<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div id="container" class="container font-size5 content-width3">
<div id="reader-header" class="header" style="display: block;"
dir="ltr"> <font size="-2"><a id="reader-domain" class="domain"
href="http://www.alternet.org/activism/now-time-nobodies-dean-spade-mutual-aid-and-resistance-trump-era">http://www.alternet.org/activism/now-time-nobodies-dean-spade-mutual-aid-and-resistance-trump-era</a></font>
<h1 id="reader-title">Now Is the Time for 'Nobodies': Dean Spade
on Mutual Aid and Resistance in the Trump Era</h1>
<div id="reader-credits" class="credits">By Sarah Lazare / <em><span
class="field field-name-field-date field-type-date
field-label-hidden"><span class="field-items"><span
class="field-item even"><span
class="date-display-single" property="dc:date"
datatype="xsd:dateTime"
content="2017-01-09T16:35:00-08:00">January 9, 2017</span></span></span></span></em></div>
</div>
<div class="content">
<div id="moz-reader-content" class="line-height4" dir="ltr"
style="display: block;">
<div id="readability-page-1" class="page"
xml:base="http://www.alternet.org/activism/now-time-nobodies-dean-spade-mutual-aid-and-resistance-trump-era">
<div class="the_body body_activism clearfix">
<p>With less than a month to go until Donald Trump and his
bevy of far-right appointees takes the White House,
communities across the United States are preparing for a
potential escalation in immigration raids, police
repression, Islamophobic targeting, corporate
exploitation and climate chaos. Many of those taking to
the streets to <a
data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=https://www.ungovernable2017.com/&source=gmail&ust=1483674245533000&usg=AFQjCNEdnWB15j2HXad9XX-2bG4H9-iPNg"
href="https://www.ungovernable2017.com/"
target="_blank">protest fascism</a> and preparing <a
data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=http://www.alternet.org/immigration/getting-prepared-fight-against-trump-immigration-raids-and-deportations&source=gmail&ust=1483674245533000&usg=AFQjCNH0kOeLOSoZjTNCQHPyeIduo71PbQ"
href="http://www.alternet.org/immigration/getting-prepared-fight-against-trump-immigration-raids-and-deportations"
target="_blank">mutual defense plans</a> in their
neighborhoods were also actively organizing throughout
the Obama years, which saw a <a
data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obamas-deportation-policy-numbers/story?id%3D41715661&source=gmail&ust=1483674245534000&usg=AFQjCNGkMMU1TAU36GX7TdQjnZc2QQ9s_w"
href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obamas-deportation-policy-numbers/story?id=41715661"
target="_blank">record</a> number of deportations,
open-ended <a
data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/08/17/war-stop-war-why-obama-doctrine-ravaging-middle-east&source=gmail&ust=1483674245534000&usg=AFQjCNGC2KjHH5l8hYqD1AVdtJszASU0QQ"
href="http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/08/17/war-stop-war-why-obama-doctrine-ravaging-middle-east"
target="_blank">wars</a> and the <a
data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=https://www.aclu.org/prison-crisis&source=gmail&ust=1483674245534000&usg=AFQjCNFnciTQ5S8jfMBCT8a7AyPPRstn4w"
href="https://www.aclu.org/prison-crisis"
target="_blank">highest levels</a> of imprisonment in
the world.</p>
<p>In the following interview, activist, scholar and
movement lawyer Dean Spade takes stock of this harrowing
political moment and offers frameworks to help social
movements navigate the treacherous waters ahead. Spade
is an associate professor at Seattle University School
of Law, founder of the the legal collective <a
data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=http://srlp.org/&source=gmail&ust=1483674245534000&usg=AFQjCNGFYsy_pWM2gVB2yfq-VFdBfVe9KQ"
href="http://srlp.org/" target="_blank">Sylvia Rivera
Law Project</a> and author of the <a
data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=https://www.dukeupress.edu/normal-life-revised&source=gmail&ust=1483674245534000&usg=AFQjCNGZARHl0nbLV6oWUI9wbjaTlMTnFg"
href="https://www.dukeupress.edu/normal-life-revised"
target="_blank">book</a> <em>Normal Life:
Administrative Violence, Critical Trans Politics, and
the Limits of Law. </em>His <a
data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=http://www.deanspade.net/writing/&source=gmail&ust=1483674245534000&usg=AFQjCNEyq8ozkGYJrwC-aTPa6UywiYSyNA"
href="http://www.deanspade.net/writing/"
target="_blank">writing</a> and organizing spans
issues from prison and police abolition to queer
resistance and global anti-militarism. Spade told
AlterNet, “We need to support the people getting killed
in the current systems, and figure out how to build the
systems we need to get everyone everything they need.
This empire is crumbling and we’re going to keep losing
the crappy, insufficient infrastructure that exists. We
need to build infrastructure we want.”</p>
<p><strong>Sarah Lazare: You’ve argued previously that we
should understand the U.S. government as being in a
constant state of war. Can you explain what you mean
by this?</strong></p>
<p>Dean Spade: For the last several years, especially
throughout Obama’s second term, I’ve been doing a lot of
thinking, writing and connecting with others about the
ways that major institutions and politicians co-opt
ideas or symbols or words from left struggles and deploy
them to shore up the very institutions of oppression
that left struggles are trying to take down. For
example, toward the end of Obama’s first term he came
out in favor of same-sex marriage and repealing the ban
on lesbians and gays in the military to make his
presidency look progressive when under criticism for
drone warfare, targeting whistleblowers, not closing
Guantanamo, deporting records of numbers of immigrants,
continuing U.S. military imperialism globally and more.
Obama used gay politics to brand himself as progressive,
just as the U.S. military used the repeal of Don’t Ask
Don’t Tell and the ban on women serving in combat to
rebrand itself as a site of liberation and freedom when
it is the most significant source of violence on the
planet.</p>
<p>Understanding this way that institutions, public
officials and corporations manage public relations is
essential right now. Whether it is a bank promoting
itself as gay-friendly or an oil company promoting
itself as green, grabbing left movement ideas, symbols
and words is a widespread, effective propaganda tactic
right now. Especially during the Obama administration, I
was interested in how we could fight this form of
propaganda, how we could build tools to discern when
various ideas and symbols from our movements were being
cynically used to cover over the ongoing operations of
violence our movements exist to dismantle. Especially
when I saw straight people who are usually very clearly
anti-war celebrating gay military service and all the
pro-military propaganda that came with it, or feminists
who usually recognize marriage as a mechanism of
gendered social control celebrating same-sex marriage as
a moment of liberation, I felt concerned about how
harmful institutions that are under attack from our
movements can rehabilitate themselves through shallow
“inclusion” strategies.</p>
<p>One frame that I think can help us through this, which
has been central to so many left movements across time,
is to understand the relationship between the United
States and both targeted populations and resistance
movements as a relationship of war. Movements have
articulated that the U.S. is at war with targeted
populations, and that the U.S. government uses
counter-insurgency strategy when approaching our
movements. In other words, the U.S. acts like this is
war, so we should, too.</p>
<p>One example that is useful to look at is the framing
from the 1951 “<a
href="http://www.blackpast.org/we-charge-genocide-historic-petition-united-nations-relief-crime-united-states-government-against">We
Charge Genocide</a>” petition brought to the United
Nations arguing that the United States has engaged in
genocide against black people according to the
international law definition of genocide. The United
States attempted to prevent the delivery of the
petition, seizing the copies that were mailed to Paris
and revoking the passports of Paul Robeson and William
L. Patterson as they tried to deliver it. The petition
became an international media sensation and a widely
read document in the U.S. The framework it lays out <a
href="http://wechargegenocide.org/">remains vital</a>
to understanding anti-black racism in the U.S.
Contemporary resistance to police violence has lifted up
this same frame, arguing that state violence against
black people is not about a few bad cops but is instead
systemic. This is a particularly important frame in the
context of contemporary rhetoric about how the U.S. is
“post-racial” because we have a black president.</p>
<p>Indigenous movements in North America have also,
obviously, consistently framed the United States and
Canada as settler colonial nations that have engaged in
warfare and genocide against Indigenous people. This
frame is essential to comprehending the colonial context
of their struggles, the outrageous claims of the United
States to be in a “trust” relationship with Indigenous
people, the meaning of treaty violations and the daily
state violence faced by Indigenous people. The warfare
frame has also been used by those working to dismantle
the war on drugs, recognizing that it instead has been a
war on people of color. Left activists have also
consistently critiqued the war on terror as actually a
war on Arab and Muslim people and a rationalization for
permanent U.S. imperial warfare abroad.</p>
<p><em>Image credit: Micah Bazant</em></p>
<p>This war-frame lets us understand the relationship
between the United States and our movements as one of
counterinsurgency. Counterinsurgency has two prongs. The
first is repression. The U.S. government consistently
and overtly oppresses resistant movements. We can see
recent examples in <a
href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/07/black-lives-matter-government-surveillance-civil-rights">government
spying</a> on Black Lives Matter groups, or the
ongoing “green scare,” which includes infiltration of
environmental and animal liberation groups, entrapment
of members and extensive criminalization of activists.
We can see it in the fact that police cleared the Occupy
encampments across the U.S. These activities are part of
a long, well-documented history that included the <a
href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/Cointelpro.html">government
infiltration</a> of the <a
href="http://iacenter.org/polprisoners/lp_primer.htm">American
Indian Movement</a>, the <a
href="http://inthesetimes.com/article/15949/how_the_fbi_conspired_to_destroy_the_black_panther_party">Black
Panthers</a>, <a
href="http://nationalyounglords.com/?page_id=13">Young
Lords</a> and other important organizations in the
1960s and '70s resulting in the <a
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLSr76vKjBw">assassination</a>
and <a
href="http://www.freethesf8.org/Persecuting_Panthers.html">incarceration</a>
of many leaders.</p>
<p>The other prong of counterinsurgency is recuperation.
Recuperation is about increasing the legitimacy of the
government and marginalizing the views of resistant
movements. This is the part where the very institutions
and arrangements that are being criticized by the
movements are recast as sites of freedom and liberation.
The Obama administration did both prongs very
effectively, particularly the propaganda part. Obama’s
presidency was consistently framed as progressive and
associated with left causes and movements in a way that
rehabilitated its reputation, and the reputations of its
key institutions like the military, despite the
realities of what the administration was doing.</p>
<p>The Trump administration is not using the same strategy
of cloaking its activities in a surface-level nod to
progressive politics: the war against targeted
populations is more overt. However, understanding
counterinsurgency will be just as important for shaping
our resistance during this period, particularly because
with Trumpism on the scene, so many elected officials,
corporations and institutions will be declaring
themselves progressive or “anti-hate” since he makes it
a low bar, meanwhile continuing to take actions that
harm people and the planet.</p>
<p>The warfare and the counterinsurgency frames can give
us some useful tools for discernment and debate about
who our allies are, and whether particular reforms are
helping dismantle harmful institutions and arrangements
or just rehabilitating their public images.</p>
<p><strong>SL: How do you see this warfare framework as
helpful for navigating which reforms set us back and
which move us toward harm reduction?</strong></p>
<p>DS: The powers that be (owners, industries, governments
and militaries) want to keep things the way they are or
enhance exploitation and violence. Our movements want to
dismantle the apparatuses of control and violence that
rob people of their land, labor and collective
self-determination. When movements are growing to resist
harm and violence, they first ignore us. When we get big
and loud enough, they acknowledge the problem in some
limited way and tell us they will take care of it,
creating a minimal reform that, as much as possible,
maintains the status quo.</p>
<p>Critical race theorists call this dynamic “preservation
through transformation,” and the example that they often
use for it is civil rights. In the face of a powerful,
disruptive, widespread movement for black freedom, the
United States made the concession of civil rights laws,
which formally make racism and racial segregation
illegal. So, the surface of the law changed, and the
story the U.S. tells about itself changes (“racism is a
thing of the past”). But the material conditions facing
black people did not change much. Schools are wildly <a
href="https://www.propublica.org/article/segregation-now-the-resegregation-of-americas-schools/#intro">segregated</a>
and unequally funded, the <a
href="https://www.thenation.com/article/the-average-black-family-would-need-228-years-to-build-the-wealth-of-a-white-family-today/">racial
wealth gap</a> continues to widen and the imprisonment
of <a
href="https://konashen.com/2015/07/09/inforgraphic-colorblind-race-justice-in-modern-america/">black
people</a> and other people of color has skyrocketed
in the last half-century. This is a major danger of
reforms—that they change the surface, but the injustice
and suffering that movements were raising hell about
goes mostly unchanged.</p>
<p>Often we see reforms that are solely symbolic. The
elected officials or institutions get to take up the
cause and associate themselves with the idea of justice
and freedom without having to endure anything actually
changing. For example, after the Trump election public
officials in Washington State, where I live, held a
press conference to declare Washington a “<a
href="http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/officials-declaring-washington-a-hate-free-state-are-shouted-down-by-youth-jail-opponents/">hate-free
state</a>." It was a feel-good opportunity where they
could all show how they are against racism, Islamophobia
and homophobia. However, these are the same politicians
who are building a $210 million new youth jail in
Seattle while the school system is operating at a budget
deficit. These kinds of empty declarations are a dime a
dozen right now, and can effectively provide legitimacy
and cover to institutions and people who should actually
be held accountable for the harm they are doing.</p>
<p>Sometimes reforms are problematic because they aren’t
totally symbolic, but they provide relief to only the
least-marginalized of the effected group. An example
would be immigration reforms that are aimed only at
people with no criminal histories or are who are wiling
to join the military or excel at school and pay for
college without access to financial aid. Since poorer
immigrants, black and indigenous immigrants, and
immigrants with disabilities are more likely to have
been targeted by police and less likely to have been
given educational support, any policy that picks out the
"<a
href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/28/dreamers-immigrant-rights_n_5227646.html">deserving</a>" will
also reinforce existing hierarchies of vulnerability and
legitimize the targeting of the most vulnerable.</p>
<p>Many reforms provide little or no meaningful change to
conditions, but go far to legitimize and even expand
harmful systems. We can see this when states propose to
build “gender-responsive prisons” in the face of
criticism about gendered violence in prisons. Building
more prisons means filling more prisons, but cloaking
that project in purported care for women prisoners can
legitimize prison expansion. Similarly, police forces
faced with criticism about racism and sexism sometimes
initiate hiring focused on women and people of color.
Our movements want to dismantle policing and
imprisonment, not win reforms that expand them.</p>
<p>Because of these complex dynamics, a big question for
movements is how you tell whether a reform (that we’re
proposing or that the powers that be are proposing)
advances our struggle or recuperates their institutions?</p>
<p>Some of the criteria that I have found useful are: Will
it provide material relief? Will this improve the life
chances of people who are most vulnerable under the
current conditions? Does it leave out an especially
marginalized part of the affected group (such as people
with criminal records, people convicted of “violent”
crimes, or people without immigration status)? Is it a
reform that says some groups (families, children, people
with jobs, people with education) are deserving and
should be given relief but others (single people,
adults, poor people, people on benefits, people with
criminal records, people without degrees) deserve to get
targeted? Is it dividing our constituency, undermining
our power, and exposing the most marginal people to more
harm? Does it legitimize and expand the system we’re
actually trying to dismantle? </p>
<p>And the question isn’t just about the content of the
reform, but also how it is being fought for. Who’s
pushing for it? Is it a bunch of people in suits behind
closed doors, or is it most affected people in the
streets fighting for this? Are we building power in this
fight, power that we can keep using to continue the
fight? Or is this reform coming from the powers that be,
the sheriffs and prosecutors and elected officials
saying they have solved the problem and we can all go
back to sleep?</p>
<p>In his recent book, <a
href="http://leftbankbooks.bigcartel.com/product/the-failure-of-nonviolence-from-the-arab-spring-to-occupy-by-peter-gelderloos">The
Failure of Nonviolence</a>, Peter Gelderloos suggests
that we ask, “Does it have elite support?” That’s a very
useful question right now, because with everyone excited
to get on the Trump-is-bad bandwagon, the bar has gotten
very low for what constitutes a racist. If you’re not
Trump, you get to proclaim you are progressive or
right-on, even if you’re actually a jail-building
elected official. Many elites are trying to get mileage
for their reputations out of supporting reforms that
won’t threaten their power or the power of their donors,
but make them look like they are on a moral high ground
compared to Trump. It is a good time for us to be
suspicious of any purportedly justice-oriented reforms
that are backed by elites.</p>
<p>The organizer, educator and writer Mariame Kaba made a
very useful contribution to this thinking about how we
evaluate reforms in an <a
href="http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/27852-police-reforms-you-should-always-oppose">article</a>
about evaluating police reforms. She asks: does it
allocate more money to the police? Does it advocate for
more police and policing? Is the reform primarily
technology-focused? Is it focused on individual
dialogues with individual cops? These kinds of concrete
questions help advance our thinking about reforms, and
they do so because they keep an understanding of the
adversarial relationships between the government and
capital and our movements in focus.</p>
<p><em>Image credit: Talcott Broadhead</em></p>
<p><strong>SL: What kind of organizing do you think is
important in this political moment, less than a month
out from Trump taking the White House?</strong></p>
<p>DS: Trump is not promoting himself as progressive.
Obama did promote himself as progressive, but only as
cover for his actual actions as the deporter-in-chief,
the expander of drone warfare and domestic surveillance,
the president of the most imprisoning nation in the
history of the world, etc. The Trump moment is different
from the Obama moment in many ways, but there are also
important similarities. We’re under a lot of the same
conditions, but not under any illusions that we can
negotiate at the federal level to transform them. We’re
all pretty aware that the levels of danger that
vulnerable people (people in public housing, people on
benefits, immigrants, prisoners) are in are very high
already and worsening under Trump. A lot of people are
scared and many are getting mobilized by that fear,
whether they are the ones in the most direct line of
fire or whether they are concerned for the people they
care about.</p>
<p>This moment, importantly, turns us to the local level.
Most of the things we’re concerned about—immigration
raids, people losing their welfare benefits, public
housing being closed or privatized, a growing private
prison industry, more power for landlords, bosses and
polluters—these things might be federal decisions, but
when they are implemented on a local level. This is the
moment to establish local projects to obstruct the
implementation of these harms and support the people
most endangered by these forces. It is time to build
many, many local projects everywhere, to do things like
<a href="http://www.blackandpink.org/">support prisoners</a>,
go with people to housing court and benefits hearings,
create <a
href="http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2960-fight-trump-stop-deportations-by-any-means">rapid
response and alert systems</a> for immigration raids,
create community networks to house each other, create <a
href="https://www.thenation.com/article/occupy-sandy-efforts-highlight-need-solidarity-not-charity/">emergency
response</a> for climate-change created disasters,
create community care networks to support people with
disabilities and old people, create childcare projects
and more. We need to do this mutual aid work alongside
work to disrupt the operations of the systems that
pulverize our communities. We need to be <a
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywWVquJeUGw">blocking
deportations</a> with our bodies, sabotaging jail and
prison building efforts and occupying public housing
slated for demolition.</p>
<p>In contemporary culture, we are strongly encouraged to
spend all our political energy declaring our positions
on social media, and none on supporting targeted people
or actually building the world we want to live in. The
work we need to do is deeply local. It is not glamorous,
but it is satisfying and radical. Figuring out how
evictions work in our town, what resources tenants are
missing in those processes, and how to support the most
vulnerable tenants who are the least likely to make it
through those processes when fighting rich landlords is
work we can actually do. And when it fails, we must also
be ready to use direct action to protect tenants and
target landlords. </p>
<p>We don’t have to be lawyers to support people through
bureaucratic procedures. Many of us have the research
skills to support these kinds of projects and can share
and build those skills with others. If we have the
internet, we can be doing research for people getting
out of prison about housing and health care, helping
them with that transition. We can be using various kinds
of literacy and access to create meaningful advocacy and
accompaniment projects. It is the right time for solid,
long-term, committed mutual aid work. It is a matter of
survival, and it is a matter of creating a new world.</p>
<p>I’m very inspired by groups like <a
href="http://www.nooneisillegal.org/">No One Is
Illegal</a>, which has chapters across Canada. NOII
has done organizing around people being in immigration
detention and facing deportation. They consistently use
grassroots organizing and direct action to assert
political pressure to support people facing detention
and deportation and delegitimize Canadian border
enforcement policies and practices. We’ve seen these
strategies building in the United States with the <a
href="http://www.notonemoredeportation.com/tag/hunger-strike/">hunger
strikes</a> of people in immigrant detention over the
last several years and work to <a
href="http://www.notonemoredeportation.com/2013/10/10/tucson/">block
deportation buses</a>. #Not1More has demonstrated the
powerful work that can happen with solidarity between
people inside and outside immigration prisons.</p>
<p>When we’re committed to regular practice with group of
people with whom we build trust to commit to a project,
and those groups are in solidarity and connection with
other groups in similar kinds of deep work, I think this
is our way to prepare for this Trump moment and all the
ongoing moments we’re going to face during and after
this presidency. This work builds the relationships and
movement infrastructure we need to prepare for the next
storm, the next war. To be honest, we needed this work
with Obama in office too. Local, grassroots work that is
rooted in mutual aid and has lots of people
participating is vital for both survival of the most
targeted and building the power to displace the
structures that have been making war on targeted
populations for centuries. I hope that the ways that
many people are feeling mobilized by the election help
us develop more of this work.</p>
<p><strong>SL: You’ve talked about now being the time for
‘nobodies.’ Can you explain what you mean by that?</strong></p>
<p>DS: I got this concept from the activist, writer and
filmmaker Reina Gossett. She <a
href="http://www.reinagossett.com/commencement-address-hampshire-college/">talks</a>
about "nobodies" and "somebodies" and asks us to think
about when we are doing things to try to not feel like a
nobody. When are we doing things to try to feel like a
somebody? Her inquiry made me think about how many
people are excited about social movement ideas and
transformation but don’t actually give a f*ck about
homeless people in their neighborhoods, or actual people
in prison in their city and state. Even people who have
been through poverty or criminalization or migration are
encouraged to wash our hands of it as soon as we can, to
villainize anyone still struggling.</p>
<p>In our movements, it often seems like people are
struggling to be seen, to be somebody, to meet with
someone who is somebody like the mayor or an activist
celebrity or a Hollywood celebrity. What would it look
like to turn that upside-down? How could I shift that
and say, I can’t wait to shake the hand of the person
whose name I don’t know who’s in solitary in the prison
50 miles from my house. And that’s my life goal, not
meeting Beyoncé or Noam Chomsky, but connecting with
someone who is being tortured and denied human touch.</p>
<p>As someone who has been a poverty lawyer and spent time
fighting in these murderous bureaucratic systems, I have
seen how they are very local and idiosyncratic. We need
to getting in the muck of local systems. All of us need
to figure out something that we’re kind of good at or
willing to study up on, something we feel passionate
enough to make a long-term commitment to and dig into
material work. We need to support the people getting
killed in the current systems, and figure out how to
build the systems we need to get everyone everything
they need. This empire is crumbling and we’re going to
keep losing the crappy, insufficient infrastructure that
exists. We need to build infrastructure we want. We need
to actually, concretely build the world we want to live
in, before the next blackout or storm comes, and in the
face of the longer-term deterioration of our educational
systems, hospitals, all of it. This local work is
building our movement, because people who are doing that
work are mobilized, have relationships with each other,
know each other’s kids and elders, and have skills for
connecting across difference that are lost in an
individualist, isolating society.</p>
<p>The warfare frame helps us with this work. If we
understood that there is a war against targeted people
and our movements, we would be more ready to help people
escape the raid, escape the jurisdiction, escape from
prison. We might be more ready to open our homes to the
person getting out of prison, set up the bail fund, hide
someone from the cops or ICE, give someone a ride, or
whatever it takes. </p>
<p><em>Debbie Southorn helped with this interview.</em></p>
<div class="bio-new body_activism">
<p>Sarah Lazare is a staff writer for AlterNet. A former
staff writer for Common Dreams, she coedited the book <em>About
Face: Military Resisters Turn Against War</em>.
Follow her on Twitter at <a
href="https://twitter.com/sarahlazare">@sarahlazare</a>.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863.9977
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.freedomarchives.org">www.freedomarchives.org</a>
</div>
</body>
</html>