets and substantially cheaper. In the military, they are usually only used by people who want the ability to hold gear like night vision goggles without the weight of a ballistic helmet. First responder helmets are often bump helmets in bright colors.

Then there are ballistic helmets. Nearly all military ballistic helmets are rated to NIJ IIIA—which is to say, they are rated to protect against handguns but not rifles. Finally, there are some helmets that claim to protect from rifle rounds. Most of these helmets only protect from certain rifle rounds at long distance. Others, however, can use a special insert to increase the level of protection they offer against rifles. This also increases a helmet’s weight. Ballistic helmets are generally made of aramid fibers like Kevlar.

The best kind of helmet available to a demonstrator for confronting almost any impact threat model is a ballistic tactical helmet. However, the cheapest ones start new at $200, and most well-reviewed models are $500 or more. If bump helmets, or even airsoft helmets, are able to withstand less lethal munitions without penetration, then with impact padding, they are the next best thing for a fraction of the price. However, we have not tested this ourselves.

Styles

We will focus on US models of ballistic helmet, because these are what are most readily available here and most manufacturers copy them. There are numerous styles for numerous purposes, but the most common include:

PAGST helmets are a style of ballistic helmet that has been largely phased out since 2001. Soldiers complained that the suspension system and pads were inadequate and that the strap worked poorly. The brow also limited visibility, and the nape protection extends low enough to interfere with shooting from a prone position. It would absolutely be worth wearing a PAGST helmet if you find one cheap, but if you’re shelling out real money to buy a ballistic helmet, don’t settle for a PAGST helmet.

MICH/ACH helmets replaced the PAGST model. The ACH is a more modern version of the MICH, but the helmets are very similar. Compared with the PAGST, it has a better chinstrap and relies on padding rather than suspension. It’s considered to offer superior protection against blunt impact. Now ECH helmets are replacing the ACH; they have a very similar design, but they are made of a lighter-weight material that some people consider slightly weaker, ballistically. This style of helmet has “ear bumps” that permit the user to wear headphones inside it, although the fit is not always perfect.

MICH helmet with side rails and a shroud.

FAST/ATE/High Cut helmets are built similarly to MICH/ACH helmets but are cut above the ear (ATE) instead of having ear bumps. These weigh less, protect less, and allow the user to wear rail-mounted ear protection. Given the choice, this might be the style best suited to protest situations, particularly if you might need to wear ear protection. A “bump” model, rather than a ballistic model, weighs half as much and provides as much impact resistance, though less protection from bullets. Older models of this style of helmet, such as you might find on the surplus market, are sometimes called CVC helmets.

Side Rails and Shroud

Some ballistic helmets (sometimes described as “shell only”) are plain helmets without mounting systems, but most tactical helmets are distinguished by the various mounting options built into them—usually, side rails and a shroud. Surplus helmets, particularly older helmets, are much cheaper when they don’t come with rails and a shroud. These can be attached aftermarket, but it’s a bit of an undertaking.

The “shroud” is a rectangle on the forehead of the helmet that is designed to mount night vision goggles. In the civilian market, most people use this spot to mount GoPro cameras. The shroud is a fairly universal mounting system, although some cheaper helmets are poorly made and may not lock as tightly with accessories. The side rails usually run above and sometimes behind the ear and are used to mount other devices. They can hold visors, ear protection/comms devices, flashlights, cameras, or anything else you desire. Just as with the rails on rifles, not all helmets use the same standards for the side rails; there’s an entire industry of people selling adaptors to translate between all the different rail standards. If you go for rails, make sure your accessories fit your rails.

The primary reason you might want side rails for a protest situation would be to mount noise-gated earmuffs. These headphones muffle loud sounds (such as gunshots, flash-bangs, LRADs, fireworks, and liberals with megaphones) but amplify quiet sounds.

Still, most helmets (not just ATE helmets) are designed to accommodate earmuffs like those underneath the helmet—which is less comfortable, but can be substantially cheaper.

If you wear anything heavy on the front of a tactical helmet, such as night vision goggles, you might need to wear something as a counterweight on the back. Soldiers sometimes store extra batteries there for this purpose.

Padding

The strongest shell in the world won’t protect your head from blunt impact without good padding. Many helmets, including some military-issue helmets, come with inadequate padding. Padding serves two purposes: impact resistance and establishing a tight yet comfortable fit. Both are important. To our knowledge, there is no single foam that provides both. Good pads are multilayered.

Pads are generally foam encased in fabric. Sometimes there is plastic between the fabric and the foam to keep sweat from soaking the pads—this is likely an important feature for chemical weapon exposure as well. Some pads incorporate both types of foam (impact and comfort) in multiple layers within a single pad, while other padding systems use separate pads, which makes the helmet more customizable but also demands more work. In a multiple-layer pad system, it’s important to use both layers everywhere there is foam.

Pads are largely interchangeable between all types of tactical helmets, as all use hook-and-loop attachments and are designed to be customized by the wearer to fit their unique head shape.

Good pads can be found reasonably cheap (approximately $40). Any reputable manufacturer should be proud to announce their impact resistance certifications.

Surplus

You can purchase surplus helmets on ebay.com or via a variety of surplus sites. A used helmet is better than no helmet, but the ballistic fibers of helmets break down from wear and tear as well as exposure to sunlight, and you have no way to ascertain where the helmet has been. Still, surplus helmets are substantially cheaper. Some models in some sizes can be found for as little as $50, although prices closer to $200 are the norm.

Chinese Imports

Unfortunately, forums that discuss the efficacy of various ballistic helmets tend to be dominated by US nationalists and gear snobs, which makes it hard to identify honest reviews of cheap equipment, especially foreign-made options. Yet the cheapest source for new, ballistic-rated helmets (especially helmets with all the bells and whistles) is China. Many manufacturers claim that they offer US quality at China prices, and we’ve found that “cheap” Chinese “knockoffs” often perform similarly to American models. We don’t currently have the resources to test these claims about Chinese ballistic helmets.

It’s likely that helmets that are ballistically rated will stop handgun rounds, as they claim. The primary argument we’ve seen online is about whether the shell will deform upon impact enough to injure or kill the person wearing the helmet. We haven’t been able to reliably source that information yet. In any case, it’s never a good idea to get shot in the head with live ammunition. Even if the bullet does not penetrate and the shell doesn’t deform, the blunt force alone can be enough to injure or kill.

At least one predominant ballistic helmet manufacturer, Hard-Headed Veterans, has their helmets manufactured in China.

“My friend lost an eye when he was in high school. A cop shot him with a rubber bullet. A couple years later, we were participating in a new round of protests against police violence, and people were getting seriously injured at every demonstration. We discussed it and concluded that, sure, maybe the police would target us more if we protected ourselves as individuals, but if we all protect ourselves, we would all be better off. My friend brought a shopping cart full of helmets to the next demonstration and made a speech about how important it was for everyone to wear one.”

“Since then, every couple demonstrations, someone brings a bunch of helmets to give out—all different sizes, to provide for everyone, since, for instance, I have to wear a child’s helmet for it to fit right. That helped to normalize wearing them.”

Doxcare : Prevention and Aftercare for Those Targeted by Doxxing and Political Harassment

2020-08-26T18:02:08Z

This step-by-step guide explains how to protect yourself from online stalkers, why it is important, and what to do if you are targeted for “doxxing”—the publishing of your private information. In a era of universal surveillance, when livestreamers broadcast every major demonstration while fascists, FBI agents, and police officers comb through social media posts to gather intelligence with which to harass activists, there has never been a better time to take steps to secure your privacy. Here’s how.

What is Doxxing?
Why It’s Important to Protect Yourself
How to Maintain Separate Spheres of Online Activity
Steps You Can Take
What to Do If You Have Been Doxxed
Additional Resources

Introduction: One Person’s Story

I have been active in my community for years. Not long ago, far-right trolls found social media accounts of my friends, family, and workplace. They stalked me and used the photos they found of me and my family members to assemble timelines of my life and to map my social networks. Because of my anti-racist beliefs, they used the information they gathered to threaten me, my family, and my friends. In every harassing email and social media comment, they characterize the projects I participate in as “terrorist groups,” describing me as a “leader” and member of an imaginary “shadowy mob of violent leftists” that they want to “do something serious about.” Whether these conclusions are just shoddy investigative work or intentionally dishonest misrepresentations, their behavior should be concerning to anyone who believes in standing up against oppression.

I deactivated my social media when I learned that this was underway—not because I am ashamed of being associated with the struggle for a freer world, but because I want to protect my friends and social networks. Anyone who knows me knows it is no secret that I oppose all forms of bigotry and oppression. They did not target me specifically for anything in particular I have done, but because they are opposed to all anti-racist, feminist, and queer activism and they think that they can isolate and intimidate us one by one. This is why we need to stand by each other.

I want you to know about this in case you ever find yourself in the same situation. You are not alone. I hope this encourages you to think seriously about your personal online security and the security of your family members and friends.

Robert Bowers, the Pittsburgh synagogue shooter, publicly chatted with alt-right trolls who doxxed anti-racists. The stalking campaign against me shows that they are willing to manufacture falsehoods to put people in those crosshairs. The only way to protect ourselves is to keep showing up for each other. We must not let them intimidate us.

Stay safe.

What Is Doxxing?

Doxxing means publishing a person’s private information with the intention of exposing and intimidating them. This can result in physical, emotional, and economic harm to the target. It is intended to dissuade the target from action and to shame them for their ideas and values. It is important to take security seriously before you are doxxed—before you even have reason to fear that you could be doxxed. Often a doxxer will wait until they have gathered a lot of information before releasing it. It is possible that you are already being stalked and will not find out until it is too late.

Whether you are a well-known public activist or hardly involved at all, you should protect your social networks and other spheres of your life—even if you don’t think you are doing anything that would warrant attention. Maintaining good practices protects your friends, family, and community. It is common for people to be included in right-wing conspiracy theories about “Antifa members” solely because they are queer or trans, “look like a leftist,” play in bands, attend an event, or hang out in radical spaces. The information does not have to be correct or justified for someone to target you. All a harasser needs is one piece of information to begin to seek more details online.

Being aware of what information trails you leave online can protect you from law enforcement as well as stalkers. Now that state-imposed surveillance is increasingly sophisticated and livestreaming has become normal at protests, just wearing a mask is often not enough. In June 2020 in Philadelphia, investigators identified a woman starting with nothing more than a blurry photo of her. They followed a trail of breadcrumbs including an Etsy purchase, twitter accounts, and her professional work page. Customs and Border Protection have started to trawl public social media. Securing your online presence can make you feel more secure taking action offline.

These days, there are cameras everywhere.

An Ounce of Prevention Is Worth a Pound of Cure

There’s no better time to start than now. After you have been doxxed, you may not be able to eliminate the information that is out there even if you try to get it taken down.

There are many different ways to approach this. Obviously, the best way to ensure that no one can find any information about you is to have nothing available—but some people can’t eliminate their online presence, whether because of work, family, or other responsibilities. In some cases, there are strategic reasons to maintain some sort of online persona; for example, having a longstanding, believable but innocuous social media account may be helpful for non-citizens crossing the US border. Thankfully, there are ways to firewall distinct spheres of your life, curate a public profile if you need one, and adopt practices that can help you and your friends to feel empowered to continue taking action in your community. This process can be tedious. It will take time and energy. I recommend doing it together with friends, roommates, or family members to help through some of the difficult or boring aspects.

Maintaining Separate Spheres

If you cannot completely delete yourself from the internet, you can still preserve relative privacy by maintaining distinct spheres¹ of online activity and cleaning up forgotten or infrequently used accounts.

You likely have more than one online presence. This could include social networks, message boards, job sites, email accounts—anything you need to log into. Often in doxxing, information is triangulated from many different sources. One way to reduce the amount of information available to doxxers is to partition these spheres so they are not connected to each other. This is a highly individualized process; take some time to consider the following questions and map out your own online spheres.

Do you spend your time on r/politics or the wall of a Facebook acquaintance debating? Do you frequently like or repost statuses from radical Instagram or Twitter accounts? Do you have images or personal information on job boards? Do you buy things on Etsy or eBay? Do any of your friends post pictures of you on their Instagram accounts? Do you have to promote yourself online for the line of work you are in? Do you connect with your co-workers, family members, and activist friends using the same account? Do you use parts of your real name or birthday for usernames or emails?

Each of these may not be a problem in and of itself, but together they can create links between different spheres of your life.

Ask yourself:

How separate are each of these accounts/identities?
What is public? What is private?
What does public and private mean in the context of each site?
What can be found by searching your legal name?
Do you use the same username or email for multiple accounts? Do these cross over into distinct spheres of your life?Take a moment to think about the way in which all of these spheres overlap offline.
Does your job allow you to be open about your politics?
How public is your activism? Do you speak to reporters? Do you work at an infoshop?
Do you filter some or all of your social media content from relatives?
Are there any references to illegal or controversial activities in a given profile?

Don’t forget metadata! In this case, Gustave Courbet’s face is erased, but his signature is clearly visible on the canvas.

Here are a few examples of how your online presence can overlap across different sites:

Relatives

How open is the relationship between you and your blood/legal relatives? If a stranger had information on just one person in this network, what could they discover about the others?

Politics

Do you discuss or post about your political beliefs online? If so, on which platforms?

Friends and Community

If you have social media, who are your friends? Your followers? In what ways do your online communities reflect your IRL communities?

Hobbies

What hobbies do you have? Do you have friends and community through them? Are you a part of any internet communities dedicated to those hobbies?

Legal

Who are you on paper? What names, phone numbers, and addresses are you tied to? Do any of your accounts include this information? Do any other sites (probably without your permission)?

Career

Does your job involve an online presence, website, or social media account? Would there be a problem if your politics overlapped with your career? Or is your career in some way tied to your political identity?

Take time to consider where you overlap, what your online goals are, and where you can separate these spheres.

Tactics

Let’s talk about how to discover what information is available about you, how to identify and eliminate trails, and what online resources exist to remove them.

Begin with what is publicly available. Google yourself and make a list of all of your social media accounts. Delete old accounts for things you no longer use. This is also a good time to download a password manager like 1Password or LastPass to assist you in managing unique usernames, emails, and passwords.

Delete off Snoop Sites/Data Brokers

Find out what information people can find out about you simply using a search engine. Search for yourself on DuckDuckGo and Google. Try doing this search in incognito mode. Try different versions of your name, with and with out your middle name and in quotation marks. You could set Google Alerts to send you emails when your name is published on the internet. This will give you a sense of how much data about you is available online to people who are not in your network.

After this initial search, have a look at all of the data broker sites that profit on trading in personal data. I also encourage you to remove your closest family members at the same time. This process can be arduous; these sites try to make it as difficult as possible to delete information about yourself. There are some things you can’t remove yourself from—for example, if you recently registered to vote and still live at that address. (This is another reason some people choose not to vote.)

The most trafficked host sites include: Been-verified, CheckPeople, Instant Checkmate, Intelius, PeekYou, PeopleFinders, PeopleSmart, Pipl, PrivateEye, PublicRecords360, Radaris, Spokeo, USA People Search, TruthFinder.com, Nuwber, and FamilyTreeNow. I recommend starting by searching yourself on OneRep using the free version of their service—it will show you what sites have your information. Then use that information on this website, which has a guide for opting out of virtually every data broker. If you have more money than time, you can pay OneRep or Just Delete Me to have your information removed, but I usually only recommend this service if you have already been doxxed.

I recommend starting with these by searching each one on this website, which has a guide for opting out of virtually every data broker. If you have more money than time, you can pay for a service called Just Delete Me to have your information removed, but I usually only recommend this service if you have already been doxxed.

Delete Old Accounts

When you search yourself in a online search engine, you may also find old accounts. It can be good to do a reverse search using all of the old user names and screen names you can remember. Accounts you have not used in a long time can make you vulnerable because if they are using an older password, they can try that account’s technical support to get more data about you that they can try to use for other accounts. Download any material of sentimental value to you and permanently close all the accounts you no longer use. These can be full of clues about your life.

First, go to this website, which searches over hundreds of platforms for specific usernames, and search all the possible usernames and emails you have used. This will tell you what platforms have accounts using that handle.

Second, go here and type in the website domain. This website archives a huge array of existing websites, categorizes how easy or difficult they make it to delete an account, and provides the link to the “delete profile” page for each respective site.

Haveibeenpwned.com will help you find out if there are any data breaches involving any accounts you hold. If there are, take immediate action to change passwords.

Change Usernames, Email Addresses, and Passwords

The easiest way for someone to find more information about you is to search your name, aliases, and usernames. To keep your spheres of internet activity separate, always use a new username when you create an account. If you have a professional website for work and must use you legal name, make sure the email you use for that account is used solely for that purpose. You may have to have a handful of email accounts and usernames. I have one for all of my medical and governmental accounts, one for my online shopping, one for my political life, and one for my social media, another for dating sites, and so on. I use aliases and false information for all the websites that represent me or display photos of me.

A password manager is a great help for this, as it will store logins for all of your accounts. I recommend LastPass, which you can download for your phone and web browser. It might be tempting to leave yourself permanently signed in, but always make sure to sign out when you are done using it. First, so you don’t forget the master password—and also to ensure that even if someone manages to gain access to your phone or computer, they can’t access all your personal data. Take this time to create new emails and change usernames for all of the accounts you aren’t going to delete. You can easily create new emails using Protonmail. Both 1Password and LastPass can help generate random string passwords, which are the most secure.

Curate What Is Available and Change Your Privacy Settings

Once you have eliminated all your loose ends, take a look at what you chose to retain and what can be found there. If you keep any social media accounts, go through your profile and note what people can find out about you. You can choose from a range of strategies regarding how to approach this, depending on how cautious you want to be and how certain are that it is possible to keep your different spheres of internet activity distinct.

Some of your options include:

Deleting all photos of yourself, your pets, your car, your mailbox, tattoos, and anything else that includes unnecessary identifying information—especially your public profile picture.
Eliminating or falsifying any personal details in your profile—give an inaccurate birthday or no birthday at all, choose random answers for your hometown, schools you have attended, and other information.
Deleting questionable followers and friends. If you change all of your social media settings to private and you feel confident about your followers list, there may be less reason to hide your face. I still recommend keeping details about your location and intimate personal life offline. Remember, you are only as safe as the most open person in your life. If you choose to be more public, keep your friends and family separate, do not post pictures of them or their personal information without their informed consent, and remember that social connections are visible through social networking and data collection websites.

The Coach from Crash Override Network is a helpful step-by-step guide that links you directly to the privacy settings page for many commonly used social networks. Click “Let’s Get Started” and “Strengthen the security of my online accounts so people can’t break into them as easily,” and follow their guides for all the top social media companies. This guide can also help with other aspects of online security, so after you’ve done that, I recommend finishing the Coach helper and checking out what other resources they offer.

When you think you are done, have a friend try to create a profile based on what information they can find about you while pretending to be a “doxxer” to see if anything you didn’t think of slipped through the cracks. It may be important to periodically check in on what can be found by searching your name every few months.

Conduct a “pre-mortem”: if something goes wrong, how will it happen? What are your vulnerabilities?

If You Have Been Doxxed

We do not recommend approaching the police when you are doxxed (or ever). The police may use the information you give them about the harassers, but they will also use the information they get about you and other individuals and groups you may have been publicly associated with. Once that is on file, it’s permanently in their hands, and there’s no guarantee they won’t use it to target you or others with state repression.

If you chose to involve the police, please be transparent and do not ask any radical groups to support you. Be sure to inform any groups that you are connected with of your decision. Usually, the police will do nothing or make the situation much worse. The idea of thiis guide is to provide you with alternatives based in community support and empowerment.

Should I Go Public?

Short answer: Do not immediately react publicly. Take time to secure yourself and alert your networks privately before reacting publicly.

Your first impulse may be to alert as many people as you can immediately with a public announcement or to shut everything down. Going public in this way can provide you with immediate support if you have a sympathetic audience, but it carries the risk of increased aggression from harassers. There are good arguments for being cautious with information at the beginning. The most important thing to do first is to take steps to protect yourself and your networks against further harm.

Immediate announcements can complicate your security efforts. Whether or not the information posted about you is accurate, no one is likely to use it to cause you any serious harm without first confirming at least some of it. Posting on a social media account confirming your doxx immediately confirms that the information about you is accurate; it also indicates that you have seen where it was posted and suggests that you are terrified. This furthers the goals of your harassers. They want to intimidate and isolate you. Do not confirm or deny any of the information they have dug up about you, regardless of whether it is false or embarrassing. They are seeking a reaction. If you let them know that what they have posted is incorrect, they may conclude that they are on the right track and they just need to keep digging. Sometimes, one of the most effective initial public responses is no response at all—don’t make any major changes to your posting habits or show any fear. This can send the message that your doxxer missed the mark, and that the attack was a failure.

After you have had time to process your feelings and secure your position, it may be strategic to go public and perhaps to band together with other people who are in a similar situation. You may be able to leverage the public outrage over white supremacists to create a campaign to dissuade further doxxing—for example, make a funding drive with pledges to give money for every harassing email you or others in your community receive! Since your harassers want to isolate you, public support like this may dissuade further intimidation. Try to be creative, resilient, and strategic. Be careful not to endanger anyone else in this process.

When making public statements, if you posture or brag about your abilities, your ability to employ violence, weapons with which you can defend yourself, or overstate your ferociousness, you may bite off more than you can chew. It is generally not a good idea to misrepresent yourself. Talking directly or indirectly to the harassers does not usually improve matters. I recommend making a positive statement asserting your ethics and beliefs, describing how your identity or your ideals have made you a target but maintaining that while these campaigns of harassment are intended to make you cower, you will not do so, because you have no reason to hide your politics. Avoid talking about specific actions or groups, whether or not you are involved with them.

Immediately after Being Doxxed

Don’t panic. Call a close friend to come over and help.
Create an incident log and keep records for both online and offline provocations. This is crucial to identifying the patterns of the attacks. It can be useful to compare these with other organizers in order to identify larger patterns so as to identify your opponents and their organizations.
Alert your friends, family, and sensitive political networks privately. Task a few friends that you trust with your personal information to help report social media and blog posts that doxx you, identifying them as harassment. Do so repeatedly. Some platforms lack policies that will protect you, even if these posts include accurate personal information, even if they put you in danger. Sometimes, doxxers will use your photos and information to make imposter accounts. It is usually easier to report these as fakes; try to do so quickly in order to prevent them from obtaining more information from your networks by posing as you. You, your family, and your employer may begin to receive threatening or harassing phone calls. Let them know what is happening as quickly as you can and instruct them not to engage with the harassers.
Shut down the flow of information. If you are reading this section and have not done the preventative care section, begin that process. Download a password manager like 1Password or LastPass and change all of your passwords immediately. You can also pay for a service called Delete Me that will take much of your online footprint off of snoop sites that harvest and display personal information. This service will take care of the information aggregated by the data brokers but not any social media, web accounts, news articles, or arrest records you may have, those will have to be handled on your own. It is important to balance the hemorrhage of information, while also not alerting your harassers that the dox was effective or on target. Try to shore up your social media accounts by making friends lists and information private in order to protect your networks until you are sure that they don’t offer vulnerable personal information to those willing to dig for it. How you react publicly is a very delicate situation and should be handled carefully throughout this process.
Set up a safety plan. Recruit friends and family to support you. Let them know what is going on; doxxing can be traumatic and you need to prioritize your mental and physical health so that you can work through these attacks. These conversations can be difficult—especially if they do not understand the nuances of this political moment, if it’s the first time they are hearing about a particular flavor of hate group, or if your relationships are strained due to political or personal differences. If you don’t feel up to it, you could ask a friend who has a good understanding of the situation to have the more difficult conversations for you.

If your home address is included in the doxx, find somewhere new you can stay if you are able. If you can’t leave your home, invite friends or a local security group to stay with you. Make a “go bag” with everything you will need if you have to pack up and go with little notice.

Evaluating Threats

If you don’t feel you are at any great risk, especially if your doxx is comprised of freely-available information or is just sent directly to you in an effort to unnerve you, you may feel fine dismissing it as a cheap intimidation tactic, blocking and reporting the harasser, and moving on. It may just be a matter of someone trying to get a rise out of you. However, if your doxx includes sensitive personal information, especially details that are not easy to obtain with simple detective work, or it appears in a public forum where people distribute information in hopes that others will act on it, you may want to take further precautions. This is especially true if you are already part of a targeted group or demographic.

When you learn that you have been doxxed, it’s important to establish which information could translate into credible threats. Often, doxxing is a precursor to more intrusive offline harassment, or is connected with threats to act on the information. This could be anything from threatening phone calls to family or workplaces to pointed death threats or a SWAT call.

It is sometimes difficult to determine what makes a threat “credible.” The most common tactic of ordinary doxxers is to send creepy or intimidating messages wherever they think they can reach you—social media, email, and to family members, and the like. They will often imply that they have more information than they really do; it’s common for them to say that they have provided this information to local law enforcement. Their goal is to intimidate you out of acting; often, whatever information they post publically is all that they have.

Your employer may receive calls demanding that they fire you. Thus far, it is rare that the targets of doxxing have been physically attacked, but it has happened, and it is possible that those who doxx you may make efforts to get your information into the hands of people who are not acting rationally or ethically. It is important to be cautious, but don’t panic or immerse yourself in anxiety.

Ask yourself:

Is the information accurate? Do they have your home, work, or family address? Do they know places you hang out? Who you are friends with?
Are you at risk of losing your job if they find out any of this information about you?
Do you know where the harassers live? Are they close to your physical community or just online trolls on a decentralized forum? Do you have reason to believe law enforcement will be interested in this information? Is the information being shared from local right-wing news sources, putting your face in front of a multitude of hostile strangers who now have your information?
Do they have embarrassing or private photos of you?
Is there information tying you to criminal activity that could get you arrested?

Solutions

Here are some things you can do in response to the dangers that can arise from being doxxed:

Create a self-defense plan, sign up for self-defense classes, contact a local community defense group.
Inform the people and groups that are named in the doxx—workplace, comrades, roommates, family.
Talk through your fears with people you trust.
Contact people who have been through this before for advice.
Arrange to have a lawyer available if you are worried that the information about you may be of interest to state actors.
Connect with a local anti-fascist group—they may be able to help identify the doxxers, if the latter are posting from fake account.

Having Conversations with Jobs and Family

This conversation can be very difficult, especially if your relationship with your family is strained. Have a cool-headed friend on call to help mediate or support you afterwards if necessary.

Think about how often you are willing to be vulnerable with your family and how much opportunity you will have in the future to follow up on the conversation. If it’s necessary to speak to family members but you feel like you will only get one chance, you can rehearse with a friend and prepare for their reactions. If you have an ongoing, conversational, trusting relationship, you can explain the situation to them in a series of smaller conversations, instead of one long sit-down. Evaluate how much time and how much attention you will have.

It has always helped me to frame this as “having a stalker” to people who I do not want to have a political conversation with—that may suffice to explain the severity of the situation and why you need privacy. But it can be worth the effort to be honest about what’s going on. This can help build stronger relationships and demystify this common occurrence, while encouraging others who may not have considered that it could happen to them or someone they know to take online privacy seriously. Most people will respond with fear and sympathy, though sometimes they will suggest or even insist that you call the police.

There is no one-size-fits-all approach. In my case, I had to compel my conservative mother to promise that she would not involve the police. I did so by appealing to my right to personal safety and my autonomy as the victim in the situation, asking her to respect my wishes and reminding her that the police can do very little to respond to targeted harassment like this—and all that calling them would do would be to open me up to their scrutiny, since I was being accused of criminal activity. Such conversations can be very difficult, but they are often necessary. Remind your friends and family not to react or respond to any phone calls, emails, or social media requests.

You can read a guide for how to discuss this with your employer here.

Things to remember when talking to your friends and family:

The harassers’ goal is to strain your relationships and ruin your life. Do not let them succeed at doing this. Tell your family that the best way to support you is to refuse to give in to their tactics.
Don’t throw anarchists and anti-fascists under the bus or claim that you are being targeted for no reason. This will not serve you if reasons emerge—and it will only delegitimize and further endanger those who can’t distance themselves from anarchist politics.
Do not let anyone blame you for what is happening, whether for the politics you adhere to or your perceived irresponsibility for getting yourself “into this situation.” Fighting for a better world involves challenges. If anything, it is to your credit that you have provoked this response by your efforts.
Suggest concrete ways you can help them understand the situation and protect themselves. Send them this article or a list of resources; offer to help them lock down their social media if they are not tech savvy.
Talk through what they can prepare for—harassing phone calls, emails, perhaps the neighbors will receive messages about you. Prepare them for worst-case scenario, but emphasize that it is unlikely.
Be clear about what you need from them.

If you are targeted for doxxing, communicate clearly with others about the potential consequences of appearing in photographs together.

Living Your Life, Moving Forward

Take a deep breath. Do not blame yourself. Emotionally this can be deeply disturbing and disruptive, adding a layer of acute stress to your life. There may be people out there who know what you look like and you will have no idea who they are. Sometimes information from doxxes becomes a permanent part of the internet if you name is googled; this can affect your job prospects. Sometimes nothing comes from the attention—but there is always the possibility that someone will try to pick up where the last doxxer left off.

Until you are sure that your time in the spotlight is over, you may have to alter some aspects of your life. Ask yourself, “What kind of life do I want to live? How can I manage my anxiety? Are there ways I can embrace being a more public figure? How can I feel secure in taking risks and being active again?” Especially as political tensions intensify, it may be important to take more extreme safety measures.

Here are some of the measures you might choose to employ:

Do not let anyone photograph you unless you trust them to handle the images the way you need them to. This can create some awkward conversations, especially at family events or in professional situations. Be aware of who appears in photos with you; inform them that appearing in a photo with you may attract unwanted attention. It can be helpful to rehearse the conversations you may need to have.
Install trail cameras at your house.
Keep logs of all harassment you experience.
If you move, do not update your address. Do not register to vote, as this makes your address publicly available. Try to hold on to your old driver’s license or ID and receive mail at a post office box. Consider when to use a real address and when to use a fake one or omit your address altogether when you sign up for things online or in person.
Use pseudonyms online and in person if need be. Don’t use the same one over and over.
When you go to actions, especially if you don’t mask up, be aware what groups, places, or individuals could be implicated by being seen or photographed in your vicinity.
Invest time in self-defense classes. This can include weapons training, but should include defensive and disarming training.
See a therapist to work through any trauma you have experienced.
Help your friends and family understand the importance of online security.
Have frank conversations with people outside your circles of political affinity. You may be surprised at how much empathy they express.

No matter how hard the people targeting you try make you feel isolated, you are not in this alone. As a community, we must protect each other and our online networks from harassment, imprisonment, political violence, and intimidation. Together, we can do this.

Citations

Smiling Face Collective
Anti-Doxxing Guide for activists facing attacks
We Are Being Doxxed: What to Do to Keep Each Other Safe
Guide to Using Signal Securely
Crash Override Resources: preventing doxxing and post-doxxing resources
Coach: Crash Override Automated Cybersecurity Helper
How to Avoid Being Tracked by Facebook
Communicating Securely Online and via Phones

Get a Password Manager like 1Password or LastPass: You can download it on your phone, computer, and as a browser extension.

Get a VPN: Riseup offers a free VPN, but the one from Nord is more user-friendly.

This podcast presents ideas to help you become digitally invisible, stay secure from cyber threats, and make you a better online investigator.

The concept of spheres was developed by the Smiling Faces Collective. ↩

Tools and Tactics in the Portland Protests : From Leaf Blowers and Umbrellas to Lasers, Balloons, and Power Tools

2020-08-03T21:32:06Z

Across over two months of protests, demonstrators in Portland have experimented with a variety of tactics and strategies. The clashes in Portland drew international attention starting in mid-June, when footage spread of federal agents in unmarked cars snatching demonstrators off the sidewalks and Donald Trump announced that federal agents would be using this model to intervene in other cities around the United States. After Trump’s announcement, the demonstrations in Portland grew exponentially, drawing thousands each night, until the governor of Oregon declared that federal agents would be withdrawn from the streets. In the following overview, participants in the Portland demonstrations describe some of the tools and tactics they have seen employed there.

Many of these tools work best in combination with each other. As usual, diversity of tactics is key—not just tolerance for different approaches, but thinking about how to combine all of them into a symbiotic whole. Soon, we aim to follow up this cursory review with a more thorough accounting of the full range of street tactics and equipment relevant to today’s demonstrators.

The Portland protests have also produced some new terminology, such as the expression “swoop,” which describes what happens when a reformist with a megaphone makes a power play to hijack a gathering organized by people who want to see the police abolished. As demonstrators expand their notions of what tactics are appropriate in this swiftly polarizing society, we hope they will also expand their visions of what is worth fighting for, adopting horizontal models of organization and learning how to identify and resist power plays.

Ready or not—the war is on.

Digital Security
Masking and Proper Attire
Riot Ribs, Food Carts, Infrastructure
Leaf Blowers
Umbrellas
Shields
Sports Equipment
Balloons and Bubbles
Lasers
Graffiti
Paint Bombs
Fireworks
Fire
Fence Toppling
De-Arresting
Crowd Movement
Disabling Cameras, Breaking Windows
Legal Support, Jail Support

https://twitter.com/dougbrown8/status/1288732683917332480

Digital Security

This thread spells out how to protect your privacy via proper phone safety at demonstrations—before, during, and after the protest. You can find a lot of important information about general security in protest situations here.

Masking and Proper Attire

Wearing a mask is responsible from a medical perspective—in the era of the pandemic—but also for security reasons, to protect your privacy. Nowadays you don’t just have to worry about the police filming and arresting you, but also about far-right internet trolls trying to identify you from video footage.

If demonstrators are dressed appropriately in black bloc fashion, it should be difficult to make out identifying particulars.

https://twitter.com/arunindy/status/1288717970416398336

Pay attention to detail. Cover your tattoos and other unique traits. Cover your whole face, not just your mouth. There should be no visible logos on your clothes, shoes, or backpack. Read this for more details.

Riot Ribs, Food Carts, Infrastructure

It is really good for morale to have a group of people providing food and other needed resources. Portland protesters have been deeply thankful that Riot Ribs have come out to feed everyone free food. This enables people to stay longer and helps them to feel that it is worth the effort and risk to support the movement that nourishes them.

You can read about Riot Ribs here.

Feds and cops know how important these mutual aid efforts are and intentionally target them in hopes of breaking the will of the demonstrators:

https://twitter.com/griffinmalone6/status/1288757440729628673

Here you can “before” and “after” shots of the infrastructure one night that federal mercenaries attacked it:

https://twitter.com/bitchwitch20/status/1287826105496346624

Unfortunately, uniformed officers are not the only danger threatening community infrastructure. In late July, Riot Ribs experienced a coup involving physical violence and intimidation. Wherever money is involved in activism, there is great risk of infighting unless the goals, structures, and expectations have been set very precisely in advance. The original Riot Ribs folks have left town, apparently taking the concept of Riot Ribs on the road to other cities as Revolution Ribs. Someone should write in detail about the rise, fall, and rebirth of Riot Ribs.

Leaf Blowers

Leaf blowers can dispel tear gas or smoke.

Tear “gas” is actually a fine particulate matter—imagine a bag of flour exploding, but much finer and lighter. When this particulate lands on you, it stays there and can be re-activated later, especially by water or sweat. For this reason, demonstrators have used leaf blowers to blow tear gas off of people after exposure—it is the same concept as taking a shower at the beach to get the last of the sand off your body.

Be careful not to blow tear gas in a direction where it could affect other people.

A single leaf blower can serve to blow gas from a single canister away from people until others can extinguish it, as demonstrated in this classic video from Hong Kong:

https://twitter.com/demosisto/status/1188518932031762432

But for best results, use several leaf blowers together:

https://twitter.com/hungrybowtie/status/1288715582112591872

When you’re choosing a leaf blower, make sure it has a good fan and a wireless power source.

Leaf blowers work well in combination with umbrellas and shields. While the shields protect demonstrators against impact munitions, the leaf blowers keep the gas moving away from protesters until someone can run up and extinguish the canister or throw it back at the assaulters who shot it. Teamwork!

You can see an example of this approach at the beginning of this video:

https://twitter.com/hungrybowtie/status/1289649707048869891

This article traces the origins of the leaf blower as a tool of struggle, from Hong Kong to the debut of the “dad bloc” in Portland.

In some cases during the clashes in Portland, demonstrators with leaf blowers and other tools were able to keep the tear gas that federal mercenaries deployed entirely within the fence surrounding the so-called Justice Center:

https://twitter.com/griffinmalone6/status/1287301017558687746

A few people in Portland have employed other less effective tools—such as box fans—for the same purpose:

https://twitter.com/iwriteok/status/1287315866963460096

Not wishing to be outdone, federal mercenaries in Portland used a fogger to spray demonstrators with poison:

https://twitter.com/dougbrown8/status/1288767229476012032

Umbrellas

Umbrellas can serve several functions at once. An umbrella can block a stream of pepper spray. A full line of umbrellas at the front of a demonstration can block the view of unwanted cameras and police spotters stationed on rooftops—for example, concealing efforts to attack the joints of the fence, or making it safer to change clothes or employ other tactics. While not a reliable substitute for a shield, an umbrella can also aid in deflecting police bullets, green and blue powder marker rounds, and the laser spotters used by police to identify troublemakers.

Umbrellas in action together.

On January 20, 2017, during the fierce resistance to the inauguration of Donald Trump, a single umbrella played a crucial role in enabling a large number of demonstrators in the black bloc to break out of a police kettle and escape arrest. Previously seen in demonstrations in Hong Kong, the umbrella has become an anti-fascist symbol of sorts.

In Portland, people with umbrellas have worked shoulder to shoulder with those carrying shields, creating a phalanx that can hold a line in a street, offering cover and protection to those behind them. In at least one case, demonstrators have forced federal mercenaries to retreat back into their courthouse by slowly advancing in a line like this.

Umbrellas, shields, and leaf blowers together, at the toppled fence:

https://twitter.com/1misanthrophile/status/1287303576214106114

https://twitter.com/1misanthrophile/status/1287304370913124352

For their part, police haven’t hesitated to randomly steal demonstrators’ umbrellas.

Shields

So far, in Portland, shields have mostly been used in defense against attacks from a distance—such as impact munitions, tear gas grenades, and the like—rather than against batons or police charges.

Different shield designs are better for different situations. Like umbrellas and leaf blowers, shields can do things in large numbers that they cannot do alone. If you want to form a shield wall, ideally your shield should be big enough to cover your body. But the bigger your shield is, the heavier, bulkier, and more difficult to transport it will be. Smaller shields can be lighter and easier to sneak into a protest area. Many people have been carrying smaller shields with them while playing other roles besides maintaining the shield wall. Having even just a little bit of protection has saved people from serious injury and provided the confidence to hold territory they might not otherwise have been able to.

If you don’t have anything else on hand, a skateboard can serve as a small, mobile shield.

A common Portland shield design involves cutting a plastic barrel vertically into three or four curved rectangles, leaving the circles from the top and bottom of the barrel for making smaller shields.

https://twitter.com/ghostmobpdx/status/1289684460485500929

On the other hand, to form a shield wall, it is best to be able to line up shields so that they overlap slightly, as even slight breaks in the wall can present a vulnerability. Consequently, plywood may be preferable to barrels for that particular application.

Some in Portland have experimented with using lubricant on the edges of shields to make it more difficult for police to grab them during charges.

Make sure you’re using an effective technique when taking blows. If you are using a tall shield, hold it very tightly against your body where the center of your chest is; that makes you harder to move, preventing your adversary from pushing you around by your shield and ensuring that even if your shield moves, it still covers your body.

A shield wall in Oakland in solidarity with demonstrators in Portland:

https://twitter.com/sarahbellelin/status/1287226244833202177

Sports Equipment

You can use sporting equipment to catch tear gas and throw it back. Just as you would when using a leaf blower, make sure you’re communicating well with other demonstrators and have a well-thought-out plan regarding what you are going to do with the canisters.

Some of the most effective tools for this purpose include lacrosse sticks, wiffle ball scoopers, and kitchen mitts—anything that enables you to engage with the canisters without touching them directly.

Demonstrators have used hockey sticks to hit the canisters back, too. Some people have been upgrading their umbrellas—for example, duct-taping an umbrella upside down on a lacrosse stick or hockey stick handle. The user can flip the tool around and use the side that makes the most sense in a given situation:

https://twitter.com/pdxcarmedic/status/1288643538347933696

Although there are many videos on the internet of people attempting to cover tear gas canisters with traffic cones and the like, it is a much better idea to extinguish them in containers of water. This twitter thread shows how to extinguish tear gas canisters:

https://twitter.com/crimethinc/status/1265808184519864320

Balloons and Bubbles

Demonstrators have used balloons to show which way the wind is blowing—in order to know which way tear gas will blow—and identify a rallying point on the ground.

https://twitter.com/proudbulba/status/1287291571646259200

They have also employed bubbles to mock the force of the police:

https://twitter.com/mrolmos/status/1287306738106949633

Lasers

In Portland, demonstrators have used lasers to disorient police and federal agents; they can also disable security cameras. It’s worth noting that pointing a laser at someone’s face is expressly illegal in Oregon and can draw a more aggressive response from police than defensive tools such as gas masks, shields, and leaf blowers. Those who have employed lasers by themselves have been targeted for arrest or shot with pepper balls and rubber bullets, as it is easy to trace the source of the laser unless the person directing it moves around rapidly between applications.

Someone directing a laser at a mercenary who is discharging a chemical weapon at demonstrators.

Almost all the lasers seen in Portland during the last weekend in July were the cheaper green ones, the 303’s (~50 mW), which can be deployed en masse to provide cover and irritate police. But the more powerful blue ones (~1w to 4w) are more effective against police, helicopters, and drones. They cost roughly $45 to $100.

Portlanders have also combined laser usage with high-powered flashlights on strobe function, in an effort to prevent the police from getting a good visual read on the crowd. Using bright lights to backlight a crowd might make it difficult for officers to pick out individuals at the front.

Police also use lasers to identify demonstrators for targeting.

Police employing lasers to target protesters.

https://twitter.com/mrolmos/status/1288016965148110849

Graffiti

This is so obvious that it almost doesn’t bear mentioning, but demonstrators have painted inspiring messages all over the area in which these clashes have taken place, underscoring the determination of the participants. Federal agents have intentionally refrained from cleaning graffiti off the courthouse in order to pose as helpless victims, when in fact their violent provocations have been the chief cause of the entire sequence of conflict. Nonetheless, although images of graffiti on federal property may serve to outrage far-right voters who already supported Trump and his goons, these images also convey the courageous defiance of those who are standing up to the authorities.

Paint Bombs

Demonstrators have used paint to reduce the vision of officers wearing visors or utilizing transparent shields. Officers need clear vision to be able to go on attacking people.

https://twitter.com/mathieulrolland/status/1287511718499766272

https://twitter.com/_whatriot/status/1288741205379956738

One of the classic models for making a paint bomb is to inflate a small balloon and dip it into wax over and over until the wax can hold shape by itself, then pop the balloon and fill the vessel with paint. Other containers, such as hollow Christmas tree ornaments, can serve the same function. You can find more information here.

Fireworks

The use of fireworks as projectiles to disorient or discourage police and federal agents has made for fantastic visual displays, both in the moment and in the footage that circulates afterwards. Ordinarily, it is irresponsible to aim fireworks at human beings, but the state mercenaries here are equipped with so much taxpayer-funded protective gear that this arguably does more to prevent them from harming others than it does to put them at risk.

On the other hand, many demonstrators are reporting that the booms of fireworks trigger their PTSD as a consequence of the ongoing trauma created by the booms of flash-bang grenades deployed by police. There are tradeoffs to everything.

Fire

Protesters in Portland have used fire to distract officers or to create an ambience of celebration. It’s important to be very conscious about safety issues when people are doing this; in some instances, trees or human beings have been exposed to flame. Some protesters have used mortar fireworks to set fires from a distance.

The question of whether fire is appropriate at these protests has been hotly contested between demonstrators who are oriented towards symbolic displays and those who are focused on direct confrontation. Self-appointed protest police have been quick to put out fires, talk people out of setting them, and hassle people who have started them.

All of the fires in question have been purely symbolic—in contrast to the burning of the Third Precinct in Minneapolis, nothing significant has been burned. Fire has been employed to burn flags, trash, the elk statue and its location after it was removed, and on one occasion a tiny pile of pamphlets or something like that in the police union (PPA) building. So all the debate is about symbolic fires.

Protestors scrambling to put out a small symbolic fire:

https://twitter.com/human42lm/status/1289855658565632001

Symbolic fires:

https://twitter.com/econbrkfst/status/1277384499953688576

Fence Toppling

Since the end of May, the police have installed several fences in Portland in attempts to control demonstrations, and demonstrators have repeatedly attempted to topple or relocate them. The earlier fences were mostly of the ordinary chainlink variety; protesters dubbed a series of such fences “The Sacred Fence.”

A word of caution about those previous fence relocations. Sometimes the fences that were torn down were left discarded in street intersections, creating a hazard of tripping or injury, especially when officers subsequently attacked with tear gas, forcing blinded demonstrators to retreat hastily. Be mindful about where you put a fence after you dismantle it.

In late July, the authorities built an industrial barrier around the federal courthouse with a sturdier frame, fencing, and smaller holes, anchoring it with concrete blocks at the back. On subsequent nights, the blocks were moved the front side; protesters and reporters frequently stood on these blocks, but federal mercenaries would target those who did so with considerable fire from impact munition weapons.

On July 25, some demonstrators equipped with power tools including a portable angle grinder managed to topple a section of the fence. The angle grinder was used effectively on the corner of the fence, but ran out of batteries before the job was finished. Lesson: charge up first and bring spare batteries.

https://twitter.com/alexmilantracy/status/1287283495266525184

The use of power tools was new. Umbrellas and shields were critical in protecting the operator from press cameras and impact munitions, while leaf blowers kept the smoke away.

“Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world,” as Archimedes said. Ultimately, the section of fence was pulled down toward the protestors side by a wide line of people, after earlier attempts to pull it apart at the place where the angle grinder had been employed, using a line of people pulling on ropes.

https://twitter.com/oregonian/status/1288502532705259521

Possible improvements could include finishing the cuts into the hinges or using a sledgehammer to bang through an unfinished cut. It could make sense to arrange to have two sets of ropes pulling on both the left and right sides of a seam where the cut was made: two deep lines instead of one wide line. As people have discovered in the process of toppling statues, it is important to use a strap or chain that has no elasticity, rather than a rope that has too much give.

Protesters have used sections of the chainlink fence as “shields,” but these do not block gas or impact munitions. They have also used them, at least symbolically, to “barricade” the courthouse doors closed from the outside. This never actually stopped federal agents, as no one ever attempted to block the doors at the back of the courthouse.

Symbolically blockading the front of the courthouse.

At one point, demonstrators filled parts of the fence with expanding foam to prevent federal agents from shooting through it:

https://twitter.com/iwriteok/status/1287276794710618113

https://twitter.com/hungrybowtie/status/1287280037863895043

Whether it was acceptable to shake or topple the fence became a point of contention between the protest police and front liners:

https://twitter.com/pdocumentarians/status/1289469522756345857

After the fence came down:

https://twitter.com/clypian/status/1287315331594117120

https://twitter.com/7im/status/1288534589011406848

De-Arresting

During the clashes in Portland, demonstrators have repeatedly freed people from police and federal mercenaries who were attempting to kidnap them. Successful de-arrests are usually only possible when demonstrators massively outnumber those attempting to kidnap them. To succeed, the action has to happen so fast that there isn’t time for police or federal reinforcements to respond.

De-arrests are risky and can result in much higher charges than the original arrest. It is not a tactic to employ lightly. However, if the balance of numbers and power are in the demonstrators’ favor, successful de-arrests can show state or federal mercenaries that it is not worth grappling with a group of protesters, convincing them to shift to dispersal tactics.

Crowd Movement

Generally speaking, as long as the police are not prepared to kettle and mass-arrest everyone, the surest way for individuals to avoid arrest when police are pressing into a crowd to split it up is to follow the largest part of the crowd. This is because—all other things being equal—the biggest crowd is usually the hardest for them to deal with. This insight scales up, since the best approach for crowds is to stay as large as they can.

We have seen this with the crowds in Portland, where people have learned to stick together in large groups when the police attack, moving slowly and calmly rather than running and not retreating more than necessary—one block is typically the most that the police in Portland will advance at a time. There are chants about this: “Stay together, stay tight; we do this every night,” reminding everyone that there is no reason to take exceptional risks to one’s personal safety if one can return the next night to accomplish the same action more safely with more friends.

There are other factors to bear in mind, of course. It’s better to be with a group that is aware of its surroundings, quick on its feet, and capable of defending itself than to be with a group that is sluggish, confused, and easily intimidated.

In Portland, we have repeatedly seen police employ a “bull rush” in which they charge at full clip while using some combination of tear gas, pepper spray, impact munitions, and batons on everyone in their path. If you are not part of a crowd big enough and equipped enough to prevent the police from injuring or picking off individuals, it’s important to be ready to run. Cops can’t sprint very far.

A bull rush on June 12:

https://twitter.com/mrolmos/status/1271715330188967938

A bull rush on June 27:

https://twitter.com/johnnthelefty/status/1276854263747014659

https://twitter.com/hungrybowtie/status/1277159562563317760

A bull rush on June 28:

https://twitter.com/rosecityantifa/status/1289956848158642177

A bull rush on July 18:

https://twitter.com/hungrybowtie/status/1284731897143160832

A bull rush on July 25:

https://twitter.com/donovanfarley/status/1287309238134423552

A bull rush on August 1:

https://twitter.com/pdocumentarians/status/1289792025580023808

Disabling Cameras, Breaking Windows

People have used paint and other tactics to prevent surveillance cameras from filming demonstrators. Some demonstrators have also broken windows—a tactic that can serve to draw the attention of the police away from what they were trying to do before. If you are engaged in any sort of activity like this, it is especially important to dress properly (see above). It can be worthwhile to dispose of all the clothes you were wearing after an incident. What’s more expensive—another run to the thrift store, or bail money, court fees, and a lawyer?

https://twitter.com/iwriteok/status/1286585525365768193

Legal Support, Jail Support

It has been very important to organize proper legal support in Portland with federal mercenaries arresting people every night. Even if you can’t go to the actions, you can help bail people out of jail or raise money to contribute to bail funds.

https://twitter.com/mrolmos/status/1286941911631056898

A movement that combines a wide range of the tactics described here—the way demonstrators have done in Portland—can hold space in the face of considerable state violence. Unfortunately, this may soon be necessary all around the United States.

Be like water—keep your mask tight—and destroy what destroys you.

For extra credit: cartwheels!

Blinding the Cyclops—Wrecking the Panopticon : Camera Hunting in the Metropolis

2020-07-14T20:18:53Z

“Big Brother is watching you.” Once a threat from a dystopian future, today this is a universal reality that we all participate in with our smartphones and Instagram accounts. Yet for years, a rebel undercurrent has pushed back against surveillance, seizing the prevalence of surveillance cameras as yet another vulnerability in the system of control. In the following narrative, an anonymous researcher wages a personal war against surveillance infrastructure, testing some of the same tactics that social movements have recently employed from Greece and Slovenia to Chile and Hong Kong.

This text, surely fictional, was submitted anonymously to our journal, Rolling Thunder, several years ago. Some of the technical details may be out of date.

Can lasers disable surveillance cameras? Yes, they can.

I, Suspect

Since cameras became mobile enough to take pictures of people without their consent, punching photographers has become the great American pastime. From celebrities hounded by paparazzi to civilians who resent news teams invading their privacy and demonstrators who don’t want to be profiled, everybody loves swinging on a person shoving a camera in their face.

But what about when the person shoving the camera in your face isn’t there—it’s just the camera and you? Every time I turn a corner and see a camera pointed at me, in my mind I can’t help but hear the word “Gotcha!” Even at our most innocent, it’s hard not to feel like a suspect. Indeed, to the security professional who sees the world through a surveillance camera, everyone is a suspect.

These thoughts had been running through my mind the day that I stumbled upon a Youtube video entitled “Camover 2013.” I watched Germans running all over their city, tearing down security cameras, smashing security cameras, painting security cameras. They said it was a new game and challenged others to join in. “I’m glad somebody’s doing that,” I thought to myself, and went to bed.

Camover.

Camera 1

Weeks later, I was out with a friend scouting spots for banner drops and generally exploring the less-traveled altitudes of Springfield. As we came to the edge of a roof overlooking the main strip of downtown, we saw that we were not alone. Also looking over the edge of the building was a security camera, wires leading into a hole in the wall to God-knows-where. My friend commented on the camera, but I shrugged it off and changed the subject, deciding that if I was going to come back for it, I should probably not let on.

Every Sunday, my friends gather to watch Itchy and Scratchy. I really couldn’t care less about the show, so when Sunday came, I said I had to clean my room, slipped out, and went back to my house. There I put on an old windbreaker that somebody had left there ages ago, black cotton gloves, a baseball cap, and some dark blue jeans. I grabbed a canvas shopping bag and put into it some wire cutters I’d taken from the supply closet at work earlier that week. I rode my bike to a spot a couple blocks from the target, parked it there, and approached on foot, hood up and hat pulled low to avoid other security cameras.

I climbed up the fire escape onto the air conditioner and finally to the roof. I crept up behind the camera, grabbed it with both hands, twisted it from its bracket, and snipped the wire with my clippers. Having never done this before, I wasn’t sure if some silent alarm was going off or if somebody watching a screen somewhere had just had their creep-fest interrupted, so I hastily shoved the camera and clippers in my bag and retreated to my bike.

When I got home, I was wired on adrenaline. I knew I was going to do this again next weekend and I knew exactly which camera it would be.

Greece.

Cameras 2 and 3

My job is right next door to a green yuppie cafe that has been cashing in on the local foods trend of the past few years. The owners are doing pretty well for themselves; the only thing holding them back from their Eco-topia is that they are located beside the Krusty Burger where a lot of Black youth hang out, so they’ve plastered the outside with security cameras. One of those cameras points straight at the spot where I take smoke breaks out back. Every day, it stares at me as I smoke and try not to stare back at it.

The only glitch in my plan was that this camera was with others that all essentially watched each other. I had to get to the roof, but the only way I could see to get up there was directly below the camera I wanted. I spent all week playing out scenarios in my head; by the time Itchy and Scratchy came on, I almost felt like I’d done this many times before. I excused myself, got on my bike, parked a block away, and proceeded on foot.

Before I got to the site, I hid behind a fence and tied a bandanna over my face. Even with the hat and hood, I’d felt a little uneasy the last time—the twisting and breaking of the camera bracket had happened so quickly that, thinking back, I couldn’t really be sure I hadn’t accidentally pointed it at myself before clipping the wires. What if the last thing a person reviewing the tape had seen was my stupid face? Probably that hadn’t happened, but the point was that any mistakes I made would be recorded.

Masked up, I approached quickly, moved a stack of chairs behind the café to the wall, and climbed past the camera. Once on the roof, I made a quick detour to another camera that pointed into the same alley, snipped the wire, and twisted it till the bracket broke, then repeated this process on the first camera. Then I climbed back down and, for some reason, put the chairs back where I’d found them.

I biked away, stowed the cameras off site, and changed clothes. Then I went to the bar across the street and waited to see if the cops came. I wanted to know if cameras were hooked up to alarms. None came.

Conspiracy of One

I was hooked. I spent each week plotting, mentally rehearsing, for Itchy and Scratchy time. Two notable mental shifts occurred at this point.

First, my interactions with security cameras changed. Before, if I rounded a corner to see the red circle of LEDs that features on the front of most modern cameras, I might have reflected on how it looked remarkably like Hal from 2001: A Space Odyssey and then walked on grumbling about industrial capitalism’s increasing encroachments on my privacy, feeling generally violated. Now, when I saw that camera, I immediately began evaluating the best way to remove it.

The second shift was that this changed how I spent my mental free time. It put other parts of the week in perspective. Anytime I was on a mindless task at work, my thoughts would move to that week’s target. This made the tasks that then required my full attention an annoyance. But on the other hand, things that I would previously have found irritating, like bad drivers, stupid customers, or breaking or losing possessions, could obtain no foothold in my thoughts. I had a mission.

Disaster Relief: Cameras 4, 5, and 6

Winter began, pushing me indoors. Like many parts of the country, we had an “extreme” winter. I looked out my window, listening to the radio imploring people to go home and not drive anywhere. I looked forward to the warmer weather returning so I could go out and play again. I watched videos of the Ukrainian uprising. People outside, fighting the police, using homemade catapults to hurl Molotov cocktails over the barricades. Barricades made of… snow. The video showed them packing burlap sacks full of snow and I realized the obvious. These people were fighting all day and night in the middle of Russian Winter. How comfortable I suddenly felt—too comfortable! I needed to push myself. It occurred to me: as the populace watched Netflix with their heat blasting, and police tended to car accidents and other weather-related 911 calls, anyone who would brave the elements would have full run of the town.

That evening, I put on all my sets of thermal underwear, my scarf, big gloves, and a large windbreaker over my winter jacket and headed out to test my hypothesis. The two cameras I wanted were not on a main street but in a heavily trafficked parking area behind some bars, normally populated and fairly exposed. They were on a window ledge—out of reach, but not terribly so. I parked my bike behind a restaurant, masked up, and took a milk crate I thought would allow me to reach the targets. Sure enough, the place was dead. I climbed on the milk crate and came up short. Fuck.

Disabling a surveillance camera in Greece.

My meticulous planning each week had let me avoid the stress of improvisation in compromised positions. There was a third, much higher camera for a different business, for which I had other plans at a later date. If somebody had watched the tape from that camera on that night, here is what he would have seen: A black marshmallow with a bandanna over its face approaches the pair of cameras, places a milk crate on the ground beneath them, pulls out a pair of wire cutters and reaches for the cameras, fails to reach them, hops down, and looks around frantically. Said black marshmallow then proceeds to run around to every restaurant and bar in the alley and eventually drags a wooden pallet from behind one of them, leans it against the wall, and climbs up to the cameras, snips the wires, and attempts to twist the first camera from its bracket. The camera remains firmly affixed to the window sill; the marshmallow places both feet on the wall below the camera and wrenches back and forth with full upper torso until the camera finally comes loose, sending the marshmallow flying backwards, nearly landing on its ass. The marshmallow gets up, frantically looks around, and proceeds to attempt the same maneuver on the other camera.

It’s hard to gauge time in moments like this, but I am quite certain that at this point it had taken a matter of minutes, in contrast to my previous actions which had certainly all been a matter of seconds. As I had both feet pressed against the wall and was pulling with both hands, my eyes fell on a small hand screw at the joint where the camera meets the bracket. Duh. Back to the view from the third camera: Marshmallow stops wrenching back and forth, puts feet back on wooden pallet, calmly unscrews camera, climbs down, returns wooden pallet, and walks away.

A few days later, an ice storm hit, paralyzing the city, and I was back out, this time on a highly-visible roof during what should have been rush hour—instead, it was a ghost town covered in a sheet of ice as far as the eye could see. And there I was, holding onto a satellite dish for balance, kicking a camera from above. I couldn’t wait till flood season.

Location, Location, Location

Beyond simply getting the easy ones first, figuring out which cameras to remove seemed to warrant a plan. I’d decided that I should avoid appearing on any camera during my little excursions, due to the nature of the crime. It was easy to determine the exact time it was committed by watching the video, and other camera owners might well be sympathetic and cooperate to help track who had been in the area around that time. Also, if at some point this behavior pattern was designated political—because a communiqué appeared, or as a result of astute police work—federal money would become available for an investigation. This greatly limited my range of motion and list of potential targets.

I was immediately reminded of one of the rules of guerrilla warfare: every action should give you the ability to do something you could not do before. It was with this in mind that I decided I would create “privacy corridors” in my town: paths one could take without appearing on camera.

Future Primitive

I walked through a different world. My solitary secret made me feel like a superhero, or a villain.

When I see cameras staring at me today, I still feel that initial anxiety. Studies have shown that humans behave very differently when they know they are being watched; they try harder to conform to social norms, not to stand out. They become anxious and irritable, yet ultimately they adapt emotionally, accepting the surveillance and anxiety as normal. I too have always behaved this way: eyes forward, keep walking, unconsciously weighing how my every movement might be interpreted. But now it’s different: after the initial moment of anxiety, I remember that I am undercover, plotting, watching back.

In an increasingly complex society, the space for individual deviation becomes smaller and smaller as more conformity is demanded of us. I don’t mean superficial forms of expression like dress style, musical taste, recreational drug use, or even religion and sexual preference—those are tolerated, so long as they are practiced in ways that don’t disrupt production, consumption, or social control. I mean rather that our freedom of movement, our freedom to express ourselves by acting upon the world, our very autonomy—these are greatly curtailed. Our minds adjust to these new limited sets of options: employment, charity, starvation; or buy, rent, be homeless; or be observed, hide away, comply and be ignored.

But sometimes our minds and bodies remember that there was once another set of options: self-defense, attack, destroy. And it was in these options that I found dignity. When I act for the cameras now, my smile is genuine, not forced. I know I will be back to destroy them.

A wave of attacks on traffic cameras in Maribor helped to set off a countrywide uprising in Slovenia in 2012.

Double Down: Cameras 7 and 8

I loved working alone. It felt safe, but it also felt strong, figuring out how to do things and executing plans that required serious judgment calls with real consequences without running them by anybody else, just trusting myself.

So I’d be hard pressed to tell you why I decided to bring a second person on. Perhaps I thought I needed a lookout for some of the more audacious actions I hoped to accomplish; perhaps I just needed to get out of my own head with the whole thing and get a little perspective. Either way, I decided to approach Bart. I trusted him, and he’d made some comments about wanting to act in a similar way. I had originally feigned disinterest, the way I always did when the subject of cameras came up.

He was excited about my invitation. For practice, I took him to an abandoned strip mall that still had its cameras intact and questionably operational. I wanted him to learn the motions outside of a stressful situation so that he could focus on our surroundings during missions, avoiding awkward situations like my last couple outings.

We hid in the bushes and masked up and then quickly approached from behind the first camera. Bart stepped in my hands and I pushed upward. He put his hands on the wall to stabilize himself. “Now use the clippers to cut the cord, and then just pull on the camera and see if it’ll break.”

“It won’t.”

“OK, perhaps there’s a hand screw at the joint which will just come undone?”

Silence. “Got it!” He hopped down. We did another and went home.

Bart and Lisa Hit the Streets: Camera 9

A few nights later I brought Bart out on a simple mission I’d been planning but had to keep putting off because the bar kept later hours than I did. Once I finally found a night they were closed, the task was a breeze. We kept our hoods up and hats low as we approached the building, then climbed the chain link fence against the back and onto the roof. We circled behind the camera, masked up, did one more “Anatomy of a Camera,” cut the wires, shoved it in my jacket pocket, climbed down, and exited the area before removing our gloves, and hoods.

We wandered through a back neighborhood route toward my house. “Wanna try one more? An experiment?” I asked.

“Yeah, sounds great.” The camera I wanted was at the entrance of a parking lot, face level, commanding a view of where cars came in but also of the sidewalk. It was covered by a glass dome to hide which direction it pointed.

I produced a hammer from my jacket pocket. “Let me run this plan by you: we circle around, mask up in the back corner of the lot, approach from behind, you keep your eyes peeled because traffic is pretty steady, I’ll strike the bulb with the hammer, it’ll break, I’ll try to rip out the camera, and then if that doesn’t work, I’ll just bash it a few times with the hammer. We’ll jog back across the street into the neighborhood. Any objections or modifications?”

“I’m in.”

Communicating what I wanted to do and putting it up for debate felt strange, emotionally. I felt like this was my project—and with so much at stake, was I ready to take another person’s input? I suppose if he’d said no or we couldn’t agree on one plan, I could have returned another night to do it solo. We followed each step of the plan, but when I swung the hammer it glanced off the dome. I swung again and it glanced off again. I stepped around to get a direct shot and hit the dome head-on with the hammer. It bounced back at me as if I’d struck rubber. We paused, shrugged, did the best we could to wipe off the scuffmarks advertising our failed attempt, and jogged away, unmasking behind a building.

Camover Lab

We discussed the possibilities as to how to deal with the dome. We ruled out fire because of the disproportionate penalties associated with arson in the United States. We also ruled out just painting the dome because that would only be temporary; we want the cameras fully destroyed. Contrary to some texts circulating on the issue that advocate paint, snipping wires, or even just gluing plastic bags over the lenses, I believe in maximum damage. If we damage a camera in a temporary way, it will be fixed quickly and we may have to return over and over. This is pattern behavior: it gives the enemy the chance to adapt, and that’s how you get caught.

While we were out one night, Bart updated me about his inquiries. “I did some research on the domes, and they advertise as vandal proof. There’s a promotional video where they run it over with a car and try to set it on fire. The screws all require proprietary bits to remove. But there is a tool for working with the material the dome is made out of. It’s long, slim, and sharp and available online so we could buy it anonymously with a Visa gift card… but I still wouldn’t know where to get it sent to.”

We decided to table the subject for the time being. Meanwhile, I’d been developing my own special tool and was excited to test it in the field. I’d been in Conglomo-Mart’s camping section when I’d stumbled across a small device called the “Commando Saw.” It was a few rough wires twisted together with cloth finger loops at either end. I shoved it down my pants, put fifty feet of para-cord in my pocket, and walked out.

When I got home, I cut two twelve-foot sections from the para-cord and tied them to the loops on each end of the “Commando Saw,” adding a heavy steel link at one end. I pictured myself throwing the link over a camera, adjusting it so the wire saw was directly on top, and then pulling the strings back and forth to saw through the hard plastic bracket.

I explained the tool to Bart and he got excited. “Perfect! I’ve been watching a spot that you mentioned to me last week, and foot traffic dies there shortly after the mall closes. The cameras are out of reach, but this new tool would be great.”

Greece.

Springfield Under Siege: Cameras 10, 11, 12 and 13

We approached the mall well after closing, but early enough that a show at the bar next door would drown out any suspicious noises we might make. We stood on either side of the first camera. I let out a little cord and threw the steel link over the camera. My angle was wrong; it bounced off the wall, but Bart caught it before it noisily hit the metal grate below us. “Good save! Can you be ready to do that again?”

We repeated that a couple times until I finally got the steel link over the camera. I let out a little more cord until the saw was on top of the metal bracket, then I changed the plan. “Let’s see what happens if we just pull.”

“OK. 1, 2, 3!” We both gave a hard tug and the wire saw broke in half, re-angling the camera upward in the process.

“Fuck.” I’d broken my new toy by using it wrong and had no backup plan. I thought for a moment. “Let’s see if the remaining cord is long enough to just throw over and pull it down, since the para-cord is stronger”. I had previously assumed that the brackets couldn’t possibly be flimsy enough to pull down with some thin, non-static cord—that’s why I’d developed the elaborate saw device.

I was wrong. The camera came away easily when we pulled. Bart grabbed the camera and ripped it free of the wires that still attached it to the building.

“Want to do the other or call it a night?” I asked.

“Let’s get it!” Now getting the hang of the cord with steel link, I easily tossed it over the second camera, which came down as easily as the first. Normally, I would have gone home at this point. Go out, hit a spot, go home, that was my trend; it was conservative but safe. But this is where I learned the true value of working with others: it’s fun and you push each other. While some tasks may seem like a one-person job, two people’s worth of courage and audacity may make them more likely to happen quickly. Instead of going home we went and did two more rooftop cameras and I fell asleep feeling amazing.

Greece, 2004.

Greece, 2007.

Think Global, Smash Local

We heard later through the grapevine that the employees at the mall had been gossiping and speculating about what had happened to the cameras. It occurred to me that every business where we’d destroyed cameras probably had a boss who was angry, possibly even feeling threatened, but also had employees that surely noticed that the cameras were gone and either didn’t care or thought it was funny. No doubt when the bosses called the police, they replied, “Yeah, we’ve had a string of these lately,” and so the rumors spread…

Irrational as it was, I sometimes felt bad for the people whose cameras we destroyed. Some were small business owners who probably imagined that whoever broke their camera might come back later to rob them or whatever. It’s important to remember that individual people needn’t act in malice to help build a totalitarian system; in fact, that’s almost never how such systems are built. If each camera is part of a larger system of cameras that effectively monitors us every time we leave our homes, does it matter who put each one there? Would any of those people resist if the footage were subpoenaed by the police state? Would it even take a subpoena, or would they just hand it over like good citizens? Does it even matter, since most CCTV is hooked up to the internet, and we know that the NSA and by extension every other government agency has access to nearly everything on the internet—so that these are, for all intents and purposes, NSA cameras? Each owner is just tending his little plot in a system of surveillance feudalism.

Using a car to pull down a traffic camera in Maribor, Slovenia in 2012.

Anonymity Loves Company: Cameras 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18

Any apprehensions I’d had about bringing in a second person were gone. Bart had hit the ground running, doing research, reconnaissance and—making me a little nervous—dropping five cameras on his own the same week we had done the other four.

“I would never say you shouldn’t do cameras on your own—but consider slowing down a bit, we want to be able to keep doing this. We’ve definitely got to go kind of hard if we want to make a dent at all, but leaving irregular periods of inactivity between jobs will greatly increase our chances of not getting caught. I don’t want to hold anybody back from smashing every camera in the world, but pace yourself so we can be in it for the long run.”

I also talked to him about my personal policy of not wandering around on a night I was going to attack cameras, so there would be no recordings of me in the area. “I know it seems a little overcautious for each individual act of misdemeanor vandalism, but if at some point they pick up the pattern and label it some sort of activism, federal investigation money will come pouring in and we won’t be sorry we played it safe.”

Hong Kong.

Unfinished Business: Cameras 19, 20, 21 and 22

Determined to keep working on the so-called vandal-proof cameras, I went to Lowe’s and took a hammer and the biggest chisel I could find.

We crouched and masked up behind a closed business across the street, double-checked our tools, and put our gloves on. What had looked ordinary in winter looked criminally absurd in the hot and humid summer night. We waited for a break in the sparse traffic of stragglers still making their way home from the closed bars. The only people out at that hour were drunks, taxis, cops, and criminals.

We sprinted across the street to the target. I put the chisel’s tip to the dome and struck the butt repeatedly with the hammer. Over and over I swung, at least a dozen times. The electrical box it was affixed to let out a loud low boom with every strike; deep pockmarks appeared in a cluster on the surface of the dome, but the chisel wouldn’t pass through to the camera itself.

“Cars!” Bart stage-whispered, and we lazily jogged a safe distance into the lot.

“Not gonna happen, time for plan B,” I said, pulling a can of flat black spray paint from the bag and jogging back toward the camera.

“All clear,” Bart said, looking up and down the street. I covered the dome with a thick coat of paint and sprayed around it as well, letting the paint drip so that any passer-by could tell from a distance that this node of the panopticon was disabled. We went and painted another dome camera across town.

“We’ll keep an eye on these, to see how long it takes to clean them and learn whether the process scrapes or fogs the dome. This may become a thing we just do for time-sensitive stuff like marches or whatever, but it can’t be a permanent fix.”

We were jacked up on adrenaline again and not ready to settle in, so we approached a restaurant that had two cameras pointing toward the sidewalks that were the boundaries of their so-called property. We were beginning to act together more naturally. We approached almost without discussion, I looked both ways down the street—“Clear!”—and we both jumped up, grabbed a camera, and twisted. The cameras came away in our hands and we ran off the way we’d come, into a residential neighborhood where we unmasked, stripped down to our yuppie attire, and walked off into the night.

Demonstrators destroying a surveillance camera in Maribor, Slovenia in 2012 while chanting “Gotovo je!”—”It’s over!”

Reconnaissance

When Lisa pointed out the two cameras outside of the mall, I couldn’t stop thinking about them. Every time I passed them, I looked not just to figure out how to take them down, but to see how bodies moved around the space. During what times was the area active? During what time was it dead?

One night, I had some extra time and decided I could spend a little time sitting outside the mall. I sat on a bench far away for most of the time, but I expected to have to get close to the camera at some point, to check the alleyway not visible from the bench, so I wore inconspicuous clothing and a bright yellow jacket. The bright yellow jacket was a trick I picked up from learning about the psychology of recognition—people remember only the most noticeable characteristics about you, like your bright-colored shirt or your tacky shoes, and then make the rest up. Later, I extended this trick by walking differently than normal during recon for the cameras I was going to remove myself.

I sat outside the mall and watched. For thirty minutes, no one walked even near the cameras. I changed spots and checked out the alleyway. No one. Weird. I sat a little longer on the bench and went home. In case the night I’d done recon had been an outlier, I returned the next night. It was Friday and the cameras were right by a bar, so if no one walked by this time, I could be sure it wasn’t a fluke. I arrived about an hour before the bars closed. Again, not one person passed. I watched for about twenty minutes, long enough to be sure the place was going to be an easy one. So easy. Fun as hell too.

Washington, DC.

When we received this text, it included the following note: “These actions and this text are dedicated to Jeremy Hammond.”

Click the image for a zine version of this text.

A classic sticker from our archive.

Protocols for Common Injuries from Police Weapons : For Street Medics and Medical Professionals Treating Demonstrators

2020-06-08T21:05:15Z

The following guidelines are intended to equip street medics and health professionals to respond to some of the common injuries inflicted by police violence. They are drawn from experience in the struggle against an airport that the French government tried—and failed—to build in Notre-Dame-des-Landes. It can be difficult to find solid information about how to treat such injuries based on real-life experience. Most mainstream health professionals have little experience treating injuries caused by police weapons; this guide shares the knowledge that medics gained in repeatedly responding to these injuries, in hopes of saving others the trouble of having to learn by trial and error. Being medically trained does not qualify you to be a street medic, as the Do No Harm Coalition elegantly states. Street medics gain from sharing information about what works and what doesn’t in a constantly evolving discussion. The red flags listed here can also help injured people identify when their symptoms are serious and when they should seek professional medical attention.

These guidelines are non-exhaustive; there are many things that are not included here. For instance, the police deployed thousands of tear gas canisters and flash-bang grenades on the ZAD during April and May 2018, but relatively little pepper spray. The focus here is on the protocols have been tested extensively. We prepared this translation in solidarity with the current uprising, sharing this information in hopes that it will be useful to street medics in the US.

What follows is not a do-it-yourself guide. Your local area or nearby large city likely has a street medic collective—find them! Medic collectives sometimes do trainings for new medics. Many of the practices detailed here require extensive knowledge and experience—and can really hurt someone if done wrong. Please don’t jeopardize the health of others by claiming experience you don’t have or trying to practice outside of your scope.

The title photograph is from Ujimaa Medics. Founded by Black women in Chicago, they train communities for urban emergency first response.

While the best way to learn how to be a street medic is from street medics themselves, here are some sources for more information about the history and practice of street medicine—from its inception as a self-defense tool during the Civil Rights Movement to its use in the recent uprising in response to the deaths of Black people at the hands of a system of brutal, racist policing.

Always prioritize sources that are up to date and use evidence-based practice.

A Brief History of Modern Street Medics
Street Medics: Keeping Our Movements Healthy and Safe
Where to find your local medic collective—This is not always up to date, but offers a good starting point.
Rosehip Medics, a long-running medic collective, offer a variety of information on their website—from “Health and Safety in an Insurrection and Pandemic” to free brochures about alternatives to Emergency Medical Services.
Paper Revolution explains some ways to become a street medic and offers links to more detailed practical information, such as their Street Medic Guide or the Riot Medicine Guide.

A recent video training by a coalition of medics about how to stay safe and healthy in the streets.

The Origins of These Protocols

The following protocols were written by the ZAD healers group, an interdisciplinary team of nurses, doctors, street medics, herbalists, psychologists, naturopaths, and energy workers who were part of a larger network of healthcare workers involved in the struggle to defend the ZAD (Zone à Défendre, “Zone to Defend”) at Notre-Dame-des-Landes.

In their words:

During the evictions of autumn 2012, a number of healthcare professionals came to support the medics on the ground. Over the years, we have worked together to prepare logistical and communications strategies, and to have the materials necessary in the case of eviction attempts or other police intervention. We also have regular discussions, and regular reciprocal trainings.

As soon as we turn our dissent into concrete action, or block the smooth functioning of the corporate economy, repression quickly follows. Whether for the duration of a protest or because we live in the wrong neighborhood or because of the color of our skin, when we are labeled “undesirable” or “radicals,” the State hurts and kills us via its law enforcement.

Conscious of these risks, in many countries revolutionary groups and activist movements have developed their own medical support networks for demonstrations or direct actions. This practice differs from humanitarian groups like the Red Cross, because we don’t pretend to be neutral. We take a clear political stance and an active role in the conflict and in the support that we bring to our comrades in struggle.

In a demonstration, street medic teams try to be present on the scene as early as possible to be able to provide emergency care to people who ask for it, and to evaluate the needs of the situation before an ambulance arrives, which is sometimes blocked or delayed by the police. There is also an assessment of the legal risks involved in resorting to official emergency care: for example, the risk of identity checks and arrests inside hospitals targeting those who are undocumented, who have outstanding warrants, or simply because the fact of being wounded makes someone a suspect.

The police regularly update their equipment dedicated to repression with new chemical, electrical and physical weapons. As street medics, we try to respond by spreading defense techniques developed on the ground and shared across the world for prevention, protection, and healing.

For us, medical knowledge comes with a political reflection on how we put it into practice, to avoid reproducing the relationships of domination, management, and dispossession that characterize the medical institution. As street medics, we want to make the consent of injured people a priority and give them the information they need to make clear and informed choices for themselves.

-Excerpt from a declaration of the ZAD street medics, 2015. (Published in print; not available online.)

A tear gas canister.

Non-Exhaustive Protocols for Common Injuries from Police Weapons

The following protocols were written after the most recent eviction of the ZAD in 2018, during which medics set up a parallel system of emergency care as police blocked ambulances with tanks. These protocols were based in access to specific resources and skills and knowledge; they have been edited for clarity and context. Many of these protocols presume the ability to access medical care and transfer to a hospital as a backup option. The US does not have universal healthcare (yet). If you lack health insurance but have relationships with healthcare workers in your community, please reach out to them for resources or work with the people around you to find other ways to get the care you need.

These guidelines are written for trained street medics and healthcare workers to respond to police violence. They are not a substitute for medical treatment or diagnosis. Please do not practice outside your scope!

I. Chemical Agents

Also called CS, CN, or CR gas, tear gas is an aerosol that acts as a respiratory system irritant. Pepper spray is a red oil-based substance containing capsacin, derived from peppers, that is sprayed directly onto the skin and eyes.

A. Tear Gas

i. At low concentrations

—Symptoms: skin and eye irritations and burns
—Treatment: Rinse as much as possible, with water pressure or gentle friction.

Eyes: rinse with saline solution (water + salt, 9 grams per liter). It doesn’t need to be sterile.
Skin: mix 90% water, 10% Maalox, or water with 4% baking soda. If you don’t have access to those, plain water will serve for tear gas.

—Tear gas can cause trouble breathing or provoke asthma attacks. For people with asthma, employ Albuterol, or even oral prednisone (by an experienced medic) if they are out of breath. Avoid tear gas for several days afterwards.

ii. At high concentrations or with frequent repeat exposure

—Can result in disability or other neurological symptoms: nausea, vomiting, intense headache, confusion. In these presentations:

Rule out concussion!
Learn the mechanism of the injury. What happened? Gas? Sound blast from a grenade? Impact to the head? Fall? Ask the injured person and witnesses.
Did they lose consciousness or do they remember everything?

—For pain: Ibuprofen
—For moderate nausea and vomiting: oral or suppository anti-nausea medications such as Metoclopromide (Ondansetron and Promethazine are more widely available in the US). Ginger chews and peppermint or chamomile tea also help.
—For severe vomiting and inability to keep liquids or medicines down (risk of dehydration): refer to hospital for IV fluids and observation.
—For intense confusion: Nothing by mouth. Place injured person in the recovery position and call for an ambulance.

Make sure people know to wear thick leather or specifically heat resistant gloves (such as barbecue gloves) before picking up or touching tear gas canisters to avoid burns.

Concussion grenade exploding.

II. Concussion Grenades and other Explosive Devices

A. Blast Wounds

Blast wounds mainly damage the ears.

i. Tearing of the eardrum

—Occurs infrequently in our experience. Not an emergency.
—Symptoms : pain, bleeding from the ear, temporary reduction in hearing.
—Treatment: Examine the ear with an otoscope, ideally within 24 hours. A torn eardrum heals itself in 2 weeks.
—If a medical exam is possible, an eight-day course of antibiotic drops (ofloxacine otic) can be offered preventatively to avoid infection of the middle ear and adjacent area (behind the eardrum). In any case, follow-up with Primary Care in 10 to 15 days is ideal for otoscopy and referral to ENT specialist if there is persistent anomaly.

ii. Blast injury to inner ear

—Occurs frequently in our experience.
—Symptoms: pain, ringing in the ears (tinnitus), loss of hearing, vertigo, or dizziness.
—Ringing in the ears does not come from the eardrum, but from the inner ear! Hearing loss is the guiding factor for treatment (not tinnitus).
—Simple hearing test: rub your thumb against your other fingers next to the person’s ear. Ask them if they can hear, and do the same thing on the other side.
—Treatment: If hearing loss persists for 24 hours after the blast, make an appointment with an ENT (ear, nose, and throat) specialist as soon as possible. To avoid or at least limit permanent hearing damage (resulting from the death of cells in the inner ear), a steroid may be indicated: prednisolone in the ear (0.5mg at 1mg/kg/day for 2-3 days) is the most common prescription.

iii. Blast injury to lungs

—Occurs rarely in our experience
—Symptoms: Difficulty breathing in the days following impact.
—Treatment: Emergency. Pulmonary edema requires hospitalization. Air embolisms caused by blast injury to the lungs can cause seizures, strokes, and/or permanent brain damage when air bubbles pass from the lungs to the blood and enter the brain.

iv. Intestinal blast injury

—Occurs rarely in our experience.
—Symptoms: Abdominal pain, blood in stool (hematochezia) in the days following impact can indicate bowel perforation. Fever and abdominal distention (hard stomach) can indicate peritonitis.
—Treatment: Both of these are medical emergencies and require hospitalization!

v. Remember!

—Shelter the person from additional noise.
—Do not hesitate to contact emergency medical providers if there is any impact on cognitive function or damage to organs.
—ENT specialist consultation for blast injuries to ear is suggested within 24 to 48 hours.
—Observe people with blast injuries for several days. Symptoms indicating complications may be delayed, such as changes in hearing, breathing, and abdominal functions.

B. Shrapnel wounds

Shrapnel wounds occur frequently in our experience. Shrapnel is often plastic; sometimes it is metal. On impact with pavement, concussion grenades can propel dirt and asphalt alongside shrapnel; this increases the risk of infection. Sometimes entrance wounds are small, even tiny. Sometimes they are large and obvious. Shrapnel injuries are serious even if they don’t look like a big deal. Examination, observation, and follow-up are vital.

NEVER approach or pick up a canister that is not yet smoking. It may be a concussion grenade with the capacity to blow your hand off. (This has happened both on the ZAD and in the Gilets Jaunes protests).

Examine and evaluate the breadth and depth of the wound before rushing to bandage it!

Treatment by area of injury:

i. Thorax, abdomen, face

Emergency: potential risk to life. See an experienced medic. Evacuate and evaluate respiratory/neurological/cardiovascular system distress and the extent of bleeding.

ii. Extremities

Check for:

—Damaged joints.
—Nerve damage. Nerve damage requires immediate hospitalization! Check pulse, movement, and sensation above and below the wound; compare the limbs next to each other for reference. Look for paralysis, weakness, or range-of-motion difficulties. Numbness, tingling, or pins and needles indicate nerve injury.
—Damaged tendons:

Especially on hands and feet
Occurs frequently with wounds on the back side of the hand (the side with the fingernails).
Symptoms/Signs: Visible tendon injuries at the bottom of a wound, or suspicion of a tendon injury based on anatomy.
Normal range of motion does not mean there is no damage to the tendons.
Treatment: See an experienced medic if a tendon injury is suspected. Surgical intervention may be required within 24 hours to avoid risk of rupture.

Remove shrapnel based on size. All large pieces must be removed.

i. Large foreign body in a large wound

—Occurs infrequently
—Treatment: See an experienced medic who can refer patient to a hospital or remove the foreign body and close the skin, employing excellent knowledge of anatomy and controlling the risk of infection with follow-up care and prophylactic antibiotics.

ii. Small puncture wound that looks benign but with an unknown depth

—Occurs frequently.
—Treatment: Clean, bandage, and follow up. If there are many obviously shallow pieces of foreign object (like road rash), honey dressing can draw them out without physical removal. Monitor closely for infection.

Localized treatment:

Direct compression will stop bleeding the majority of the time.
Every open wound requires basic hygeine! The medic must wash their hands with soap and water, and wear medical gloves that they change between each person.
Scrub with Betadine soap (the red kind) as soon as possible : some puncture wounds from shrapnel are not immediately visible.

Cleaning and drying:

—Wash wound with soap and water before you do anything (or with sterile saline solution if soap and water are not available).
—Follow with hydrogen peroxide, which has the advantage of foaming and can sometimes draw out little pieces of shrapnel.
—If the foreign body is small or difficult to see, use sterile forceps but don’t tear at it or make it worse! It’s not a big deal if it stays in, but it’s usually worth trying to remove it. The body will either reject small pieces naturally, like a splinter, or create a buffer around them. The damage is done when shrapnel enters the body; the additional risk is infection.

Use sterile medical tweezers. Normal tweezers (for removing hair) are too big and tear the flesh.
A magnet can help remove metal shrapnel. Pull the shrapnel back through the path of entry—otherwise, you may create a new wound!
If it’s too painful, use local anesthesia such as lidocaine spray in the bottom of the wound.

Disinfect with antiseptics:

—Remember: if an antiseptic bottle is open for over a month, dispose of the bottle. Mark the date on the bottle upon opening. Prioritize smaller bottles to avoid expiration.
—Yellow Betadine, povidone iodine. (Use red Betadine first if washing with soap and water is impossible.) It exists in individual doses too. Iodine allergies don’t apply to Betadine.
—Chlorhexidine is good, such as one-time-use Dosiseptine, but not Biseptine (alcohol-based) because it stings.
—Diluted sodium hypochlorite (Dakin’s solution) works well but has to be diluted at 50% in sterile water, so it is impractical. Alcohol is efficient but burns a lot.
—For puncture wounds: Disinfect surface and interior. Use an antiseptic syringe without a needle. Put the end of the syringe inside the wound before injecting. Don’t use hydrogen peroxide for this.

Bandaging:

—Approximated wound with controlled bleeding: dry bandage, gauze compress, elastic bandage.
—Wounds oozing blood or pus: Consider an absorptive cushion like hemostatic packing, followed by a compress and bandage on top.
—If moderate bleeding or unapproximated wound: use clean raw honey (not the corn syrup kind), Neosporin, or tulle gras, then compress and bandage.

Dressing changes:

—Every 24 hours at the beginning (depending on severity), then every 48 hours.
—Rinse with saline solution. Don’t reapply antiseptics, as this can delay healing.
—Prevent secondary infections. These occur frequently with shrapnel wounds! Signs of infection include redness, inflammation, pus and weeping, or fever. Get an experienced medic’s advice and local or oral antibiotics for 48 hours after injury.
—Abscesses may necessitate x-ray, ultrasound, or surgical consultation depending on the wound.

To pass on to injured people: If you experience fever, chills, stiffness, redness, wetness around the wound, red plaques or streaks on the skin, or a neurological or motor deficiency, consult a doctor, medic, or go to an emergency department immediately.

Takeaways for shrapnel wounds:
Don’t dig too hard to get out small pieces.
Assess immediately for nerve or tendon injury.
Monitor for signs of secondary infection for several days.

III. Rubber bullet injuries

Rubber bullet injuries often leave a big bruise. Check for other lesions! If you suspect trauma that will necessitate surgery, do not give them anything by mouth. No drinking, no eating, no smoking.

Rubber bullet.

A. By location

i. Large bruises to extremities

—Assess neurovascular status: Pulse, movement, sensation, and color. If there’s an anomaly, hospitalization is urgent.
—Palpate the bones for pinpoint pain and crepitus. Test each joint for range of motion. If you can’t rule out a fracture, get an x-ray within 24 hours. Suspected displaced fracture (shortening, etc.) requires an x-ray immediately.
—Rubber bullet impacts on muscles and tendons are not an emergency.
—Treat all bruises or hematomas with Arnica (Arnica montana) tincture or gel or Ground Daisy (Bellis perennis) tincture. Apply topically as soon as possible (actual tincture, not homeopathic).
—If plan is to hospitalize, wait before applying topical treatment: it may mask the seriousness of the condition.
—The most important thing is to immobilize the injury.

ii. Facial impact

—See an experienced medic.
—Palpate facial bones looking for pinpoint pain and crepitus indicating a fracture: orbitals, nose, zygomatic processes, mandible, chin, dental articulation (closure and alignment). Examine each tooth.
—For teeth that are broken, moving, unseated, or painful—see a dentist immediately. Conserve the tooth in milk, saline solution, or saliva. Ideally, the injured person would carry it in their mouth, taking care not to swallow.

Simple Neurological Face Assessment:

Compare sensation on both sides of the forehead, cheeks, chin
Movement: symmetry in smile, eyes symmetrical when tightly closed, eye movement (in both directions, vertically, horizontally, diagonally, inversion and aversion), pupils equal, round, reactive to light and accommodating.

iii. Eye impact

—Immediate hospitalization.
—Nothing by mouth: no food, no drink, no smoking.
—Rinse area with sterile saline solution.
—Have the person lie down and cover both eyes with sterile compresses.

iv. Nose impact

—Probable fracture.
—Get an x-ray.
—Epistaxis is bleeding from the nose; it can become a large hemorrhage.

Pinch the bridge of the nose between two fingers, neck bent forward.
Experienced medics can plug nostrils with gauze.
For large amounts of blood loss, call an ambulance.

v. Thorax impact

—Pain may indicate a broken rib or lung damage. See an experienced medic.
—Rib fracture: pinpoint pain when palpated along the sternal line.

Pain with deep inhalation.
No respiratory distress or coughing.
If it’s a simple fracture, treat with rest, painkillers to ensure deep breathing and avoid pneumonia, and topical comfrey (Symphytum officinale) salve 2 to 3 times daily.

—Pneumothorax: pain and cough, sometimes spitting blood.

X-ray within 24 hours, or immediately if there is respiratory distress.
Monitor respiratory rate. Normal is 15-20 breaths per minute.

vi. Abdominal impact

—See an experienced medic.
—Check for:

Pain around the liver (right upper quadrant) and the spleen (left upper quadrant): signs of internal hemorrhage indicate danger. Get an ultrasound quickly.
Blood in stool, abdominal pain, hard stomach area or fever, suspicion of peritonitis: immediate hospitalization.

vii. Both abdominal and thoracic impact

—Check for signs of internal hemorrhage (shock) such as pallor, weakness, diaphoresis (sweating), tachycardia with normal blood pressure. —Late signs include low blood pressure, altered mental status, loss of consciousness. —Watch them for several hours!

viii. Lower back impact

—Look for blood in the urine. Ideally get a urinalysis done to check for kidney damage.

ix. Testicular impact

—If bruising or excessive pain, get an emergency ultrasound.

Surviving a Pandemic: Tools for Addressing Isolation, Anxiety, and Grief

2020-05-07T17:31:45Z

A selection of exercises, rituals, and ways of preparing you can use to reconnect with your agency and ground yourself as we face the long-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The following text draws from our lived experiences of struggle, of growth and of loss. It is informed by the things we have learned from the practice of Somatic Experiencing as well as through doing end-of-life care as death doulas, as nurses, and as human beings loving people in a hard world. This writing also springs from seeing the need for us to acknowledge and face our fears on an individual level in order to ensure that we can build the capacity to trust each other in this new uncertain context. No one knows how to contain this pandemic—and it is more evident than ever that we cannot trust the state. Tending to our mental health can increase our capability to act together.

We find ourselves in a new era in which we must figure out together how to navigate life in the midst of a worldwide pandemic. All of us are experiencing collective trauma as the wave of COVID-19 moves across the world, tearing apart the basic fabric of society. Other living things sigh a deep breath as capitalism falters in this country. This historical moment has opened up the opportunity for new pathways towards connection and mutual aid in both social and economic aspects of our daily lives as we continue to experience the weirdness of physical distancing and the ambiguous loss of what we have known as day-to-day life.

It is a worldwide collective human experience to be moving in and out of moments of stress and uncertainty as we try to navigate life with this virus. At the same time, this pandemic is not a unique event; it is part of the new normal in this global economy. Viruses will continue to spread as long as we go on upsetting the ecological balance of the planet. Yet what we have been through so far could help us to figure out how to build more of the society we want together as we move into the future. While this may feel difficult, it’s important to remember that we do have agency—together, we can build a meaningful life in the rubble of the parts that we must leave behind.

This text is a small effort to help hold each other up in the process of this collective readjustment as we continue to fight in pursuit of the dreams we have for the world. We offer a look at the importance of moving through the many aspects of grief with some suggestions as to how we can prepare for the unknown ahead. We provide several somatic exercises aimed at facilitating our ability to ground ourselves in uncertain futures while also finding creative ways to get connection and expand the imagination in spite of the need for increased physical distancing.

Some of us are in shock. Some of us are anxious. Whatever feelings and mental states you are moving through right now, you make sense. Each of us, in our own way, is undergoing what is known as ambiguous loss. The collective experience of COVID-19 began without any sort of closure for our pre-pandemic lives. None of us have a clear understanding of what this means for our day-to-day life. We don’t know how we will make money in the future. Unplanned loss can overwhelm our coping abilities, making normal functioning extremely difficult. We have to figure out new ways to structure our lives. This can leave us anxious and complicate or delay our process of moving through the loss in order to adapt to the changes. In addition, many of us are also experiencing the anticipatory grief of the impending loss of loved ones because of the pandemic. None of us are alone in this.

Because of the way our threat response cycle works as humans, we are having a hard time orienting to what the threat is because the future is so unknown to us right now. We are hyper-focused on our phones and screens, seeking both information and connection to help settle us—to help us obtain a sense of control and imagine a path forward. Yet this does not calm our nervous systems. Our brainstem is designed to locate a threat, usually scanning far out into the distance before moving up close to our present surroundings. In this situation, our nervous systems tend to remain in a heightened state because our present environment is giving us the potential of dangerous information and swiftly changing news.

Our immune systems are deeply interconnected with our nervous systems, and our stress levels impact both of these. In particular, extended periods of shutdown strain our immune function. We hope that some of these tools can help move you towards settling your nervous system, as well as towards the mobilization many of us seek.

Social isolation is a risk factor, compromising our mental and physical health. In this new context, it is very important that we direct intention towards connecting with other people. Using screens and video chats can cause an extreme strain on our attachment system. We must make an effort to nudge ourselves towards facial expression, making eye contact and modulating our tones of voice with others. We must imagine windows where there are walls. It is important that each of us resist the tendency to normalize the fear of others, which we already experience so much in this individualized society. Implementing these practices can help us avoid fear-based interactions with friends and strangers alike.

One way that we can reduce stress and harm to ourselves and each other is to practice good consent when interacting with others. For example, take the time to figure out what you want your personal boundaries to be when you interact with others. Do you need to be six feet or more away from people? Do you need them to be wearing masks if they want to talk to you? Do you feel comfortable sitting next to someone? Is touching toes acceptable? If so, under what conditions?

Ask yourself questions like these and make your feelings known to others. This will help to prevent people from accidentally crossing a boundary that they weren’t aware that you had. It can also help to reduce the kind of self-policing that can happen when people feel scared and uncertain, enabling everyone involved to be able to trust that everyone around them is being thoughtful about their boundaries and needs.

Exercise: Self-Hug with a “Vu” Sound

Self-touch is a useful tool, especially right now when we are getting less physical contact. Stress and shutdown responses can affect our digestion. Making a low “vu” sound encourages our nervous system to downshift towards a more balanced state, bringing a sense of cohesion to our organs and body. This particular sound comes from the lower trunk part of our body. When we focus our attention on feeling the sound as it comes from below our diaphragm, it helps us to reset.

There is a great deal of difference between a forced breath and one that arises spontaneously. Instead of taking an intentional deep breath, allow yourself to make a full exhale, and as you do so, notice the quality of settling as your body comes into balance.

Try to pay attention throughout your day to notice when you let out a deep breath, a sigh. This slow, audible exhalation is an everyday experience of resetting the body and mind. We spontaneously sigh many times an hour as our nervous system resets and regulates.

Place your right hand under your left armpit, close to your heart. Then place your left hand on your right shoulder. Notice the warmth of your body. Invoke a sense of containment. Pay attention to see if you feel any sort of ease settle in your chest, or if you get a spontaneous deeper breath or a natural breath that comes back in. Then, when you’re ready, slowly inhale and, when you exhale, let all your air out slowly with a “vu” sound, like that of a low foghorn. Repeat this three times slowly. Imagine your brain moving down into your pelvis, like an ice cube melting, flowing down to help regulate your nervous system. And finally, just be curious about what you notice. Has anything shifted? Is your attention more available?

Exercise: Extending Your Gaze

In our modern situation, and especially with the sudden need to care for each other with physical distancing, we spend a lot of time in focal vision, in which we move focused attention from one object to the next. It is helpful to extend our peripheral awareness and gain a greater sense of physical perspective as we adjust to the context we each find ourselves in. Staring at screens, or even at printed material, is a fairly recent human invention. Before industrialization, the vast majority of people did not spend so much time looking at things so close up. We evolved in the savannah. Human evolution brought us out of the trees to stand upright. It’s good for our system to be able to see over long distances, even in the cityscape. Focusing on the point of furthest contact gives us a more softened and expansive consciousness, while still maintaining a sense of awareness. The goal is to enter a state of relaxed alertness in which you are able to access a wide range of responsiveness in any given moment.

To begin, let your eyes go where they want to go. Allow your eyes to wander slowly. Take a moment or two to do this; be curious about what you notice. Then, begin to look for the thing you can see that is the furthest away. It might take a little effort to adjust to looking in the distance, but take a moment to play with that. What’s the furthest thing that you can see right now? As you find that object, notice how your eyes soften, how the muscles in your face relax. You may notice that you naturally inhale or exhale more deeply.

Next, slowly extend your arms out in front of you and move them outward to the edges of what is just within your peripheral view. Once you have found that spot, turn your palms in and slowly wiggle your fingers. As you again find that object at the point farthest away from you, notice your eyes soften. Allow your eyes to rest and tap into a deeper sense of centering. Notice how you can hold relaxed vision and pay attention to the movement of your fingers at the same time. In this place, you are in balance with a relaxed alertness, ready to respond to threat from an underlying state of calm.

Exercise: Face Attention

It’s important to make space to express feelings of agitation, rage, and grief. The goal of this exercise is to legitimize and tend to these feelings, giving them permission and expressive release. When we engage our facial muscles, it helps to downshift and regulate our nervous systems. This enables us to communicate better and read others’ faces better too.

Begin by directing your attention to your face. Slowly scrunch up the muscles in your face until they are as tight as possible. Hold this for a moment, then release the muscles. After a few natural breath cycles, move to widen and extend your face outward. Open your mouth and stretch your cheeks. Hold this for a moment and then rest. Move back and forth between these states several times.

Then, when you are ready, focus on any feelings that want attention and movement. Begin again to scrunch up your face, bringing awareness to your eyes and nose; scrunch harder, letting the anger know that it’s OK for it to be there. You may experience a spontaneous settling breath. Next, use your eyes to direct a piercing glare. Grit your teeth slightly. Allow any sort of rumble or sound you feel within you to make its way out of your mouth. When you are ready, let your face to return to a neutral state, allowing your eyes to soften. Repeat a couple times, if needed.

Exercise: Progressive Balancing

Our bodies can get stuck in habitual patterns in which some areas are extra tight or tense, while other areas can become absent from our awareness altogether. In order to shift these states, we have to become aware of them. An excellent way to do this is to create and release tension intentionally. This exercise brings attention to what your nerves are usually doing unconsciously, enabling you to begin to shift those patterns.

From a standing position, with your eyes closed if that’s comfortable for you, begin to tense up one area of your body, then another, allowing yourself to breathe. For each part of your body, count slowly to eight while you hold the tension forcefully. Then slowly release the tension as you exhale, imagining that that part of your body is expanding or taking up more space, as if all of the cells that comprise it are growing. After the next breath in, exhale for a count of eight, imagining that that part of your body is relaxing—melting like butter. Go through the process of tensing and relaxing each area twice. Be sure to allow for a few natural breath cycles between the two states.

Start by tensing your neck and throat. Many of us hold tension in our necks, sometimes keeping rigid as a consequence of trying to control situations. The neck is a great place to gain back some ease. After doing this twice, rest a moment. Second, tense your shoulders, arms, and hands, as if you are getting ready to fight. Notice your muscles and any sensations of strength in your body now. Feeling your arms can give you a sense of how much space you can take up. Third, tense your stomach muscles. Many people feel a tense knot in their upper bellies connected to anxiety, while others feel an emptiness or lack there. Focusing on sensing your belly can be a step towards restoring a depth of experience and a sense of quiet at just being. Finally, tense your legs and feet. Lots of us feel separated from our legs; restoring your awareness of them can be a step towards feeling your strength, standing your ground, and rediscovering your power to charge or flee if need be.

After all this tensing and relaxing, do an extra swinging movement to discharge any excess tension. Stand and turn your upper body from one side to the other, as if you’re looking first over your right shoulder, then over your left, gently rotating your whole upper body in the process. Let your arms hang loosely, following the movement, so they swing out in front of you, then knock gently at your sides at the end of each twist. You can relax your knees a little, letting your hips join the turning movement. Feel the gentle twist of your spine as you move. Do this for a minute or two.

Preparing for Every Possibility

This pandemic reminds us that we are never quite sure what is going to happen. As we confront uncertainty, it can help to give us a sense of our agency to address all the things that we can control. Even if these preparations do not become necessary for years or decades, you may feel more grounded having made them.

Dealing with Loss

The ways that the pandemic and social distancing have destabilized our lives have already given rise to a painful sense of loss for many of us. Whether you are dealing with the changes in your life or mourning the passing of a loved one, it can help to use ritual to structure your relationship to these feelings.

Here are some ideas for creating ritual around loss:

Light and burn candles at a planned time.
Read poems aloud. Record them to send to each other.
Host bonfires and share stories. You can still do this while maintaining a safe distance and wearing masks.
Choose objects with which to create an altar for remembrance or transition, so that people can gather and witness together.
Develop a memorial ritual honoring your loved one, like picking a bouquet of flowers, to observe on special days or whenever you wish.

You can also practice ritual on an individual level. This can help give you a feeling of control over your environment at times when that is otherwise hard to maintain. It can help you feel more grounded to focus on controlling things that only affect you, such as the structure of your day, the order in which you do certain things, or the arrangement of your things in a personal space, for example.

Many of us are experiencing a dramatic increase in the amount of time we spend at home with our loved ones. This makes it especially important not to take out our difficult feelings on them. Giving ourselves creative and intentional ways to deal with our need for control, such as focusing on ritual, can help keep us from hurting or conflicting with those around us.

Tools for End of Life Care

One of the best gifts we can give to each other is to prioritize having the difficult conversations necessary to prepare for the unknown. We encourage you to talk with your friends and family about what you would want in case of serious illness. This is a way to increase your self-determination and autonomy even in a worst-case scenario. Write down what you will want your companions to do if you are sick or dying and what you want them to do after your death. Here, we offer some of the logistical aspects of how to do so. Be as specific as you feel you can. It can be an immense relief for friends and family not to have to make such significant decisions for you in a situation in which you cannot make them for yourself. Preparing in this way forestalls the sort of second-guessing that can occur even among those who know your desires best. You are never too young or too old to take these steps.

Giving thought to this can be an important way to prepare for the unknown and to care for ourselves, as well as those we love.

What Is an Advance Directive/Living Will?

An advance directive, also known as a living will, is a state-specific legal document that declares your healthcare wishes should you become unable to make those decisions for yourself. It can describe what kinds of medical intervention you do or do not want—for example, CPR, artificial nutrition and hydration, intubation, or surgery. While the forms vary state to state, you can obtain them online or from your doctor, if you have one. This document can be revoked at any time as long as you are cognitively able to do so; it must be notarized to be considered applicable. The form requires you to name someone as your health care agent/health care power of attorney.

What is a HealthCare Power of Attorney (HCPOA)?

A HealthCare Power of Attorney is a person you select to make all your healthcare decisions when you cannot do so for yourself. You should share as many details with this person as you can about what you want for your care. You can set up secondary and tertiary agents in addition to a primary person. If you want them to make decisions collectively and horizontally, make this clear; legally speaking, your primary will have all of the decision-making power unless you specify otherwise. Make sure that you get consent before selecting someone for this role, as it can be a significant responsibility to give someone who may not feel comfortable making such high-stakes decisions.

Some questions to ask yourself when considering a HCPOA:

Can this person do the job that I am asking them to do? Are they the type of person who can or would advocate for me? How comfortable are they making emotional decisions under stress? How likely are they to answer the phone in an emergency situation? Do they live close by? Are they able to travel to reach me? How well does this person know me? Have I asked them if they’d be willing to do this for me?

Some general questions to ask yourself when considering the uncertainty of the future:

What are the things that you feel regretful about that you could resolve today or in the short term?
Are there letters that you want to write? Things that you want to apologize for?
Write down three experiences you want to start working towards now. Who would you like to have with you?
Are there any belongings that you want to make sure a certain person gets when you are gone? Is there anything you want to get rid of today?
What should your funeral sound, taste, smell, look, and feel like?
If you could do anything with your body when you die, what would it be?
Are there life-extension interventions you do not want used to keep you alive? What if you are still conscious and able to communicate?

In the uncertainty of this moment, please know that you are not alone. You are part of a larger fabric of human collectivity that spans time and space, stretching beyond the confines of capital and state control, even beyond the reach of viruses. Whatever you may be facing, remember that those of us that dream of a wholly new world are in this together. Take care of yourselves. There is still so much possibility we can enact.

Crossing the United States Border : A Security Guide for Citizens and Non-Citizens

2020-01-28T17:18:50Z

Border controls give the authorities an opportunity to invade our privacy and gather information. We would all be a lot safer if we could agree to a standard security protocol for how to approach crossing borders, as carelessness with our own security can impact others as well. The following guide details how to minimize the various security risks involved in legally entering the United States—whether by land, air, or ocean. It draws on the experiences of many anarchists and subversives, both US citizens and not, including some targeted by the security apparatus.

Among anarchists, it has become expected practice not to inform on anyone to the authorities, to refuse to speak with law enforcement agents of any kind, and to decline to cooperate with grand juries. Likewise, it is now widely understood that posting sensitive information about others’ activities on public forums can be equivalent to informing to the authorities about them. Yet failing to take proper precautions to protect your devices, overestimating your rights, and answering questions from border officials can have similar consequences, enabling the state to obtain information about your political activities or your network.

United States Customs and Border Protection

The US border is among the most tightly controlled borders in the world. The other members of the so-called “five eyes” intelligence union—the UK, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada—employ similar measures. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel are also notorious for invasive and opportunistic security procedures.

United States Customs and Border Protection officials have little accountability to anyone; there are no checks or balances on their power to protect those who are not US citizens. Legally, they aren’t supposed to question, profile, or discriminate against visitors on religious, ethnic, or political grounds. But they most certainly do these things.

In 2019, USCBP officers detained an 18-year-old US citizen for 23 days in a Texas Border detention just for looking and acting too Latino—even after he presented an ID and a birth certificate. This was not even at the border, but inside the state, when the boy was driving north to a soccer camp. USCBP have power within 100 miles of any American border; this includes entire cities like New York City or San Francisco.

Dressing according to conventional standards may help to avoid extra attention and scrutiny when crossing borders. Police are often superficial and may judge by appearances if you are not already flagged. Of course, this will not necessarily help people of color and other targeted demographics.

US Citizens

If you are a US citizen, the most important thing to remember when entering the US is that unless you are arrested upon arrival, you will eventually be let in. Legally speaking, you have a right to enter the country regardless of your cooperation with interrogators.

If you are brought into an interrogation room upon arriving in the US and non-uniformed officers or officers without USCBP identification are present, you should immediately request that they identify themselves. If they are FBI agents or non-USCBP police, request an attorney immediately. Due to loopholes available to border enforcement, non-USCBP agents sometimes use the special status borders afford to listen in on interrogations and gather intelligence in ways that would be deemed unconstitutional in other contexts. However, if you have requested an attorney, they should leave the room or cease to question you. This is not guaranteed, but technically, they are supposed to do so.

The laws regarding whether you can have an attorney at the border as an American citizen are complicated. Officers will tell you that you are not entitled to an attorney, as the law is confusing on this subject.¹ According to USCBP, you are not entitled to a lawyer during first or secondary screenings when entering the country. As a citizen, you are entitled to request a lawyer, but it is not certain they will cooperate with your request. If you anticipate serious harassment, you should arrange in advance for an attorney to be on call or even to meet you at the airport.

Requesting an attorney may cause USCBP officers to escalate their efforts to intimidate you, but it will also let them know that you are prepared to stand up for yourself. Never forget that whatever happens, you will eventually be let into the country. If you are arrested, you will be entitled to an attorney as soon as you have been taken into custody by non-USCBP.

As a US citizen, you have the right to remain silent throughout your detention by USCBP. In theory, this is the best strategy for dealing with these officers. However, this will almost certainly escalate the encounter; if you insist on refusing to answer any questions from the outset, you will probably be detained, searched, and interrogated at length. Therefore, in practice, it can be advisable to start with a different strategy.

The alternative is to remain polite and cooperative in response to requests for your documents and simple questions such as where you are coming from, then to politely decline to answer once the questions became invasive or political. You could explain “I’m choosing not to answer, as is my right as an American citizen.” If the questioning intensifies, answer, “On the advice of my lawyer, I’m not going to answer any such questions.” This is the best way to phrase your answer, as it sidesteps any questions about why you are choosing not to answer.

You may be asked for your Facebook, Instagram, or other social media profiles. If you have any profiles in your legal name, it is probably better not to lie about it, as being caught lying will escalate the situation. It is better simply to decline to answer the question. It is a good idea to delete all apps that can be used to access social media and all online history, so there is no evidence on any device with you. Remaining silent in response to invasive questioning may be stressful; the officers may attempt to intimidate or trick you into answering. However, if you have the privilege of citizenship, they cannot deny you entry. Remember, they are counting on your fear. It is the chief weapon they have against you.

Do your best to prepare your emotions and belongings ahead of any potential encounter. This may not be the time that you are detained and harassed, but it is essential to prepare yourself, your devices, and your possessions so that you will have no regrets later.

While crossing the border as a US citizen, do not forget that whatever happens, you have the right to re-entry. A little courage and patience will see you through.

https://twitter.com/HMAesq/status/1221312555014152192

Non-Citizens

If you are not a US citizen, you lack most of the rights described above. Essentially, USCBP can deny you entry without reason. If you are denied, it is possible to send a letter requesting the reason and a reversal of the decision.

You will likely be asked to provide a destination to border officials. The best answer is probably a hotel or the home of a person who is ostensibly a respectable, law-abiding citizen. Border officials may test you and ask for receipts or proof of a hotel reservation or the name and contact information of the people you will be visiting. They may also contact your hotel or host. You should also be prepared to answer questions regarding where you are coming from.

Stay calm. Don’t risk making jokes, even harmless ones. Sarcasm can lead to detention or escalation. Remain respectful even if they bully you or attempt to provoke you. There’s no humanity when it comes to USCBP officials, like police, they should be understood as puppets of the state and navigated with calculated and stoic communication.

You are not entitled to an attorney unless a non-CBP agent formally arrests you. You have very few rights as a non-citizen in this situation; essentially, USCBP can deny you entry on almost any grounds.

Border control agents are basically able to do as they wish; because they are a federal police force, they do not have to recognize state laws. For example, if you arrive as a non-citizen in Oregon or California, where marijuana is legal, and you admit to having smoked marijuana at any point in your life, USCBP agents can reject your entry on this basis alone. Hundreds of Canadian citizens have been turned away from the US border and banned from the US for admitting to smoking marijuana at some point in their life—in a country where it is legal.

Electronic Devices

On November 12, 2019, a federal judge in Boston ruled unconstitutional the search or seizure of devices belonging to international travelers without individualized suspicion. While groups such as CAIR, the ACLU, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation hailed it as a victory, it may not change things very much in practice. We should never place faith in the state’s alleged protection of our civil rights; we will always find ourselves in a state of permanent exception when it comes to the democratic discourse of state-sanctioned rights.

This ruling does not give a binding course for eliminating the practice of search and seizure. The category of “individual suspicion” is extremely broad, and USCBP officials are free to fabricate any reasons they require. In addition, the federal government has stated that the ruling will only apply to Boston International Airport, in the district where the ruling was issued. We should proceed on the assumption that the state may still seize our devices.

Whether or not you are a US citizen, if you do not cooperate in unlocking phones, laptops, or other devices when requested, the officers are permitted to seize them until they have broken your code and copied the contents.

Some would say traveling with no devices at all is the best solution. This is by far the safest way to travel across borders if you think your devices will likely be searched or seized. Unfortunately, this can be expensive and inconvenient, as well as potentially suspicious.

Your phone should always be locked and encrypted at all times. A good password can go a long way.² If you are a US citizen, you can refuse requests to unlock your phone, and a strong password and encryption can help protect your phone if it is seized. Nonetheless, if they return your phone after seizing it, it is best to assume that the phone is compromised and replace it.

USCBP agents have been known to demand that travelers turn on their devices, allegedly to show that they are ordinary electronics rather than disguised objects of some other character, threatening to confiscate and destroy devices that could not be powered on. If you would comply with such a demand, arrive with enough battery charge to be able to do so.

If you are a non-citizen, refusing to unlock your device could result in border guards seizing it and denying you entry.

If you do bring a phone or other electronic device to a border crossing, it is a good idea to prepare it by removing any information or programs that would give the state access to your contacts or communications. This should only be understood as a means of harm reduction. We can’t be certain of the full capabilities the state has to investigate phones and other devices. Bringing no phone or device whatsoever is the only sure way to limit USCBP access.

Whatever you do, it is suggested that you do it at least 48 hours before arriving to the border. Even when you delete a file on your phone, it may not be immediately expunged. Some people whose phones and computers have been confiscated by USCBP have received them back with applications, messages, and contacts on them that they had deleted shortly before they were seized.

One option is to reset all of your devices to factory mode well before the time of crossing a border. However, this could also be grounds for suspicion, and may create challenges for non-citizens. Another option is to cleanse all sensitive material from your phone so you can open it if asked.

Manicuring your devices and your life for interrogation is challenging. It requires being able to identify and delete any information or contact information that would be of interest to the authorities. Considering that you cannot know for sure who or what may be of interest to them, it is better to approach this as a consent issue: if USCBP officials gain access to your phone, would all of the people in your contact list be comfortable with the state associating them with you?

Keeping the numbers of family members or non-political friends who consent to be associated with you in your phone when you approach a border might help to allay the suspicions of border officials if they ask you to unlock your phone and you choose to comply. Bear in mind that USCBP officers might contact someone at random from your list; ideally, anyone who answers should know to refer to you by your legal name alone, so as not to put additional information at their disposal.

If you open up your device for them, they could review all of your correspondence. If it is necessary for you to have access to a phone or device with sensitive information on it and you are a frequent traveler, another solution is to buy a phone or device for this specific purpose once you cross the border, or to keep a phone in each of your frequented destinations. If you choose to use a burner phone, there are some promotional plans that can be almost free with new activation.

USCBP shares information with a wide range of state agencies including the FBI. Whether or not you are a citizen, deleting sensitive contacts from your phone is essential to protect those who do not want their information shared with the US government. If you choose to open your phone when you have the contacts of anarchists or other targeted individuals in it, you are essentially cooperating with the US government at the expense of your revolutionary community.

In addition to deleting contact information, consider deleting applications for encrypted communication such as Signal or Telegram from your phone. When preparing your phone, you should make sure to delete all remnants of correspondence, downloads, and data that could be connected to the deleted contacts, history, and applications. This includes

email correspondence that offers an opportunity for state officials to fish through your information and compile a list of your contacts;
WiFi networks your phone has joined and learned;
photographs you have downloaded that include sensitive information or metadata;
and cookies that can be used against you or contradict answers you have given about your travels or plans, or that show that your phone has been manicured.

If you are a non-citizen, traveling with anarchist literature, posters, or books could also create grounds for officials to suspect you or deny you entry. For US citizens, traveling with such material will not enable them to deny you re-entry, though it could contribute to officials flagging you.

Regardless of your citizenship, if it is possible that you will choose to open your phone when asked, make it appear that you are using these devices in a normal manner and have nothing to hide. Open up new search histories, open some innocuous tabs on your browser, keep games on your devices, retain harmless correspondence and communication with those who are comfortable with you keeping their contacts in your phone, and keep some pictures or videos of yourself and your approved friends and family that don’t give away any sensitive details.

Regarding email and social media, if you claim that you do not use them, you must be very careful to ensure that all related history, downloads, and applications are cleared from all your devices. Some phones have Facebook built in, which offers an excuse; but if you have downloaded an image from Facebook and the authorities find it and analyze its properties, this could be grounds to accuse you of lying.

You can make secondary profiles, especially if you are a non-citizen and you are afraid that you will be rejected if you do not give officers access. Generally speaking, anarchists should not make social media in their legal names. There are many creative ways to avoid this. Likewise, you should never use a social media account can be traced back to your legal name for sensitive political projects or correspondence. As for email, it is easy to maintain a separate email for anarchist correspondence.

Social media creates tremendous security risks; it is a dismal part of social alienation, though unfortunately inescapable for many people. In any case, USCBP officers may search the internet for information about you, including social media profiles for you or any project you are involved in; you should be prepared to address anything they find.

You can upload contacts or files that you wish to keep private online ahead of any border crossing. You can export contacts into files and upload these into a draft file on a secure email forum such as protonmail.com or another safely hosted server, then download them to your manicured, stored, or newly purchased device when you arrive at your destination. It only takes minutes to make exportable contact files and folders.

It is safest not to discuss anything illegal on any electronic device, including via encrypted apps like Signal or servers such as protonmail.com.

Ideally, when you give your contact information to another person in the anarchist movement, they should be able to commit to making sure you are not setting yourself up for needless risk. Raids, unknown technologies, and unexpected arrests are among the threats that we face, but we should establish ethical frameworks and explicit expectations regarding how we conduct ourselves in order to minimize danger.

If you are detained or interrogated for specifically political reasons when entering or leaving the US, it is important to consult a lawyer and to report your experience to other members of your community. This is true following police raids or FBI visits; it is just as important following border crossings. Making a public statement online can enable you to reach a larger number of people, but it can also lead to an escalation by those harassing you, as they may perceive it to confirm their suspicions of your involvement in the anarchist movement. Whether you reach out publicly or on an individual basis, it is important to inform others in order to maintain a strong network of trust and transparency within our communities, to alert others who may be similarly targeted, and to battle tendencies towards isolation that can lead to people leaving the movement or even betraying other participants.

https://twitter.com/HMAesq/status/1221312557031608320

For Non-Citizens Applying to Appeal Rejection

If you are told you have been banned from entering the United States following rejection at a border, you can apply to repeal the decision via this application.

This is only for those who have been formally banned, not those denied entry. These applications are not reviewed by a judge or any independent authority, but a bureaucrat within the USCBP. Getting a ban lifted entitles you to nothing beyond the opportunity to try entering again. It puts you in the same position you were in before you were banned, but this time with a black mark on your record.

On the No-Fly and Terror Watch Lists

In 2014, the No-Fly list was deemed unconstitutional. In 2019, the Terror Watch list—which includes approximately 1.2 million people—was also deemed unconstitutional.³ Despite this ruling, no formal procedure has been established to dismantle the lists or stop the state from using them. How the list is produced remains a secret—ironically, this is one of the reasons it was deemed unconstitutional. So even if the courts have made this ruling, we should assume that both lists are still functioning as guides for the authorities. In both rulings, the people who challenged the lists did so on the grounds that they were law-abiding citizens who have been persecuted on account of being Muslim. In cases of political repression, we assume that the courts would extend little sympathy to any anarchist unlucky enough to end up on either of these lists.

Sadly, there is practically no way to challenge inclusion on the No-Fly list; you can only request the help of a lawyer and continue trying to fly. The ACLU has provided some guidance on challenging no-fly status here.

If you do not have a criminal record, it may be possible to travel overland to Canada and fly from there to your destination. However, depending on the degree to which you have been flagged, you may also experience harassment there, as the Canadian and US border control agencies share intelligence. You can also travel to Mexico overland in order to fly onward to your destination; you should be able to do so without having to report your visit for upwards of 48 hours after arrival. It may be possible to book a departure ticket for these first 48 hours in order to avoid using your passport.

If You Need to Travel Long term

If you need to travel for a long period of time, it is important to remember that under Obama, the US made it necessary to reapply for passport pages once you have run out of space for more stamps. If you run out of pages abroad, you can apply at an embassy. However, in case your travel needs turn out to be more complicated than those of a typical tourist, it is better to prepare in advance by getting a passport with 52 pages rather than 28. When acquiring a new passport, you can also order a Passport ID card. The ID card can serve as identification without disclosing an address and suffices for overland travel to Canada and Mexico. It can also help you to obtain a new passport if your passport is lost or stolen.

https://twitter.com/HMAesq/status/1221312561280421888

General Resources on Repression and Resistance

From an article in the Intercept:

“IN GENERAL, LAW enforcement agents have to get a warrant to search your electronic devices. That’s the gist of the 2014 Supreme Court case Riley v. California. But the Riley ruling only applies when the police arrest you. The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether the same protections apply to American citizens reentering the United States from abroad, and federal appeals courts have issued contradictory opinions. In the absence of a controlling legal authority, CBP goes by its own rules, namely CBP Directive No. 3340-049A, pursuant to which CBP can search any person’s device, at any time, for any reason, or for no reason at all. If you refuse to give up your password, CBP’s policy is to seize the device. The agency may use “external equipment” to crack the passcode, “not merely to gain access to the device, but to review, copy, and/or analyze its contents,” according to the directive. CBP can look for any kind of evidence, any kind of information, and can share what it finds with any other federal agency, so long as doing so is “consistent with applicable law and policy.” ↩
The strongest passwords are long yet easy to remember. A good rule of thumb is to select at least five random words. For example, “correct horse battery staple atom.” Include the spaces in your password—they give you extra length without making it harder to remember. The key to making your password more secure is length, not complexity; the previous example is much more secure than “ruvsybgj36,” provided the word selection really is random. Don’t come up with the words on your own; your brain may not be a good random generator. If you look around your room and make your password “curtain chair window sky,” that isn’t random. Instead, choose words randomly from a list like this one. ↩
Though the task ahead is weighty, with the judge essentially asking the two sides to settle a fundamental question of the post-9/11 era, CAIR is celebrating the ruling as a “complete victory.” ↩

Hacking Back: "How to Rob a Bank" : Expropriate, Redistribute, and Leak—Dispatches from the Digital Trenches

2019-11-17T16:32:08Z

In the middle of the recent wave of struggles, from Rojava and Catalunya to Ecuador and Chile, while the smoke hanging over the scorched earth of the Amazon reminds us that the rainforest is close to its tipping point, we at the CrimethInc. Technology desk bring you the latest episode in the HackBack chronicles.

A text file just appeared in which its author explains how and why she hacked a bank and gave away the money. Resisting oppression necessitates a diversity of tactics, and the digital front is as important as a theater of conflict as the streets.

An Ode to Expropriation

“This is my simple word for recounting my hacks, and to invite other people to hack with joyful rebellion. […] I robbed a bank, and gave away the money…”

Thus begins the most recent hacker zine to appear on the internet. In this text file, the anarchist hacker formerly known as Phineas Fisher narrates the how and why of her expropriation, almost four years ago, of the Cayman Bank and Trust Company (Isle of Man). Nobody was harmed in this action; it was so stealthy that she was able to follow the bank’s investigation into the incident over the following months.

Published in Spanish—the language of hacktivism?—”A DIY Guide to Robbing Banks” is the latest chapter in the HackBack! saga. It is equal parts technical guide and anarchist manifesto. She emphasizes she does not seek to draw attention to her persona—she is showing what she did only

“to show others what is possible, to offer help cashing out similar attempts, and to call for a broad collaboration of hackers that want to contribute to radical social change.”

The guide goes into depth discussing why expropriation from the rich cannot be considered theft and why it is logical to redistribute the wealth that has been amassed across centuries of exploitation. The text is punctuated with humor related to the new handle that signs the document: “Subcowmandante Marcos”—an allusion both to the former literary spokesperson of the EZLN and to certain ASCII cows from hacker culture.

You can read an English translation of the zine here. You can access the raw leaks here.

This story breaks on an appropriate anniversary. A century ago this year, the first politically motivated robbery occurred in Latin America, following the Semana Tragica in Argentina, when Argentine police, soldiers, and anti-Semitic vigilantes murdered hundreds of anarchists and Jewish people. That expropriation opened a decade in which anarchists carried out attacks on banks throughout the region despite extreme levels of state repression. Today, presuming the necessary precautions, it remains difficult for states and repressive forces to link a bank robbery to the ones that committed it.

Hacker poetry: this is not only ASCII art! When pasted into a terminal, the characters in the star execute a program that will print a very inspiring manifesto. Although you should know your OPSEC before executing random garbage found on the internet in the same computer where you keep valuable data!

Privacy for the Weak, Exposure for the Powerful

The guide explains in detail the initial intrusion and escalation of privileges within the bank system, and offers a crash course regarding how to navigate the internal SWIFT network operations until money can be transferred to a bank drop, then cashed out and anonymously converted to cryptocurrency. It also refers readers to a dump of internal data from the bank, defending this disclosure as a means of exposing those who sit at the top of economical hierarchies, protected by the privileges of “a system designed to benefit them.”

“They feel the ‘danger’ about an offshore bank and its clients with much more intensity than they feel the misery of those dispossessed by this unfair and unequal system.”

This exposure is just another example of the strategies we can follow in this uneven, ongoing war. The same war that, on behalf of state and capital, Presidente Sebastián Piñera openly acknowledged fighting a few weeks ago.

Learn to Hack, Hack to Heal

According to the “Subcowmandante,” hacking does not need to be as sophisticated as the security industry and the intelligence community want us to believe it is. The guide suggests that social engineering and phishing, combined with some operative knowledge about windows hacking, should be enough to get us inside the networks of most companies. To reinforce this idea, the publication demystifies the procedure that was used to achieve the famous hack into the Hacking Team vaults. “You don’t need to be a genius, I certainly am not.” Persistence and determination are far more valuable, she insists.

The zine also highlights the importance of self-care, an emphasis that has been rare in predominant hacker culture until now, which tends to be dominated by masculine bravado, braggadocio, obsessiveness, and self-destructiveness.

“Hacking made me feel alive. It started as a way of self-medication for depression. Later I realised that, in fact, it could be used to do something positive […] but if you feel it is feeding your isolation, depression, or any other conflicts related to your mental health, make a pause.”

It is really encouraging to see a hacker expressing her concerns about mental well-being and the importance of cultivating a genuine human connection with other people.

Calling All Hackers

Some of the points in this zine may be controversial. For example, the pragmatic approach to cryptocurrencies: “they are closer to a hyper-capitalistic dystopia than to the social economy we dream with,” but still, they are deemed an effective means of evading controls and circulating expropriated money today.

The text closes with an announcement about a “bug bounty program for hacktivists,” in which a part of the expropriated funds is offered in exchange for impactful leaks in the public interest. A list of suggested targets follows: mining, timber and cattle farming companies; companies attacking Rojava; surveillance, military and private prison companies; corporate lobbyists… Not only complete hacks qualify for a reward, since technical mentoring is also offered, and not only traditional computer hacking needs to be involved: physical access, microphone planting, and network taps are among the suggested ways to spy on evil companies in a call to pursue any means that can help others to gain full control over a wide range of the corporations that “harm people and the planet.”

This alter ego of the Sub Marcos (or, why not, the revolutionary Snowden plays at night) wants to subvert a multi-million industry that today is supporting surveillance, repression, and extractivism. What we read is a full-fledged call to arms to the hackers of the world, exhorting them to express their love for an alternate future, to desert from the ranks of those who do harm, and to intensify a coordinated offensive against capital.

We are sure that mainstream media will try to nullify and distort this anarchist hacker project. But we also know how much strength can arise from the diversity of our struggles. Paraphrasing the chants heard in the streets of Santiago during the revolt, we trust that “hackear, expropiar, otra forma de luchar” (hack, expropriate, another form of struggle) will also be shouted in the many corners of the net from now on.

J20 Zine Series

2019-04-18T18:51:00Z

On January 20, 2017, 500 anarchists determined to disrupt the inauguration of Donald Trump squared off against 28,000 security personnel in Washington, DC. That day’s clashes helped set the tone for resistance to the Trump administration; in the ensuing legal ordeal, prosecutors tried to set dramatic new precedents for repressing protest activity, but defendant solidarity completely thwarted their efforts. On the two-year anniversary of J20 2017, we published a series of articles analyzing what we can learn from the actions against the inauguration and the defense campaign that followed them. Here, we present zine versions of all those articles.

The J20 mobilization and subsequent court cases were historic events. They offer invaluable lessons about how to prepare for mass mobilizations, how to understand the strengths and weaknesses of riot police in situations of public unrest, and how to organize effective support for defendants when the state cracks down. Please print these out to share with your community.

As a bonus, in addition to the J20 zines, we have added two more posters and another zine, all of which are listed in the appendix, below.

Click on the image to download Anarchist Resistance to the Trump Inauguration.

Click on the image to download We’ve Got Your Back: The Story of the J20 Defense.

Click on the image to download I Was a J20 Street Medic and Defendant.

Click on the image to download Between the Sun and the Sea: Icarus at 12th and L.

Click on the image to download Load Every Rift With Ore: Critical Reflections on the J20 Trial and Support Campaign.

Appendix: Some Other New Designs

In addition to the J20 zines, we’ve also added the following posters illustrating our analysis Against the Logic of the Guillotine and celebrating workplace theft for STEAL SOMETHING FROM WORK DAY. Ready for wheatpasting!

Click on the image to download the poster.

Click the image to download the PDF.

Alongside the serialized audiobook version of our book about borders and migration, No Wall They Can Build, we have prepared a zine design of our interview with a volunteer from No More Deaths about the context that solidarity workers face on the border today.

Click the image to download the PDF of Fighting Border Violence from Obama to Trump.

Countdown to STEAL SOMETHING FROM WORK DAY 2019 : Announcing a New Website and Resources!

2019-04-09T20:38:00Z

In anticipation of April 15, the 10th annual STEAL SOMETHING FROM WORK DAY, we have prepared a brand new website collecting nine years of STEAL SOMETHING FROM WORK testimonials, interviews, educational materials, and analysis—a treasure trove of first-person perspectives about stealing from work. This is the definitive resource for employee-led wealth redistribution.

Go to the new STEAL SOMETHING FROM WORK DAY website!

If you need to gently test the waters to see which team a fellow employee is batting for in the class war, try bringing this to their attention without any indication of your position: “Crazy, huh?” How they respond will tell you everything you need to know.

Here’s a preview of what the site has to offer:

An FAQ answering common questions about workplace theft
A gallery of outreach materials including posters, stickers, postcards, trifolds, and zines
Interviews and other corporate media coverage, from The Guardian to a miserably dismayed Glenn Beck
International contributions to STEAL SOMETHING FROM WORK DAY

And a whole host of reading material, including…

Narratives

Out Of Stock: Confessions Of A Grocery Store Guerrilla—A former Whole Foods employee recounts his efforts to run his employer out of business by means of sabotage, graffiti, and insubordination, reinterpreting William Butler Yeats’ line “The falcon cannot hear the falconer” from a bird’s-eye view.
Steal from Work to Create Autonomous Zones—The shocking true story of how a photocopy scam nearly escalated into global revolution.
A Cashier’s Guide to Putting Yourself Through College— How one worker stole a higher education from a hardware store.
What Became of the Boxes—An adventure in proletarian revenge.
Stealing from Work Is a Gamble, but It Can Be a Good Bet—The story of one risk-tolerant employee who set out to double his earnings.
Don’t Beg for a Piece of the Pie—Take the Whole Pizza for Yourself!—A chronicle of workplace resource distribution in Eastern Europe.
Like Most Workplace Thieves, I Am an Exceptional Worker—Being a small-time criminal, demystified.

Analysis

The Team is Real—A model for how employees at a variety of businesses can support each other beyond networks of kinship or affinity.
A Theft or Work?—A grad student brings poststructuralist theory to bear on time theft, why the master’s degrees will never dismantle the master’s house, and how to resist work when it has spread so far beyond the workplace.
Yes, We Even Stole from Work under Socialism—An extract from A Worker in a Worker’s State, a book written by Miklós Haraszti in 1972 when he was a young employee at the Red Star Tractor Factory and suppressed by the Hungarian government as a threat to socialism.
Beyond Stealing from Work—Stealing from the workplace is only the beginning.

Testimonials

The site offers scores of anonymous first-person accounts of what they steal and why—offering considerable insight into the human condition (under capitalism). For example:

STEAL FROM WORK TO HELP PEOPLE

My wife and I are both employed in Central Florida through a technical division of the largest American motor company. The location overstocks the restrooms with free hygiene products like tampons and pads, soaps, and first aid kits. We both fill our bags with these items a few times a week before leaving. We make waterproof bags and leave them in areas where homeless people congregate. We have done this for over a year and have redistributed thousands of items.

–Robin Hood of Hygiene

Enjoy and stay safe!

I Was a J20 Street Medic and Defendant : How We Survived the First J20 Trial and What We Learned along the Way

2019-01-20T15:44:00Z

During the inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20, 2017, DC police arrested over 200 people and indiscriminately charged all of them with eight or more felonies apiece, hoping to set a precedent that would suppress street protest once and for all. Two years later, we are publishing a series of reflections on the events of that day and the court cases that followed it. In this narrative, a defendant who participated in the first J20 trial block recounts the legal strategy by which they defeated the state and passes on lessons to anyone facing a similar ordeal. The author, Miel, is a street medic who was arrested in the kettle on January 20, participated in the legal support organizing throughout the J20 cases, and continues to fight for a better world, undaunted by the intimidation of the police and courts.

Two year ago today was one of the most significant days of my life.
It was the first day of a long and trying battle for my freedom,
and the freedom of over 200 comrades
whose futures became intricately tied with mine
the moment we stepped into the streets of Washington DC
on that cold January morning.

What It Means to Be a Street Medic

Street medics provide first aid and emergency care at sites of resistance and struggle. Strong networks of mutual support and care are essential to building a sustainable, long-term movement for collective liberation. Being a medic is about being careful with each other so we can be dangerous together. Providing this type of wellness support can be as much about long-term care as it is about being there in the moment. It is an ongoing process of assessing needs, offering resources, and uplifting those with whom we engaged in struggle.

Health care is political. Medics are activists who seek to democratize health care knowledge and skills, subvert our communities’ dependence on corporate medicine, and help create the infrastructure we see as necessary to build another world. Street medics are EMTs, nurses, therapists, herbalists, teachers, comrades, and friends.

Give Care, Take Care.
Spread Calm and Do No Harm.

I became a street medic in December 2016, not long after Trump was elected President. I was motivated to do this as a way of bridging my political convictions and my personal calling to help people recover from trauma. Earlier in 2016, I had attended massage therapy school in Florida and studied herbal medicine online. Practicing healing arts as a trade is incomplete without an analysis of the privileges and oppressions that intimately impact a person’s wellness and experiences of trauma. I left Florida seeking opportunities to plug into communities of resistance and offer what I had learned in accessible ways, while continuing to learn different approaches to providing care.

I was working as a Lyft driver in Colorado during the election in November. I remember vividly the interactions I had with people I gave rides to that day and the progression of sentiments expressed to me from hopeful to concerned to shocked and terrified. Everyone I picked up was upset, angry, scared, furious, confused, disappointed, and desperate for a way out of this nightmare. Unfortunately, we weren’t dreaming—this was real and this was our life now. The question was—what would we do about it?

Hundreds of us took the streets of Denver that night, as occurred in cities all around the country; we came together for support and to collectively express our rage and grief as we confronted the reality that this was the world we were living in. The election was a spark, a call to action, an opportunity to connect with others who were already fed up with the oppressive conditions imposed by capitalism and who now had one more reason to stand up and resist. It was really the only thing we could do.

Large-scale planning for the inauguration was already underway. A website went up and a call went out inviting people to Washington DC to disrupt the inauguration on January 20, 2017—J20 for short. Comrades across the country were holding autonomous assemblies, organizing locally, and preparing for a day of action to oppose and disrupt the symbolic transfer of power in the White House and the unapologetic emboldenment of white nationalist identity.

I knew in my heart that I needed to go. There was nothing holding me back. I was at a point in my life where I didn’t have any long-term commitments, I wasn’t tied down, nobody was depending on me, and I found myself not feeling concerned about what the consequences could be. I just knew it was where I wanted to be. I decided I would travel to DC not only to participate in demonstrations, but to provide care for my comrades in the streets as a medic.

Prior to my departure from Colorado, a friend and I flew to Portland, Oregon to attend a 20-hour street medic training with the Rosehip Medic Collective. I want to express deep gratitude to the Rosehips for putting together several medic trainings that winter in preparation for the inauguration. This training provided me with the skills I needed to feel confident about providing medical care at a mass mobilization bigger than anything I had ever been to before.

At the beginning of January 2017, I drove out to the East Coast to meet up with friends who were also planning to go to DC. I assembled a medic kit and attended direct action trainings and planning meetings in the days leading up to January 20. When I arrived in DC, I attended a “medic mixer” where I found someone to work alongside as my medic buddy and a group of three other medics interested in attending the same protest. We formed a team and discussed how best we would track and tend to the needs of several hundred people.

We had a practice run the night before the inauguration during the protests outside the Deploraball, at which we had our first opportunity to perform eye flushes with LAW (liquid antacid and water) to treat the effects of pepper spray. We discussed ways to keep each other safe in the streets and familiarized ourselves with the layout of the city and the metro system. We planned to meet up the following morning near the protest route.

I hardly slept that night. My adrenaline was pumping as I imagined what the following day might hold. I knew this day was going to be big. But as I would soon find out, I truly had no idea what was to come.

What I Experienced on January 20

On January 20, I met up with my medic team and we made our way to Logan Circle, the starting point of the Anti-Capitalist Anti-Fascist march. The energy was powerful as we amassed as a group of around 500 and took the streets of downtown DC.

We have been told we are powerless.
But we had power in numbers.
And despite those who seek to silence us,
Our voices would be heard.

We were being followed by riot cops from the onset. We would later learn that planning meetings for this protest had been infiltrated by right-wing groups working hand-in-hand with DC police.

But we wouldn’t be silenced. While we were in the streets, we were a force to be reckoned with. It is exactly because we were powerful that we met with such strong opposition. There are not many opportunities in day-to-day life to express the deep-seated discontent we feel about the conditions under which we are forced to live. It is important to take advantage of such opportunities as outlets for our emotional experiences—which are often widely shared, even if they feel unique to us in the isolating world we live in.

Taking the streets with our comrades reminds us that we are not alone. That we are not crazy for feeling this way. That we are not the ones who are sick, it is the system that is broken beyond repair. Without these moments to provide a release, to uplift and inspire us and remind us why we continue to get up every morning and keep struggling to survive, we are left with not much more than a bleak and depressing reality day after day after day.

We were constantly on the move; there wasn’t much time to provide medical care before the cops surrounded and contained us in the kettle. I do remember stopping to flush pepper spray from many eyes during the half hour between the time we stepped off the curb at Logan Circle and our eventual capture at the corner of 12th & L, but it was in the kettle that most of the medicking happened. Over 200 of us spent upwards of eight hours trapped on a street corner with no access to water, food, bathrooms, or anything else beyond what we collectively had on our persons.

Being a street medic that day taught me how to show up for others. I learned how to manage my own emotional state in a way that enabled me to hold space for and tend to the needs of those around me. While we were in the kettle, the riot cops attacked onlookers who had been standing across the street from us. They chased people down the street and deployed pepper spray and sting-ball grenades that made loud explosions—we could hear them but could not see the effects. With the sound of a loud “bang,” a person standing beside me shrieked and began hyperventilating. They were having a panic attack. I consciously held my own emotional response to what was going on at a distance as I offered them support and care. It was empowering to find myself feeling capable of staying present and helping spread calm despite the scene that was unfolding around us.

As the cops began arresting people, I noticed that they were grabbing people closest to the perimeter, zip-tying their hands behind their backs, and putting them into police vans. I stayed toward the center of the group to avoid being taken in so I could continue to care for people on the outside, knowing that once I was cuffed and thrown in the police van there wouldn’t be much more I could do. At this point, we had no idea what was going to happen to us or where they were going to take us once we were taken in.

Most of my time in the kettle was spent circulating through the group, checking in with people about how they were doing, connecting with people I already knew and making new friends, offering snacks and water, flushing eyes, treating shrapnel wounds, and advocating for people who needed further medical care. We even made soft blockades for people to go to the bathroom and resorted to using bottles and plastic bags to contain our waste. We kept morale up by singing well-known songs like Baby I’m an Anarchist and Bohemian Rhapsody (though admittedly, y’all, we could really use some new songs) and using the human microphone to share communiques “from the ungovernables at 12th and L”:

Fuck Trump
Fuck all politicians
With a country built on white supremacy and patriarchy
No politician can serve anything else
That goes for his police pawns, too
We may be arrested here today
But we will not be silenced
We call on communities threatened by Trump to defend themselves against fascists and racists
We won’t back down and we will only grow stronger
If you’re hearing this, we call on you to become ungovernable
And build a new world in the ashes of the old

Well, we’re going to jail
But we aren’t going silently
As we’re seeing today, Trump indicates a new level of repression
But the tide of repression has been rising for some time
2 million in prison, a new Jim Crow
Surveillance on your email, surveillance on your phone, surveillance in your home
All governments imprison and police
Cops love Trump, but to get rid of both, we have to get rid of the government
From the threat of white supremacists to the threat of police
Our safety lies in building bonds with each other, outside of state control
For freedom, for anarchy!

The action continued around DC while we were in the kettle. We watched as smoke rose above buildings in the distance and learned that a limo had been set on fire a few blocks away. Checkpoints around the city were being blockaded and shut down, the Festival of Resistance was in full swing, and more and more people were assembling across the street from the kettle offering solidarity and encouragement as we awaited our arrest. The fierce resistance that continued elsewhere on the streets was a sweet reminder that while some of us had been stopped, the collective “we” would not been defeated.

When I was finally taken in around 6 pm, the cops zip-tied my wrists together behind my back, removed my shoelaces, and took all of my belongings from me. I spent four hours in a police van packed with seven others. We sang songs and played games to pass the time. Every one of us was severely dehydrated at this point; after much pleading, we were finally given some water to drink. The cops told us to tilt our heads as they poured small quantities of water into our mouths using tiny paper cups as you might find at a dentist’s office. They became visibly irritated when we asked for more than a few cups-full. We were transported to a precinct where our fingerprints were taken and we were finally allowed to use a toilet, our hands no longer bound.

They put us on a short bus to await yet another relocation to an overnight holding cell. I continued to play the medic role, advocating for someone on the bus who needed medication that the police were withholding. I reminded everyone not to talk to the cops unless absolutely necessary and gave hand and wrist massages to help ease the pain caused by zip-ties, some of which were so tight that they caused long-term nerve damage. After we continued to demand water, they gave us a red sugary drink, definitely not water, and told us we should be grateful for it. We spent what was left of the night cuddled together for warmth and comfort on a cold hard floor under bright fluorescent lights with only our pepper-spray-coated clothing to sleep on.

We spent most of the following day in an even smaller cell at the courthouse. There was a sink in our cell; it was above a toilet and the stream slowly dribbled out. We would have had to put our mouths on the metal sink in order to drink from it. We passed. A few hours before we were released, we were finally given some food, if you could call it that. Bologna and pepper spray sandwiches, washed down with absolutely nothing. Yum. I gave my rations to my cellmates and ate two mustard packets before passing out from exhaustion.

When we were called to appear in front of the judge, they put real handcuffs on us and attached them to ankle cuffs with a chain. We were referred to as “bodies” and assigned numbers which then became what we were called by. The dehumanizing element was hard to ignore. We stood in front of Judge Leibovitz as she charged each of us with one count of felony rioting. We were assigned counsel and released on our own recognisance: we didn’t have to post bail but were required to return for court.

We were welcomed back into the world by a huge crowd of people cheering for us. A friend ran up to me exclaiming, “You have to see this!” and showed me the viral video of someone in black bloc punching white nationalist Richard Spencer in the face. That was exactly what I needed in that moment. There were food and drinks waiting for us and so many hugs. We were given rides to the precinct where our property was being held. We spent the next several hours trying to get our property back and documenting what had been taken as evidence. Some medics who had not been arrested were there to help; they assisted me in documenting all the items that the police had stolen. We soon learned that anyone who was arrested with a phone that day did not receive it back.

I was eventually given a ride to my housing and spent the rest of the night watching videos from that day and catching up on everything that had happened in DC while I was detained. I drove down to North Carolina the following day. Some friends, who were now also co-defendants, were holding a debrief dinner and invited me to attend. I would spend the next several months living there, in a house with three co-defendants and some very supportive friends, working around the clock on the J20 case.

In April, a superseding indictment increased our charges to a total of eight felony charges each, including conspiracy to riot, engaging in and inciting a riot, and five counts of property damage. Some people were given additional charges such as assault on an officer and individualized counts of property damage. And just like that, we were each looking at up to seventy-five years in prison if convicted on all charges. This was a blatant attempt to criminalize dissent using prosecutorial overreach. Obviously, 200 people did not break the same five windows. The idea was to use an “aiding and abetting” theory of liability to prosecute everyone who was present in the streets that day for a few instances of damaged property. They hoped to scare us into taking pleas, intimidate us and others into inaction, and use us as an example of what could happen if you stand up to those in power.

Organizing J20 Legal Support and Solidarity

Organizing a collective defense for J20 took a lot of hard work from a lot of dedicated people, defendants and supporters alike. For many of us, it became a full-time job. It was no small undertaking to coordinate over 200 people across the country. A listserv and weekly conference calls were our best means of keeping everyone in the loop: sharing updates and motions, communicating about legal matters, making sure everyone had housing and transportation to and from DC for court appearances, coordinating in-person defendant meetings after hearings, asking questions, offering resources, and checking in with people about whether their lawyers were being responsive. It was up to each defendant whether to engage with the infrastructure we established, and we did our best to reach out to those we hadn’t heard from.

Early on in the organizing process, we established regional networks to help defendants find each other and build support locally. There were regional J20 groups in most major cities along the East Coast including DC, Baltimore, Richmond, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and New York City, and then there was a group for North Carolina at large. Having had no home base prior to J20, I was fortunate to land in a place with many other defendants nearby. We got together to participate in the spokes calls, traveled across the state to visit each other, held in-person support group meetings, coordinated rides to and from DC, shared dinners, threw benefit shows, made fundraiser T-shirts, tabled at events, and even organized a black masquerade party (“Black Masker Aid”) to raise money for our regional fund and spend quality time together. The North Carolina J20 defendants became family to me. They were my core support system during that time. We continue to stay in touch to this day. I hold each of them dear to my heart.

Spokes calls were hard. They were tedious. I don’t think anyone liked them. But they were important. Every Sunday at 7 pm, I would log into join.me to participate in hours-long conference calls with defendants and supporters from each region, discussing everything from legal strategy to finances to the most recent media articles that had come out about the case. Since every defendant couldn’t possibly be on each call, we would compile the most important notes and give report-backs to our respective regions in an attempt to keep everyone up to date. The creation of weekly news bulletins summarizing notable developments in the case helped streamline our communication, and the development of working groups helped to shorten the weekly spokes calls by adding several more meetings to the schedule—for better or for worse. We established several groups: the “PR” media team, the legal strategy working group, the political campaign committee, finances and fundraising, a medic working group, and wellness support.

Once the court system announced the groups that would face trial together, there were calls to discuss trial strategy and logistics specific to each group and calls to coordinate between trial groups. Not everyone was inclined to participate in conference calls, so we created countless signal threads and riseup pads to provide even more avenues for staying connected. Nobody was obligated to participate, but those of us most inclined to engage with organizing efforts sometimes found ourselves on three or more calls each week in addition to the calls all of us were making to our lawyers on a regular basis.

Like I said, J20 was my full-time job.

Face-to-face meetings after each hearing in DC were crucial for connecting with co-defendants who were more or less absent from the larger organizing efforts and for deepening our connections with those we had been working with online. We held meetings at a co-working space near the courthouse to decompress and discuss the case in person. For many defendants, this was the only opportunity to discuss what was going on.

Some of our most memorable meetings took place around the hearings for trial date selection in June. Nearly every defendant had appearances scheduled that week, and we took advantage of this to facilitate several huge collective defense meetings—followed by kickball games and support groups in Malcolm X Park, outings to Nu Vegan, and adventures in Rock Creek Park. Spending so much time in DC was emotionally draining, so we did whatever we could to boost morale and help each other take much-needed space from the tense environment of Superior Court.

There were at least six medics arrested in the kettle on J20. We came together to strategize about using the medic role as part of our legal defense in months that followed our arrest. We formed a working group that included medics from across the country wanting to help support us in the case. We came up with agreements about how we would present our legal defenses in solidarity with all of our co-defendants and in line with overarching street medic principles. We represented an ongoing struggle for street medics to be recognized—and not targeted—for providing care where care is needed. Motivated to use the strength of our medic defense to help in the larger collective defense, a few of of us decided to go to trial in November as part of the first trial block.

The defendants in the first J20 trial block, including the author.

The J20 Legal Defense Strategy

Prior to trial date selections, the government had come out with a proposed set of groupings, placing each defendant in one of four categories based on alleged conduct and supposed affinity group affiliations. The government was intent on taking those designated as Group 1 to trial first, those in Group 2 next, and so on. The majority of defendants were lumped into groups 3 and 4, seemingly without rhyme or reason. Regardless of their motives for choosing these groupings and this order of operations, we were aware that the ones that the government was seeking to prosecute first were some of our most vulnerable comrades.

In order to undermine their plan, we devised an early trial strategy. This strategy involved defendants in Groups 1 and 2 asking their lawyers to push for their trials to occur later than the government wanted, thereby enabling individuals from Groups 3 and 4 who felt they had strong cases and good lawyers to elect to go first. No one was pressured to make this choice. We held numerous conference calls discussing this strategy and considering the implications. This seemed like one of the best ways we could help protect each other while also turning up the heat on the prosecution. If the government aimed to strengthen its case against everyone by taking certain people to trial first in hopes of scoring easy convictions, our strategy was intended to disrupt their agenda.

We were successful in securing the first part of the strategy: in the first round of trial selection, Groups 1 and 2 were granted trials in March and April 2018 despite the government’s wish to try them at the end of 2017. Next came the hard part: figuring out who would take one for the team and go to bat first. The seed had been planted, everyone knew about the early trial strategy, and all we could do was wait to see who would step up to the plate for collective defense.

I have vivid memories of the day I chose my trial date. I was sitting in the courtroom filled with dozens of co-defendants and their counsel, my lawyers on either side of me, contemplating what to do. We had several options of trial blocks to choose from, including the very first trial set for November, the second one in December, and several others that were almost a year away. Judge Leibovitz was going around the room asking counsel to choose what trial dates their clients wanted. I quietly raised the possibility with my lawyers that I could be part of the first trial. My lawyers were apprehensive. They were there to defend me, not to look out for my co-defendants; they would have preferred to watch the first trial proceedings, allowing others to take that risk so I didn’t have to. But they were working for me, and it was ultimately up to me to decide what I wanted to do.

My decision to be on the first trial felt instinctual. I was there as a medic. I wasn’t being accused of any particular acts beyond what everyone else was facing—and the court had randomly appointed a very solid legal team to represent me. This was a high-profile case and one of the biggest law firms in the country chose to take on a client pro-bono. It was by pure chance that I ended up with them. Some defendants had been assigned run-of-the-mill CJA (Criminal Justice Act) lawyers, who often represented dozens of other clients simultaneously; some of them were largely unresponsive to calls and emails. Here I was with a full team of not just one but four lawyers and at least three paralegals working around the clock on my case. It almost felt irresponsible not to go first.

Plus, some of my closest friends were in Groups 1 and 2. If there was anything in my power I could do to help them, I was going to do it.

There wasn’t a doubt in my mind that I was making the right decision. I knew that if I had made any other decision, I would have walked out of that courtroom regretting it. My lawyers were not excited about this, but they respected my wishes. We selected the November 20 trial date, which was later moved to November 15, or N15. Seven other defendants made the same choice. After court, we all met to start discussing how to prepare for the trial. These seven people became my second J20 family. Ultimately, only six of us would go to trial due to last-minute legal complications down the road, but for all intents and purposes, this core group stuck together from that moment on—through weekly conference calls, frequent court appearances and defendant-led meetings with all our lawyers, and living together during the six weeks of trial, all the way through to the long-awaited day of our verdict.

N15: The Trial

Going to trial was its own chapter in the J20 saga. Time stood still for six weeks as Oliver, Jen, Christina, Brit, Alexei, and I sat at a table in our finest court fashion with our team of lawyers in Courtroom 203 in the Superior Court of DC. To our left sat two Federal Prosecutors: Assistant US Attorney Jennifer Kerkhoff, one of the vilest human beings I have ever had the displeasure of sharing space with, and the slightly more palatable yet equally reprehensible Rizwan Qureshi. In the jury box sat sixteen people from across the city who had been chosen to decide our fate via a several-day jury selection process at the onset of trial; and at the bench was Judge Lynn Leibovitz, known by many as “the toughest judge in DC.” Behind us, the gallery was full to the brim with co-defendants and supporters. They literally had our backs. They assured us that we wouldn’t be going through this process on our own.

Trial was an emotional rollercoaster. All of us had to put our lives on an indefinite hold, tying up loose ends and making arrangements in case we were sent to prison. We were uprooted from our homes, many of us still paying rent on houses with no certainty whether or when we would return to them. In DC, we lived in Airbnbs together with our closest support people. We had no idea how long trial would take. It wouldn’t be clear until the moment it was all finally over.

Day after long and grueling day was spent waking up early, putting on the nicest outfits we could assemble, grabbing something to eat, and taking the metro, riding bikes, or walking down to the courthouse from our Airbnbs in Columbia Heights. We would meet with our lawyers and hold little conferences in the hallway while waiting for the other cases to be called. Then we would spend the rest of the day wearing our best poker faces as we sat in that grim, windowless courtroom witnessing the proceedings of our trial unfold.

We sat there and watched as Kerkhoff and Qureshi presented their case, stating from the beginning that none of us was being accused of actually breaking anything. They called numerous officers and witnesses to the stand and showed video after triggering video of police body cams and aerial surveillance footage from that day. They put our hacked phone data contents on the big screen, pulled our belongings out of cardboard boxes wearing plastic gloves and held them up as though they were contaminated, and presented big foam display boards with screenshots of our alleged persons at various points during the march—a series of pixelated black clad blobs that appeared just to be walking. We worked closely with our lawyers, taking extensive notes, brainstorming counter-arguments, and digging up dirt on the bombastic lead detective, Gregg Pemberton.

Judge Leibovitz made it clear whose side she was on. After the jury had been dismissed one day, she made a ruling on probable cause in which she adamantly described us as a “swarm of bees, insects, or some kind of animal that coalesced and moved together as though pulled by a gravitational force.” She also compared the case to examples of “wilding” in which a few people beat someone up and all present parties are held responsible for it regardless of who threw the punches. This follows the distorted belief that violence against a person can be equated with property damage. She ruled that there was individualized probable cause to arrest each of us based on the movement of the “group” across sixteen blocks in thirty-three minutes, and the behavior of the “group” during that time. Although none of us were alleged to have personally caused any of the damage, nor was there evidence of our pre-existing knowledge that it would happen, she ruled that we were complicit in enabling the “riot” by not immediately leaving the protest as soon as the first windows were broken. For the six of us and many others, we were being charged on account of our presence alone.

All I can say is, it was a good thing this was a jury trial.

Our only opportunity to see daylight in those winter months was an hour-long lunch break that we sometimes spent decompressing and socializing with comrades on the lawn across the street, but more often in the courthouse cafeteria discussing the morning’s proceedings with our lawyers.

After a full day in court, I would head directly to my lawyers’ office in Chinatown, where we would spend countless hours looking through discovery footage, documenting notable scenes in highly-organized spreadsheets, talking strategy, researching the government’s witnesses, and planning lines of questioning for cross-examinations the following day. Sometimes we would be there until eleven o’clock at night, doing everything we could possibly think of and then some to aid in our defense. I always looked forward to the shot of whiskey my lawyer would share with me to take the edge off after a long day’s work.

My lawyers had me practice being questioned by them and cross-examined by a strong prosecutor in their law firm to prepare me for the possibility of testifying. This was a very helpful opportunity to understand just how nerve-wracking and difficult testifying can be. From this practice session, I concluded that unless it seemed absolutely necessary, testifying would not be in my best interest. They also prepared one of my best friends to testify as a character witness on my behalf. When the prosecution rested its case, we felt strongly that the government hadn’t met its burden of proof and decided not to have anyone testify in my defense. Putting anyone on the stand gives the prosecution an extra opportunity to ask presumptuous and leading questions in their cross-examination that could be detrimental to the overall case no matter how you answer. It is a strategic decision that really depends on the individual case at hand. It is a decision that should not be taken lightly.

While some of my trial co-defendants chose to bring in character witnesses to testify, none of us on trial took the stand. This was a collective decision that involved many conversations about the implications and risks that testifying posed for the group; it was also a personal decision on each of our parts to hear and respect the concerns of our co-defendants. I am proud to say that in the face of so much stress during that time, we each did our best to communicate compassionately with one another, to consider each others’ concerns, and to make choices that reflected a commitment to each other above everything else.

The Verdict

Once the closing arguments concluded and the judge gave the jury instructions, the jurors spent several days in deliberation. Although we did not have to be present in the courtroom during this time, we were required to be within fifteen minutes of the courthouse so we could get there quickly once a verdict was reached.

All we could do was wait. We went for walks, checked out the nearby museums, read books, and took naps in the family court lounge. We had no idea how long it could be before we heard something. It was mid-December and we just about lost hope that we would receive a verdict before the court went on break for the holidays, which would mean returning in January to continue deliberations.

And then, exactly eleven months after our initial release from jail, on the Winter Solstice, December 21, 2017, when the earth reached its furthest point from the sun and began to move closer again, we received notice that the jury had come to a unanimous decision for every charge against each of the defendants on trial. We rushed to the courtroom and waited in anticipation as the jurors filed in one by one.

All six of us were facing seven charges—six felonies and one misdemeanor each. The inciting charge had been deemed multiplicitous and thrown out by the judge during the Motion for Judgment of Acquittal prior to deliberations.

The transcript reads:

THE COURT: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen — or good afternoon, I guess.

I received a note from you at 11:20. It’s signed by Juror No. 11. And it says,

“We have reached a verdict on all counts.”

I’ll ask you, Juror 11, to please stand.

Sir, are you the foreperson?

THE JURY FOREPERSON: Yes.

THE COURT: Has the jury reached a unanimous verdict on each and every count as to each and every Defendant?

THE JURY FOREPERSON: Yes.

I was up first.

THE COURT: On Count 1, how do you find [Miel] on the charge of engaging in a riot?

THE JURY FOREPERSON: Not guilty.

THE COURT: On Count 2, on the charge of conspiracy to engage in a riot?

THE JURY FOREPERSON: Not guilty.

THE COURT: On Count 3, destruction of property?

THE JURY FOREPERSON: Not guilty.

THE COURT: On Count 4, destruction of property?

THE JURY FOREPERSON: Not guilty.

THE COURT: On Count 5, destruction of property?

THE JURY FOREPERSON: Not guilty.

THE COURT: On Count 6, destruction of property?

THE JURY FOREPERSON: Not guilty.

THE COURT: And Count 7, destruction of property?

THE JURY FOREPERSON: Not guilty.

Tears came to my eyes. I could barely contain myself as I waited to hear the verdicts for my co-defendants. I listened intently as one by one, Jen, Christina, Alexei, Oliver, and Brit were all found not guilty on each and every one of their charges too. The jury returned not guilty verdicts on all 42 counts. We had successfully secured six complete and resounding acquittals. What a victory!

The energy of the courtroom lifted us up and carried us all the way out of the building. Everyone hugged and congratulated us. Reporters swarmed us for statements and photographs; our phones were ringing off the hook. We had won! The battle of J20 was far from over, but this triumph was something to celebrate. And celebrate we did.

For a detailed account of our trial proceedings, check out the #DropJ20 Podcast Update on itsgoingdown.org. They produced seven episodes altogether, four during this trial and three more over the following six months. You can also listen to an interview I did after my trial ended on the Ex-Worker podcast, #62: Support, Healing, and Redefining Resistance—2017 in Review, Part II (timestamp 1:10:16).

One month after our trial returned full acquittals, 129 cases were dismissed without explanation, leaving 59 defendants still facing charges. A few of those cases went to trial in the spring of 2018, resulting in acquittals and two mistrials. There was not a single jury conviction during the entire J20 prosecution. On July 6, 2018, every remaining case was finally dismissed.

It was all over. We had won.

Our efforts for collective defense and the early trial strategy were a success. 234 people arrested, 217 indicted on a minimum of 8 felonies each, and ZERO convictions at trial. Only 21 plea deals were taken, and only one of those was for a felony. While there were other aspects of the case that contributed to the inevitable downfall of the prosecution, it feels safe to say that the early trial strategy played a big role in destabilizing the government’s case and acted as a catalyst for that sequence of events to unfold. This victory illustrates the power of collective defense and the potential that we have together. It wasn’t easy. It took a lot of hard work from a lot of people to make this all possible. In the end, it was all worth it.

If You Are Facing an Ordeal like the J20 Case

First, check out this article that came out soon after our arrest, Making the Best of Mass Arrests: 12 Lessons from the Kettle During the J20 Protests. I would especially highlight #5, “Don’t bring your real phone”—even if you bring a burner phone, wipe the data and destroy the sim card rather than handing it over to the cops)— #6, “Seize the chance to pass on skills”; and #7, “Care for each other.” I cannot emphasize that last point enough.

Also, as a general rule of thumb, don’t make things easy for the cops, don’t talk to them or believe anything they say. Ever.

Here are some other suggestions.

Take media into your own hands.

The narratives presented in the media do a lot to shape public opinion; they can make a big difference in influencing the outcome of a case. Working with sympathetic journalists can be a great way to avoid some of the risks of speaking in the media while facing charges. Especially when you are dealing with a political case, you have to consider the risk of being doxxed or harmed by those on the other side of the political spectrum as well as the legal risk that something you say could be used against you in court. Working with journalists who are willing to speak off the record or conduct interview anonymously or with pseudonyms can be a great way to keep yourself safe while getting the information out there in the ways that you want it to be understood.

Friends make the best medicine.

I met some of my best friends through the J20 ordeal; they gave me the strength to keep fighting and inspired me to give it my all. Not only was I fighting for myself, I was fighting for all the comrades who were in this battle with me; and together with our communities, we were fighting for the future of dissent and resistance in the United States. Working in solidarity with comrades toward a common goal can evoke a sense of belonging, a sense of purpose; it makes the whole experience feel much more meaningful.

Self-isolating is not the best way to deal with an experience like this.

How traumatic an experience is has a lot to do with the support we receive during it and in the aftermath. One thing that really helped me get through this was the relationships I built with the people who were in it with me and those doing support who had been through something similar themselves. Times were heavy for all of us, and knowing there were other people going through it assured me I was never alone. Holding space with these people to talk about how it has affected our lives and process our feelings about it enabled me to feel seen and validated my experience of being in a low-level crisis for months on end.

So many people have to face the legal injustice system on their own. My heart truly goes out to them. I was fortunate to have co-defendants to share the experience with and seasoned comrades to provide insight into the legal system, suggest how to engage with the process, and offer tools for confronting the many challenges of being a defendant. For example, I recommend A Tilted Guide to Being a Defendant by the Tilted Scales Collective.

Working together can also do a lot to dissipate the anxiety and paranoia that someone might snitch or cooperate with the state. It was reported by the court that there were no snitches and no cooperation with the government on the J20 case.

In an experience like this, the punishment is in the process.

The period of time between being arrested and the end of trial involves constant stress. During this time, it is especially important to prioritize self-care and reach out for help. Regulating the nervous system is key to staying well. Take baths, go for walks, ride a bike, drink tea and read a book in a warm cozy place that feels safe. Remember to breathe. Get out in nature! Find a therapist or a support group or both. Start your own support group. Eat your favorite foods. Move your body! Hike up a mountain. Call an old friend. Let people know what you’re going through. Ask for support. Do something fun to reward yourself for dealing with all the bullshit. Do yoga. Find any activity that puts you more in your body than in your head and allows you to discharge some of the activation energy that builds up from continual stress. Without a release, this energy can become stored in the body, causing discomfort, tension, and even chronic pain.

Comic relief is a great way to discharge built-up stress.

Whether it was cracking jokes in the kettle to ease some of the tension we were all feeling that day, creating the spectacular musical parody “Now That’s What I Call Kerkhophony Volume 1,” or performing a ventriloquist act with a black-clad ventriloquist’s dummy called Bloc-o, defendants found ways to lighten each others’ hearts and evoke moments of joy in the face of unrelenting state repression. We tend to take ourselves quite seriously and it can be hard to look on the bright side sometimes, but finding ways to break from the unending stress of a legal process to have a good laugh can offer a much-needed release to soothe our tender hearts.

Bloc-o, ventriloquist’s dummy and all around sketchy character.

Remember to take care in the aftermath, too.

The stress and grief experienced in the aftermath of a traumatic event or period of time can leave a person feeling out of control and having a foreshortened sense of future. The state was attempting to take away our ability to choose how the rest of our lives would unfold. They were threatening to take away our entire lives, to murder us slowly. At twenty-seven, facing seventy-five years in a cage meant I might not see life on the other side. And though there is life behind bars, and there does exist a chance of making it to sixty or seventy years old and getting out whole and having joyous, beautiful years on the outside, this was not their intention. They were trying to stifle and kill us. We had to come to terms with this anticipatory grief while fighting like hell to keep it from happening. Our lives depended on it.

In a lot of ways, the year after my trial was more difficult for me than the year I spent facing life in prison. When trial ended, I didn‘t know what to do with myself. I had spent so much time solely focused on my defense and preparing for an endpoint to life as I knew it. Regardless of how implausible the charges seemed, that very real threat had been hanging over my head, preventing me from making any long-term plans or imagining what the rest of my life might look like if I didn’t spend it behind bars.

Once I had my life back in my own hands, I found myself scrambling for something to do to fill the empty space that had been occupied for so long with organizing J20 defense. I went through intense periods of depression and anxiety. I wanted to do nothing and everything all at once. I experienced oversleeping and sleeplessness, and I wavered from being highly sensitive to dissociated and numb as the feelings and emotions of the past year finally had space to surface.

2018 arrived with a strange sense of loss, a lack of direction, a lot of contemplation, and a great deal of confusion. I was not facing decades in prison anymore, but I was facing the reality that life was rough before J20 and it would continue to be rough after J20.

I had spent the four years prior to my arrest traveling, untethered to any one physical location, unattached to where my journey would lead me, searching for a way to find meaning in this life. I rejected societal norms that encourage us to stay in one place, work a full-time job, get married, start a family, grow old and eventually die. I longed for something more meaningful than this generic cookie-cutter existence that accepts and upholds the conditions of a capitalist society. I sought to find a better place for myself in a world designed to isolate and alienate every single one of us.

Yet I lacked a sense of what “home” meant or what it might look like for me. I had both found and lost “community” numerous times, and had experienced trauma and grief in a variety of forms. At the end of the day, I didn’t feel like I belonged anywhere. I hadn’t lived in any single place for more than six months; I felt inhibited in my attempts at fostering meaningful connections in anarchist communities due to the fact that I was seen as a transient newcomer, and people tend to be skeptical of folks who come around seemingly out of nowhere. There were people I cared deeply for, scattered in various cities across the country and around the world—and while opportunities to connect with them motivated me to keep traveling, I continually struggled to carve out space to settle and establish myself as a part of a radical community. This was one of the primary reasons that I felt compelled to go to DC in the first place. I knew where my heart was, I was certain of my politics and the struggles I wished to engage with, but I didn’t have an apparent way to translate my yearnings into action. J20 was a way in.

It was also a way out. I had been worn down, repeatedly fighting an uphill battle for belonging with opposition coming from the very side I wished to fighting be on. I continually felt like an outcast with nowhere to go. I was tired of leaving one place just to land somewhere else and have the same story repeat itself over and over again; but I also found no good reason compelling me to stay anywhere. It was time to break this cycle.

I had no idea what to expect with my decision to go to DC, but at least I knew it would be something different. It took me out of the normalcy of struggling for a meager day-to-day existence and into an environment of direct confrontation and resistance. It was a chance to feel alive. It was an opportunity to engage with people from across the country and from all walks of life who shared my discontent and my yearnings for something more, something better. Even if this experience didn’t help me achieve my larger goal of finding a place to call home, it would at least provide me with a momentary glimpse of what it feels like to truly exist in solidarity with comrades and allow me to recharge my drained and depleted life-force energy.

That solidarity provided me with a temporary home. It kindled a fire blazing with passion, a flaming limousine that warmed my heart and nourished the deepest part of my being. The fire burned fiercely as its flame provided light through the darkness, growing in size and intensity as one day of action became a year-and-a-half-long battle against state repression. We came together around that fire for a shared purpose: to hold each other up, to work together and fight against a common enemy, to foster relationships of support despite the government’s best efforts at tearing us apart. We kept that fire burning; we fed it with our commitment to one another and watched it grow within us and beyond as solidarity actions amplified the collective heat around the world.

The thing about fire is that while it can be a source of power and strength, it also has the potential to burn us and everything else in its path. If we aren’t careful, it can destroy us, incinerating our spirit and consuming everything we have worked toward all the way down to the very foundations we stand upon. Internal conflicts, unequal power dynamics, the hoarding of information or access to resources, and ego-driven attempts at gaining social capital are among the factors that contributed to the gradual extinguishment of all that we had created and the quenching of any potential for continuing to carry the torch into the next field of battle.

The flame has been smothered as this particular fight has come to an end, and with it, the dissipation of solidarity and support that up until this point had prevailed. It seems we have learned how to make fires—whether the fire of revolt or of immediate solidarity—but we haven’t yet made hearths, homes for the fires and for ourselves, where the heat can linger a while longer, offering us solace and space to heal; nor do we have circles of hearths, the basic shape of so many human communities.

The immediate plummet of support in the aftermath was one of the hardest aspect of this whole experience. The community I had come to feel supported by dissipated as the time came to pick myself up and reconstruct a life for myself from the pile of ashes that remained. I knew that many of the people engaging with J20 organizing and support were doing so because we were directly in the line of fire, facing the barrel of the gun head-on; but part of me also believed we had cultivated something deeper than that. Once everything was over, the fallout hit hard and I found myself, yet again, feeling alone and like I didn’t belong anywhere. I spent more time in 2018 just trying to stabilize myself enough to get out of bed each day than actually recovering from the year prior.

I am still coming to terms with the loss of this collective cohesion that in many ways defined my identity for a period of time. The complexities of grief reflect disintegration on a community level, the erosion of a number of personal relationships formed through the experience, and the disappearance of some of my primary support from that time. This all added another dimension to the trauma I was recovering from and made it nearly impossible to have the capacity to take on even the most familiar stressors of day-to-day life, let alone develop healthy relationships or engage in any type of organizing or activism. The world quickly became a cold and lonely place as I came to feel more and more invisible in the absence of a conspicuous crisis to avert, and without a home community to sustain me.

“We grow powerful, we interrupt normality, we rise up, even sparking insurrections, and in most cases we also survive the subsequent repression, almost completely intact. But then after we’ve seemingly won, we grow increasingly upset with our weaknesses, with one another, with how ugly the world remains; we avoid staring into the abyss of how much is left to do and what we’re inflicting on the planet and ourselves, and we give up in a way. We lose one another, we move away from the fire and into the cold, alone, a million of us in nearly the exact same circumstance, yet each one alone.”

This brings me to consider what “support” actually means and looks like in the aftermath of state repression and, for those convicted, post-incarceration. How can we carve out space for the grief and the emotional ebbs and flows necessary to integrate such lived experiences into our personal narratives and histories? How can we find ways to establish ongoing long-term support for ourselves and each other while we continue to come face-to-face with a never-ending influx of crises? How can we build our capacity and our resilience knowing there will never be an end to the struggle? What can we learn from this and how can we do things differently in the future to mitigate the fallout from circumstances such as these? How can we keep that fire burning from one battle to the next, allowing it to continue to nourish us, so we might cultivate the strength to stick together and build upon our greatest potential?

I hope to always carry with me the memory of warmth provided by the ephemeral flame of resistance sparked on that unforgettable day and the year that followed, so I might be fortunate enough to feel it again someday.

Let’s remember to be gentle with ourselves and with one another as we acknowledge that life under capitalism is an ongoing and inescapably traumatic experience; that we are all doing the best we can; that we all have a basic need for care and compassion on an ongoing basis; and that we really do need each other.

We can’t prevent traumatic experiences from happening to us, but we can build our capacity to keep going.

The conditions in which we are forced to exist are hostile to our survival, adverse to our natural inclinations, and detrimental to our overall individual and collective well-being. This is exactly why must we seek to disrupt and abolish the foundations and infrastructures that perpetuate these conditions and work to create a new world in the shell of the old.

It is my wholehearted desire that we will find more ways to provide each other with long-term care and wellness support in the face of state repression and in the aftermath, when we attempt to put the pieces of our lives back together so we can get up to fight another day. Supporting and sustaining long-term movements of resistance takes an understanding of the diverse ways we are affected by the situations we find ourselves in and finding tools and approaches to care that help us maintain resilience in the face of perpetual class war and ongoing opposition.

The totality of this experience motivated me to continue deepening my exploration of healing practices and expanding my knowledge of medicine. It inspired me to dedicate myself to studying the psychological impacts of trauma, stress, and grief on the nervous system and overall well-being that are so deeply tied to our identities and our experiences of privilege and oppression in this world. It is my goal to acquire the skills necessary to offer accessible health care to those who need it most while continuing to focus on building long-term resiliency in the communities I inhabit.

On behalf of all the N15 trial defendants, I want to give a huge shout out to everyone who was there for us during trial. Our hearts are filled with love and appreciation for all our co-defendants and supporters, our friends, families, partners, housemates, and comrades who traveled to DC, who showed up day in and day out to sit in that courtroom in dashing court attire, who showed us unwavering support during those six long and challenging weeks of trial. Thank you for being there for us and for reminding us that we were not alone. We couldn’t have done it without all of you. Thanks to everyone who took or transcribed court notes, brought us snacks and gave us hugs during breaks, took us out for drinks, bought us massages, and made sure we had fun whenever possible. Thank you to the Brighter Days Collective for walking my dog for me every day while I was in court; to everyone who sent us letters of encouragement and care packages filled with sweet gifts, herbs, tinctures, zines, and more; to those who were willing to testify on our behalf as character witnesses; and to those who hosted us on breaks and helped us carve out time away from DC to take care of ourselves. A very special thanks to the amazing humans of the Pots and Pans Kitchen Collective for providing us with three meals per day, every day, giving us one less thing to worry about; and for bringing lunches to the courthouse and making it easier for supporters to continue to show up for us by feeding them as well. Thanks, too, to anyone who helped Pots and Pans by participating in meal trains, and to anyone else we may have forgotten. We also want to extend the utmost gratitude to our incredibly dedicated and hard-working team of lawyers; without them none of us would be here to tell the story of our success. We deeply appreciate each and every one of you!

In closing, I want to share a poem I wrote on the one-year anniversary of J20. This poem was written to all of my co-defendants and specifically to the 59 defendants who were still facing charges after the majority of the cases were dismissed. At the two-year anniversary, I am so relieved to say we no longer have anyone facing charges from that day, none of us are in prison, and I still feel as deep a connection to these comrades as I did when I originally wrote this.

One Year Ago Today

a love poem to my co-defendants

one year ago today,
all of us were in washington dc.
we took to the streets to disrupt the inauguration of donald trump.
we stood together in solidarity with each other and every person who is oppressed,
every person who is faced with living in a world where profit and hate dominate.
we came together,
from every corner of these so-called united states
to oppose this neo-fascist regime,
to oppose this president,
and all presidents,
to oppose all forms of hierarchy and manipulations of power.
to show our strength,
to stand up,
alongside one another,
together.
to show our resistance,
our commitment to the struggle for our lives,
for all life.
to fight for a world worth living in.

one year ago today,
many of us met each other for the first time.
we didn’t know each other’s names,
yet we knew we were on the same team.
black clad warriors
standing together
engaged in a class war,
in a social war.
a war on war.
we swarmed the city with our hearts as our compass.
we made our messages known.
we embraced a diversity of tactics
guided by the same principles
of unity,
of solidarity,
of resistance.

one year ago today,
we set the city ablaze.
we disrupted the inauguration,
we disrupted the flow of capital,
we disrupted the illusion of normalcy.
we fought back against corruption, greed, and violence.
we fought back against the coercive power structures
that attempt to dictate how we live our lives.
we showed the world that we were a threat to the status quo.
we showed the world that we would not back down.
we showed the world that we are not afraid.
we showed the world that we are ungovernable.

one year ago today,
we were met with force.
the powers that be attempted to stifle our dissent.
they attempted to shut us down,
to silence us.
because they knew we were a threat.
they knew we had the potential to make change.
so they attacked us with their weapons,
they brutalized us,
they surrounded us, and
they trapped us.
they arrested us,
and they threw us in cages,
because they didn’t know what else to do with us.
they may have stopped us, slowed us down,
but they did not break us.
they did not defeat us.

one year ago today,
and in the days and months that followed,
we were all charged with felonies.
felonies that threatened us
with more time behind bars
than any of us has spent living.
felonies that put our lives on hold,
that were held over our heads,
and altered our ability to have control
over how we spend our time.

we spent the next 365 days
enduring the punishment,
the punishment in the process
of the criminal injustice system.

we also spent those 365 days
investing our time and our energy
in each other.
we committed ourselves to the ongoing battle
for freedom,
for everyone.
we committed ourselves to supporting one another,
to sharing information and resources,
to building our networks,
to expanding our communities,
to strengthening our convictions,
to continuing to struggle
against the state,
against state repression,
against all forms of oppression;
against the silencing of our voices,
against the weakening of our movement.
we committed ourselves
to continuing to struggle
against that which seeks to destroy all that is worth living for.

one year ago today,
and in the days and months that followed,
we created something beautiful.
we formed a collective of strong, resilient people
dedicated to resistance,
dedicated to fighting these charges tooth and nail.
dedicated to each other.

one year ago today,
i found some of the bravest people i know.
one year ago today,
i found strength amongst people whom i truly admire.
one year ago today,
i found over 200 of my new best friends.
my greatest comrades.
one year ago today,
we found each other.
and one year later,
we have not lost one another.

while many of us are no longer facing charges,
many of us still are.
and as we go into the next year of this battle
we remain standing, side-by-side.

we are all in this together.
and we are not going anywhere
until all of us are free.

to the remaining J20 defendants,
i want you all to know—
you are not in this alone.
you will not be forgotten. you are seen.
and you are loved.
and you are important.
and we will get through this,
together,
no matter what happens next.

with endless love and rage,
Xx

This is part of a series looking back on the events of J20 and the legal struggle that followed it. Check out the rest of the series:

Anarchist Resistance to the Trump Inauguration

We’ve Got Your Back: The Story of the J20 Defense

Between the Sun and the Sea: Icarus at 12th and L—A Voice from the J20 Black Bloc and Kettle on the Practice of Anarchy

J20 Protest Simulator—Choose Your Own Adventure in the Streets and Courts of Washington, DC

For additional perspective on how to survive the turbulent aftermath of social movements, consult our four-part series from 2013, “After the Crest.”