Max Leonard (Lanterne Rouge)

Lanterne Rouge: The Last Man in the Tour de France
Max Leonard

An entertaining run through of the lantern rouges from early days to present. From when it was a disgrace to be avoided to when it was as eagerly fought as first place, nearly, with attendant shenanigans like hiding behind vans to let others pass instead of jumping trains. Being last made you noticed so you'd command more money at other races. I won't go through all the different types described but each chapter has an angle. The overriding message is that although last these riders came last they are still extreme athletes who would leave the average club rider behind after quarter of a mile, sorry, kilometre, and who despite knowing they aren't going to win pull themselves round the entire route including all those mountains for the hell of it. Or more probably because they are paid to pull other team mates around in their role as domestiques. A fascinating read and insight into what makes the mass of le Tour riders click when they have little chance of fame except through the odd stage win or by holding the red lantern on the last day which is always a photo opportunity.

The author adds a personal touch in that he's attempted one of the tours climbs but is defeated in the face of terrible weather and he then re-attempts later. I won't spoil the result for you. And he illegally climbs a mountain next to a railway. Brings a nice touch and also contrasts how even pretty good amateur riders such as him pale next to the horrors endured by the pelaton who cycle thousands of kilometres in a few weeks up and down mountains regardless of injury or weather. Riders don't give up on le tour - le tour drops them either through severe injury or unable to meet the daily cut off time. OK, so a few top riders do stop half way for season long tactical reasons but they could carry on and it's probably on team orders. The rest of the teams carry on regardless. Hard men indeed.

Peter Gelderloos (Anarchy Works)

Anarchy Works (Examples of Anarchist Ideas in Practice)
Peter Gelderloos

Well written run through of how anarchy can be a practical state(less) of affairs and a realistic goal for how people can live together and how such societies be sustained and flourish. It is peppered with examples of stateless societies including those that are consciously anarchist, those that are built on non hierarchical community or socialist principles (collective commune-ist) and those that would not recognise themselves as either anarchy or stateless which are often age old societies that have not been brought into the "modern" states within whose boundaries they have traditionally lived. Many of the references are to past societies especially those that have been colonised by invaders and those created within revolutionary times.

It is a logical journey through the realistic utopia of anarchy written by a committed anarchist who has lived within many of the stateless or anti-state communities that are described. And who has agitated for such communities. Firstly the question as to whether humans are naturally cooperative or competitive is tackled arguing that we are not naturally selfish but look to help each. This breaks down when artificial social boundaries are enforced on us, such as hierarchies, that are hijacked by individuals or groups who take advantage of others resulting in society taking the same attitude and descending into the current global capitalist nightmare that makes a few richer and richer and the many poorer and more poverty stricken. All then fight each other to climb the capitalist ladder but of course those at the top are kicking others back down. This is my analogy not the authors whose arguments are far more convincing and comprehensive. The very fact that humans live in some degree of cooperation across the globe, even if cooperating with others to the detriment of other groups, shows that we have a spirit of cooperation within us. So how to use it for the good of everyone rather than just ourselves or for the few. 

Having taken the spirit of cooperatism as a given Peter then explains how society can operate without descending into "anarchy" or at least the media's view of anarchy as everyone out for themselves. Obviously this is a very biased view as anarchy is about cooperation and collectivism rather than the neo liberal free market version of statelessness (except where the armed forces are needed to put people down and take over other's resources) which is an obvious sham. Various arguments as to why anarchy won't work in practice are knocked back including how such a society could, and indeed such societies have and do, make decisions, why anyone would work if others would share with us, why we wouldn't exploit the environment (as if it could be any worse than today), and what would stop crime if there are no prisons. There are many answers to these questions and many ways of ensuring that such a society benefits and supports everyone in a free and equal way. That is part of the anarchist view which is not to impose one version of your "truth" on others but for each person and community to find their own way. That is what being stateless is all about - not enforcing rules but encouraging good behaviour. There are times when it may be necessary to exclude people who are not cooperating and some of the examples given end in death which I'm not comfortable with but, again, that is part and parcel of self governance.

The next part of the book deals with how we can create such societies whether by stepping outside existing structures or through civil unrest and revolution. This latter is very likely to be required as any working anarchist society existing within the current world order will attract the attention of existing power structures either to stop the rest of the population looking at it and saying yeah, we don't need hierarchies and the state, or to take over resources held within the targeted communities. It's also a moot point as to whether isolationist communities are anarchist even if left alone as they are not pushing for this to be the new world order. Maybe again, each to their own. The necessity of having a global revolution is emphasised as free and stateless societies living in geographic areas will be targets for non anarchist neighbouring states. This part of the book covers how anarchist communities have had to, and will need to, fight a violent fight where necessary. And necessary it is and will be. Again, I'm less comfortable with the idea that violence is justified and righteous as it's a slippery slope from fighting outside invaders to killing those within your society who don't agree with your opinion. A long slope admittedly. Peter has written other books about how the principle of non violence has been detrimental to the aims of true libertarians, environmentalists and other like minded movements.

A very thought provoking and inspirational book that holds no punches as to how necessary it is for humans to move to anarchist societies, how it is inevitable either through revolution or due to capitalist prompted global societal and environmental breakdowns, and how we need to embrace rather than fight what will be the end game of a global stateless society. As it was in the beginning of human society. Well worth reading whether you view yourself as an anarchist or not.