UPPING THE ANT

fl/flu?ll(l/fl/%ffltf and aclion

S,

Spamphlel series
Collective Action Behind Bars

A history of jail solidarity and its importance
for today's social change movements

WWW.UPPINGTHEANTLORG
PRING THE AN

a journal a/ /fl?aw;; and aclion
Editorial Committee

Jasmine, Toban Black (associate editor), Devin Clancy;
Karl Gardner, Kieran Hart (on leave), Matthew Hayter (on leave),
Niloofar Golkar, Salmaan Khan, Sharmeen Khan,

Elise Thorburn (associate editor)

Advisory Board.

Chicagor Rita Camacho, Toroneo; Chiis L

Eaber, Windsor; David Hugill, Ortaw: Robyn Letson, Toroato: ¥) Lily §

Scote Neigh, SudburyThomas Sackowski, Toronco; Amy Saundees, Torato; Amcla
Spedalire, Toronto; G Shapak, Torono.

Kicran Aarons,

* Upping the Anti s Journal of Thoery and Action % ISSN i718-0873%

Maiting Address 909 Bloor St Wes
MoH 4Hy, Canad

Emsil uppingthesntidgmilcom
Website wwwuppingtheantiorg

PO Bos 10571, Toronto, Onvaro,

Twitter twittezcomfutsournsl
Facebook fscchook com/UppingTheAni

Unless orhervise stated, contributions express the opinions of ehei writes and

o those of the Advisory Board or the Edicorial Committee. Ifyou want to reprint

acticesorthe complete textof the jouenal, please contact . Our s of subsceibers

s occasionlly used by other organizaions 10 do onetime mailings of information.

our readers might be nceresed in. Plee contace uppingeheansidisro@gmailcom
i€y0u would prefe not o eceive these mailings.

All maserial © UTA Publicatons 2016
3 WERMES: HISTORY OF JAIL SOLIDARITY

Collective Action Behind Bars

A history ;‘Jm( solidarity and its importance

for today's social change movements

by Kris Hermes.

Al residents of Philadelphia and Cleveland anticipate this year's
political party conventions and the mass protests that they
invariably invite, the Republican convention hosted by the City of
Brotherly Love 16 years ago holds many important lessons. It was
in Philadelphia during the protests against the 2000 Republican
National Convention (RNC), that then-Police Commissioner John
Timoney developed an aggressive model for policing dissent that
included unwarranted surveillance and infiltration, preemprive and
unlawiul arrests, as well as rampant violence. Notably, this model
has become the normative law enforcement response to mass
demonstrations across the US, whether reacting to mostly-white
Global Justice activists, the Occupy Wall Street movement or, more
recently, youth of colour demonstrating against police violence
under the banner of #BlackLivesMatter. However, the way that
RNC 2000 protesters resisted the legal system in Philadelphia that
is also important to our political history and provide vital lessons
t0 those protesting in the streets today

With the intensified use of militarisic, violent, and repressive
domestic policing methods, activists are increasingly forced
to spend time in jail and endure criminal prosecution for their

INTERVENTIONS PAMPHLET 4

actions. But, by using certain tactics collectively, activists have
mitigated harm in ail and achieved objectives that would have been
impossible through individual action. According to the Just Cause
Law Collective (JCLC), the term “solidarity tactics” encompasses
“many different forms of non-cooperation, all of which are designed
t0 produce leverage for collective bargaining ™

“The word“solidarity”is ubiquitous today and can be interpreted
differently depending on the context in which it is used. Some
people act in solidarity with those struggling in other countries.
Some show solidarity with political prisoners. Occupy Wall Strect
activists prioritized “jail support” as a form of solidarity between
arrestees and their comrades standing vigil outside the jails. White
activists contemplate ways of working in solidarity with today's
youth of color leading the Movement for Black Lives. People are
probably most familiar with solidarity tactics historically used by
organized labour, such as pickets, strikes, and boycortts.

The JCLC argues that the use of solidarity tactics by criminal
defendants s less well-known amongst activists, but can be effective
“particularly when the defendants are well-organized, similarly-
situated, and working together in large numbers.” Jail solidarity;
as it has become known, has a rich history in the US through its
periodic use over the past hundred years by many different social
movements. When activist arrestees have utilized their collective
strength, often through militant and confrontational tactics, they
have won demands and built power against a legal system designed
to coerce and oppress. Integral to the success of jail solidarity is
the ability to exploit vulnerabilitis in the legal system through
collective action and non-cooperation. This is achieved because
the authorities need the cooperation of arrestees to process them,
i’ expensive to detain large numbers of people, and many jails are
near or beyond capacity and unable to deal with heavy influxes. Jail
solidarity is typically used with the aim of achicving certain goals,
such as gaining equal treatment for all arrestees; protecting targeted
groups and individuals, such as people of color, immigrants, and
queer people; helping to negotiate the widespread dismissal or
reduction of charges; and politicizing the incarceration process by
forcing a public discourse and controlling the media narrative.

By refusing bail, arrestees can stay in jail together and place
greater strain on the state. But this can sometimes involve a serious
time commitment. And, while effective negotiations can eliminate
the need for arrestees to defend themselves later in court, it can
also take several days to achieve that goal. Therefore, such tactics

5 HERMES: HISTORY OF JAIL SOLIDARITY

are often only used by those who can endure the real-world
consequences of spending days i jal,like missing out on work and
other cconomic, social or family obligations.

Non-cooperation tactics can vary dramatically and are often
as creative as the arrestees employing them. The mass refusal
to provide identification is the foundation of contemporary
jail solidarity and the tactic most familiar in the activist milieu.
By agreeing not to carry identification, to use aliases o “action
names,” and refusing to cooperate during processing, arrestees can
severely hamper the efforts of jail authorities and create a singular,
collective identity that builds strength and fosters selfiessness.
This unified approach, which can be understood as an extension of
collective political action in the streets, stands as a human bulwark
against the jail system’s efforts to atomize and incapacitate those
under s control.

Other non-cooperation tactics include collectively. sitting
or lying down, refusing to walk or move, surrounding or piling
on top of those at risk of being isolated, refusing to get dressed,
and changing clothes with other arrestees. Singing, chanting, and
making loud noises are also common tactics used to strengthen
solidarity, meet a demand, divert attention, or generally disrupt
the jail process. All o these tactics risk being met with retaliation;
many arrestees have been brutalized for their refusal to cooperate,
underscoring the significance of deciding when, how, and how long
to engage in such tactics.

The hunger strike, or political fast, has been used throughout
history by arrestees and prisoners as a tactic of resistance. From
Irish republicans to Scottish, British and American suffragettes,
and from Tibetan freedom fighters to Nelson Mandela and other
Black South Africans jailed during Aparcheid, political prisoners
have used the hunger strike to fight repression and advance
movements for social change. Most recently,prisoners in California,
Guantanamo Bay, Palestine, and Bahrain have used hunger strikes
to demand their release as well as improved conditions in jail. Over
a two-month period in 2012, more than one-quarter of the 4,700
Palestinians being held by Isracl engaged in a hunger strike. A year
later, nearly two hundred undocumented migrants imprisoned in
Ontario, Canada went on hunger strike to demand an end to their
arbitrary and indefinite detention in maximum security jais.

Political arrestees have also used jail solidarity to demand
mass arraignments and collectively refuse plea bargains in order to
exercise their collective strength in the courts. By pursuing speedy

INTERVENTIONS PAMPHLET 6

trials and court-appointed attorneys rather than the universal norm
of accepting plea deals, activists can seek vindication by placing
stress on the courts, which are often as overburdened as the jail
system.

While the examples of jail solidarity are too numerous to list
here, it usefl to look back on how solidarity tactics played out,
whether they were effective, and why or why not. There are several
case studies worth noting in what is a fascinating history that holds
many important lessons for organizers who might use and train
activists in jail soldarity tactics.

Industrial Workers of the World
and the Free Speech Fights

Jail solidarity tactics have been used in the US since at least the
time of the “free speech fights” organized by the Industrial Workers
of the World (IWW) in the early 1900s. In the first few years of
the union's existence, organizers reached out to workers, especially
migrant and new immigrant workers, by mounting soapboses on
city streets across the country: Because the IW'W was so successful
at using the soapbox as a tool to organize workers and given the
concurrent struggle over the collective commons at the time, local
governments in several cities worked hand-in-hand with lumber,
agricultural, and mining interests to pass ordinances outlawing
public speaking on the street.

Beginning in 1908, IW W organizers (Wobblies) led an almost
decade-long fight against the suppression of their ight to speak
out and organize. The Wobblies' tactics in these highly publicized
free speech fights were based on solidarity tactics and closely
resemble some of the contemporary jail solidarity efforts. The
most widely used tactic by the Wobblies was to clog the local jails.
Every Wobbly arrested for uttering the words, “Fellow workers and
friends,” was replaced by another willing to risk arrest. In this way,
the largely single male, unemployed and temporary workers were
able to flood the local jals beyond capacity; placing considerable
pressure on local political and legal systems.

The first free speech fight in Spokane, Washington in 1908
quickly grew t0 a total of twenty-six struggles across the country,
including in Los Angeles, Fresno, San Dicgo, Missoula, Denver,
Kansas City, and Everett. Some fights took longer than others, but
almost all of them resuted in the repeal of local anti-free specch
Taws.
7 HERMES: HISTORY OF JAIL SOLIDARITY.

Strategic overcrowding of local jails was an effective solidarity
tactic used by the Wobblies, but not the only one. Labour historian
Philip Foner claimed that, “Each Wobbly in jail demanded a separate
tial by jury to clog the courts and administrative machinery.” As
author and academic Matthew May explains, the jailed free speech
fighters also engaged in hunger strikes and passive resistance
techniques, such as refusing to do manual labour According to
May, many free speech fights were hailed as victories, including in
Spokane, where “the union went from about 30 members to having
about 3,000 members on the books in about 6 months.” However,
the main goal of repealing anti-free speech ordinances came at a
significant cost, with many Wobblies being killed during the struggle

The Civil Rights Movement

Fast-forward to 1960, during the Civil Rights movement. The
Congress on Racial Equality (CORE), the newly formed Student
Nonviolent Coordinating and others were
engaged in sit-ins, using nonviolent dirct action to protest the
whites-only lunch counter service across the South. Once arrested,

‘ommittee (SN

hundreds collectively refused to pay their fines and, instead, chose
to remain in jail. Author and Sociology professor Doug McAdam
characterized these “jail-ins” as an effective way to “dramatize the
oppressiveness of southern racism through mass jalings, while
at the same time straining the law enforcement resources of the
affected municipalities.”s

Another example of jail solidarity from this era was tied to the
Freedom Riders, a group of mainly college students and civil rights
activists who departed from Washington, D.C. on Greyhound
and Trailways buses in May of 1961 with the aim of forcing racial
integration at bus and train stations across the South. When they
reached Jackson, Mississippi, the Riders were brutally arrested,
charged with “breach of the peace,” and sentenced to the maximum
punishment of four months in jail and a $200 fine. Instead of
holding them in the Jackson city jail, Mississippi Governor Ross
Barnett thought he could stop the Riders in their tracks by sending
them o the notorious farm labour prison, Parchman Penitentiary.
Barnett’s plan to intimidate the Riders by making them do “hard
time” at Parchman backfired, however, serving only to strengthen
their resolve to make Parchman the next site of the civil rights
movement. The 45 jailed Freedom Riders turned into hundreds as
groups like CORE and SNCC recruited people from across the

INTERVENTIONS PAMPHLET 8

country willing to remain in jail for at least 6o days, putting into
motion one of the most effective jail soldarity campaigns of that
Finally in September 1961, after more than 300 arrests and
vigorous jail solidarity by arrestees, as well as a national campaign
to put pressure on the Kennedy administration, the Interstate
Commerce Commission issued a sweeping desegregation order,
bringing down the Jim Crow “coloured only” and “whites only’
signs that had hung in bus and train terminals for generations.

The Anti-nuclear Movement

Another era of conspicuous mass resistance to the legal
system occurred in the late 19705 and early 'Sos during the anti-
nuclear movement. This era is important not only because of the
tremendous impact solidarity tactics had at the time, but also
becauseits success inspired the use of similar tactics in the following
decades. The Clamshell Alliance, which formed in 1976 to oppose
the construction of a nuclear energy plant near Seabrook, New
Hampshire, ushered in a wave of politically motivated occupations.
A massive occupation at Seabrook in 1977 resulted in the arrest
of more than 1,400 activists who were detained in armories for
w0 weeks. “In the armories,” writes author and activist Barbara
Epstein, “a powerful spirit of community was created” Epstein
explained how “decisions were made by consensus within and
among affinity groups, and officials were forced to negotiate with
a leaderless’ movement that put forward different representatives
every day" (60, This approach was continued into the early 19805
and according to Epstein, “trained a generation of activists and
created networks to serve as bases for other movements” (92).
With the nuclear power industry in decline, the movement shifted
its focus to nuclear arms and began targeting the nuclear-weapons-
producing Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory:

The Livermore Action Group (LAG) organized multiple
occupations, the first of which occurred in June of 1982, drawing
more than 5,000 people and resulting in more than 1,300 arrests
After a negotiation process between local officials and jailed
activists, facilitated by movement-based lawyers, arrestees who
stayed in jail were arraigned in two or three days on jaywalking
charges. A year later, similar occupation had a markedly different
result. Protesters had so effectively organized themselves in
advance of the June 1983 action that hundreds of people were
9 NERMES: HISTORY OF JAIL SOLIDARITY

prepared to resist fines, bail, or probation. Quickly rejecting an
initial plea offer, arrestees collectively refused w0 go to their
arraignment. After holding out for more than a week, arrestees had
exercised enough leverage by clogging up the jail system to avoid
more serious charges and negotiate a plea offer of “no contest,”
resulting in a low-level conviction but not an admission of guilt

Shutting Down the WTO

The 1999 World ‘Trade Organization (WTO) protests in Seattle
ushered in a renewed vigor for collective bargaining and collective
resistance in jail, due in lrge part to Katya Komisaruk, an attorney
who was part of the legal team for the Direct Action Network
(DAN), one of the groups mobilizing people to protest the W'TO.
Komisaruk took what she learned from her involvement in the
anti-nuclear movement of the 1980s and, with a handful of others,
resurrected the tactics of jail solidarity and helped to inspire a new
generation of collective resistance to the legal system.

After hundreds of people were arrested in retaliation for the
successful disruption of downtown Seattle and the subsequent
breakdown of trade talks, activists began to practice jail solidarity
Natalie Mandelin, a resident of Seattle at the time who later helped
form the Midnight Special Law Collective, said she and dozens
of others were herded onto a bus after approsimately 150 people
were arrested without a chance to disperse. While being driven
t0 a nearby Naval base to be processed, Mandelin was asked by
others on the bus if she'd heard about jail solidarity. “When we
all get processed, none of us will have our 1D;” Mandelin recalled
someone saying, *We're going to refuse to identify ourselves, and
refuse to cooperate so that we can all work together to get the same
low-level charges by putting pressure on the system.” Mandelin
hadn't previously heard about jail solidarity; but the anger from
her arrest compelled her to take part. While stil in holding cells,
large numbers of arrestees made identification more difficult by
exchanging clothing and wristbands, which in turn triggered jail
authorities to use violence against them. Eventually, arestees were
taken to the maximum-security area of the jail and placed on 23-
hour lockdown

Outside the jail, some of the roughly 2,000 protesters who
had gathered to support the hundreds being held inside blockaded
the front entrance and demanded the release of arrestees. As a
result, city officials agreed to allow DAN lawyers to meet with
INTERVENTIONS PAMPHLET 10

groups of jailed protesters. However, because of the city's general
unvillingness to negotiate, jail solidarity began to break down.
After four days, more than 600 people had given their names and
the vast majority had been released.

The failure of jail solidarity in Seattle was historically rare
and represented the crucial need to properly assess the capacity
of the jails and the degree of obstinacy of local officials. Yet, the
subsequent court solidarity effort o collectively demand trials was
duly effective in placing enough pressure on the city to abrupely
drop the vast majority of charges against W'TO protesters.

The 2000 IMF/World Bank Demos DC

In April of 2000, approimately 1,300 people were arrested while
protesting the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World
Bank (WB). Just as with the WTO protesters arrested less than
six months prior, approximately 150 arrestees in DC refused to
identify themselves and engaged in various jai solidarity tactics.
Although some violence against arrestees had occurred early in the
detention process, mainly by US Marshals,jail authorities allowed
arrestees to meet in large groups for long periods of time. This
allowed representatives from the gender-divided arrestee groups
to meet with members of the legal team to strategize and discuss
possible terms of negotiation. The representative arrestees then
took what had been discussed back to the larger arrestee groups
in order to gain consensus on how to proceed. On the third day,
however, access to the legal team was cut-off and people were held
in individual cells in order to stop them from meeting s agroup. In
response, approximately 6o male arrestees began a hunger strike.
The warden quickly acquiesced, allowing arrestees to again meet
and have access to the legal team.

Concerned that activists would have an influential effect on
prisoners in general, jail authorities tried to pit one group against
the other by putting general population arrestees on 23-hour
lockdown and denying them visiting privileges, then blaming those
restrictions on the protesters. This strategy failed, however, and
instead created stronger bonds between the groups and compelled
protesters to use solidarity tactics to end the general population
lockdown and restore their visiting privileges. With authorities
fustered by ongoing solidarity tactics and with supporters from
around the country applying increased pressure on the mayor,
police chief, and warden, a settlement agreement was reached.
11 HERMES: HISTORY OF JAIL SOLIDARITY

Almost all of the protesters were charged with the equivalent of a
jay walking ticket and a $s fine.

While many of the jail solidarity tactics used by IMF/WB
arrestees were similar to tactics used in Seattle by WTO arrestees,
the main difference was acquiescence by the District of Columbia
offcials in allowing IMF/WB protesters to negotiate the terms
of their release. Whether this capitulation was due to political
pressure, overcrowded jails, effective use of solidarity tactics, or
some combination thereof is unclear, but it illustrates without
question that successful use of such tactics is possible and that
the use of collective strength in jail stll holds great promise for
dissidents and others forced to endure repression at the hands of
the state.

At the RNC in 2000

By the summer of 2000, the Global Justice movement reached
its apex and jail solidarity was de rigueur among direct action
organizers. But, government officials, law enforcement, and jail
authorities were not only becoming keenly aware and less tolerant
of such tactics, but they also bristled at the call for direct action
against police brutality,the death penalty; and the prison industrial
complex.

What set Philadelphia apart from other cities hosting major
summits in the era of the Global Justice movement was the
entrenched nature of the city’s political machine. Mayor John Strect
used the mainstream media to make clear his intolerance to protest
in the months preceding the RNC 2000. Police Commissioner
imoney — scen as a thug by many residents ~ backed up this zero-
tolerance atitude, and became the architect of many of today's
aggressive crowd control practices. Rounding out this hostile
environment for activism was District Attorney Lynne Abraham,
who had deftly navigated the city's “old boy's club” network to gain
the title of America’s “Deadliest DA from the New York Times
for her extensive use of the death penalty! These players ensured
that RNC protesters were met with violent police repression.
Hundreds were brutally arrested, excessively charged, and held on
unprecedented bails as high as $1 million, but nonetheless resisted
Philadelphia’s jail system with great determination.

Most of the jail solidarity tactics used in Philadelphia were
similar o their historical antecedents, as detailed above and
documented in my book, Crasbing the Party: Lessons and Legacies from

INTERVENTIONS PAMPHLET 12

the RNC 2000 New tactics were also used to push the envelope,
like piling on top of someone to avoid targeted abuse and refusing
to be fingerprinted, but these tactics often received a violent
response by guards. Numerous arrestees were physically and
sexually assaulted, denied food and medicine, and prevented from
secing their attorneys in retaliation for their actions.

In the end, the city refused to negoriate and many arrestees
resisted in jail for two weeks before divulging their identities
Although il solidarity in Philadelphia yiclded mixed results,
it didn't break the collective strength of arrestees, which was
translated into a court solidarity strategy of collectively refusing
plea deals to demand trials. Activists organized their own legal
defense, forming a defendant-led collective known as R2K Legal,
which succeeded in vindicating the vast majority of protesters both
legally and politically

RNC defendants deployed many creative legal strategies,
including direct action in the courtroom. Most trials were
politically-charged and some defendants chose o represent
themselves, underscoring the political nature of the arrests. Fists
were raised by defendants and supports alike; banners were unfurled
to the surprise of judges; mouths were taped shut in response to
censure by the court; and political statements were fashioned and
worn in court, all in defiance of court rules and at risk of contemp.
Ultimately, activists won the day with nearly all of their charges
thrown out or acquitted at trial. Countless inspiring and insightful
stories came out of the experience, which stand as crucial lessons
for future struggles fought with the use of jil solidarity*

Prisoner Strikes

These historical examples would not paint a full picture without
mentioning the prisoner strikes that have taken place in the last
five years. Thousands of people held in at least 11 prisons across
California succeeded in improving abysmal conditions at Pelican
Bay, the state’s first super-maimum security prison, by engaging in
aweeks-long hunger strike in July 2011

In December 2010, thousands of people from as many as
ten Georgia State Prisons refused to leave their cells to work in
the largest non-violent prisoner strike in US history. A one-day
strike turned into a days-long refusal to work after prison officials
responded with violence and other forms of punishment. Notably;
prisoners put their usual differences aside to unite across racial and
13 HERMES: HISTORY OF JAIL SOLIDARITY

eligious lines by working together to protest overcrowding and
intolerable living conditions, and demand fair compensation for
their labor (Georgia forces prisoners to work without pay), an end
t0 cruel and unusual punishment, access to educational resources,
and better nutition.

Reflections on Jail Solidarity

With the ebb and flow of solidarity tactics, it uncertain when and
how they will manifest again or whether they will positively impact
struggles for social change. In addition to pondering the efficacy of
jailsolidarity, we must ask whether its s is worth the potential harm
from reprisal. Is advanced training and discussion on the strategies,
tactics, and benefits of jil solidarity necessary to its success? What
Kkind of plans, if any, should be laid out in advance and with whose
involvement?

To help answer some of these questions, I spoke with Brooke
Lehman and Lisa Fithian, both of whom are longtime political
activists with years of experience in jail solidarity. Lehman, who
helped co-found the Watershed Center, said her entrance into
direct action was through a jail solidarity experience in 1996,
precipitated by a protest at an old growth stand on Mount Hood
that the Forest Service was threatening to cut down. With no
prior training and being forced to trust the women she was with,
Lehman said, “Going through that experience and feeling so cared
for by a group of strangers was a powerful moment. People you've
never met before who have your back can be more significant than
the experiences people have with their own friends.” Lehman
explained how the care she received and the experience of doing
something that felt right, mixed with fear and intimidation, was
a*really powerful recipe for wanting to be a part of something, It
cuts through a lot of the alienation in our society, where people
often ignore each other’ plight. And the strength that comes from
not fecling alone s so important.”

‘Although Lehman believes that prior training s crucial for the
effective use of solidarity tactics, she contends that it can be done
on the fiy. “ think there’s generally a lincage, where someone has
done it before, and where theres at least some thought put into
it” Lehman emphasized that *how tactics are exceuted can make
the difference between bringing somebody into a community of
social justice o alienating them.” She chalks up the success of jail
solidarity tactics to a higher than normal degree of participation,
INTERVENTIONS PAMPHLET 14

which raises one’s level of responsibility for the action and for each
other. “I¢’s about feeling like you have a personal stake in the fate of
your fellow organizers because you've created something together
with them and your success is wrapped up in their success; your
freedom is wrapped up in their freedom.”

Author and direct action trainer Lisa Fichian has had the
opportunity to watch solidarity tactics unfold over three decades.
Fithian, who first used jail solidarity in the 1980s as part of the
Central America solidarity movement, is a big advocate of people
exercising and reclaiming power by refusing to go along with
the state. “Collective action ahways makes a difference,"declared
Fithian. “I'm a big fan of solidarity tactics and think we ought to
be using them way more,” she continued. “I think when anybody’s
organizing to use direct action and civil disobedience to challenge
the state, we have to consider solidarity tactics.”

But, Fithian tempered her enthusiasm by recognizing the
violence of the system and harm sustained by activists and political
movements. “People have been hurt at some of these mobilizations
and so 1 am glad o see trauma care becoming an essential part of
our movement work.” Fithian also conceded that, “because jail
conditions can be so difficult, unless you have some preparation
and a good plan, it can be hard to hold the group together.” Fithian
urges people to think abou their strategies in advance and analyze
the local legal and political landscape. What's the capacity of local
jails and courts? Who's the prosecutor? Who's the mayor? Are they
friendly or adversarial? What are their political vulnerabilities?
“Who's in power can make a big difference as to whether we can
negotiate,” said Fithian. “Well-organized people using well-planned
jail solidarity strategies can change the dynamic of an arrest scenario,
can mitigate harm, and can help people access their power. Jail
solidarity works, and when you do it well it can make a difference.”

While Lehman's personal experience indicates that prior
training and discussion isn't necessary to the effective use of jail
solidarity, an understanding of the array of non-cooperation tactics
available to arrestees and why they're used can definitely improve
their impact and likelihood of success. Establishing bonds of
solidarity in advance of arrest and incarceration not only brings
people closer and builds trust among unfamiliar political comrades,
it can also unite activists in a way that overcomes the atomization
and repressive nature of the jail system.

Advance planning can also better prepare activists to pursue
important demands, whether the goalis equitable release conditions,

15 HERMES: HISTORY OF JAIL SOLIDARITY

an end to isolation of targeted individuals, o the pursuit of medical
attention for those in need. As Fithian points out, assessing the
political landscape ahead of time can also help arrestees determine
how to apply pressure in pursuit of their equitable release and
whether local officials will even be amenable. An advanced political
analysis would definitely have benefitted the RNC 2000 arrestees
who hit a veritable wall of resistance by city officials.

Certainly; jail capacity has made a difference to the success
of solidarity tactics, especially in the period predating the Global
Justice movement. Local offcials have begun pre-emptively clearing
‘out space for large numbers of arrestees, compromising the ability
of activists to “clog up?” the jail system. However, incapacity is not
the only ingredient to successful use of jail solidarity. With ample

political pressure and public embarrassment used in the right way;
arrestees need not clog thejails to accomplish their goals, especially
when it comes to protecting targeted individuals such as known
organizers, immigrants, and trans* folks

Deliberate and collective resistance is imperative not only in the
streets but also when we inevitably get caught up in the legalsystem is
erucial to the livelihood and advancement of our movements for social
change. We must challenge ourselves to put something at stake in
order to strengthen our political bonds, and conceive of our struggles
as more than just mobilizing and marching for a cause. The state
apparatus is mighty, but we have inherent and tremendous strength in
our collective action if we nurture ourintrinsic bonds of solidarity and
use them strategically

Whether or not organizers for the 2016 RNC and DNC
protests consider solidarity tactics, ways of caring for fellow

comades and using collective action in jal and court to confront
a repressive legal system may be crucial to the sustainability of
social change movements in an increasingly intolerant and violent
policing environment. %
INTERVENTIONS PAMPHLET 16

Kris Hermes isa Bay Area-based activist who bas worked for nearly
30 years o social justiceisues. The events surrounding the 2000 RNC
Protestsed 1o bis years-long involvement with R2K Legal. Since 2000,
"Hermes bas been an active, axward-wwinning legal worker-member of the
National Laswyers Guild and bas been part of mumerous Law collctives
and legal support fforts. Last August, PM Press published Hermes'book
Crashing the Party: Legacies and Lessons from the RNC 2000,
which centreson the development of repressive policing policies and o
activists worked collectively to overcome that represion.
Notes
© Seewmudsweollctiveorg
s b

5 PhilipS. Fones, Rl Workersand Frend LN/ Fre-Spech Fights o Tld by
Brticipants Grcenwood Pres, 198015
4 From an interview with Mate May, Mcch 18, 200,

5 Doug MeAdam, Plticl rocesandthe Deselapment of Black nurgecy 1330 170
(Universiy of Chicago Press, 1983, 165

6 Barbara Epstcin, Plitcl Pros & Cutual Resoluton: Nowsilnt Divec Acton
inthe 970sand 1950s Univesicy of Califoraia Pres, 1991, 6.
7 Seewwnemidnightspecialact

8 Tina Rosenberg, “Deadliest DA, New X Times Magazine,Jly 16, 1995 At
thetme ofthe KNC. 2000, Abraham oversaw the country's third eges deseh-
row population, composed of the highest percentage of Arican Americans.

9 See wnwCrashing TheParty TheBook.com

1o Kris Hermes, Crbing e Party: Legaics and Lesons from the RNC 2000 (PM
Press 2019
UPPING THE ANTI

et pearnal ef Ueery and actien..

Keep radical publishing alive!
Become a UTA Sustainer!

Radicalperiodicals are n peri. Ovr the last five years, we've witnessed many.
of our frends go under

But it doesntt have to be this way.

By becoming a UTA Sustainer, and by making a $10 [}
or $20 monthy donation, you'can help us cover
our operating costs. I return, wefl continue. Visit
publshing great material about the struggles
at affect us. Wefl send you a copy of every-
thing we put out.

On the search for:

editors, proof-readers, fundraising
experts, web masters and advice givers

Do you like editing the midnight ramblings of slecp deprived
organizers? Do you like sending emails to writers who can't keep
a deadline? Do you hold the journal and have tha special tingling
revolutionary feling? Then this project i for you!

Upping the Anci is always looking for folks to help with the
project in all scopes. We need folks with a keen eye to catch those:
spelling mirstakes, have publishing skill in design and web site
maintenance or keep us company when we table at a conference.

1f you are in Toronto, ON, you can apply to be on the
editorial committee. If you live outside of Toronto, you can get
involved by joinng our advisory board or generally volunteer.

In recurn, that tingling revolutionary fecling will continue,
and you might also get repetitive strain injury like the rest of us.

Email uppingtheanti@gmail.com
Upping the Ant is a radical journal of theory and action which
provides a space to reflect on the state of political organizing in
Canada and around the world. We publish theoretical and critical
articles, interviews, reviews and roundtables. “Upping the Anti”
refers to our interest in assessing the interwoven tendencies that
define the politics of today’s radical lft:

anti-capitalism, anti-oppression, and anti-imperialism.

Although inexact in their proclamations, these positions point
toward a radical politics that explore and experiment with social
change outside of “party politics” and social democracy. We are
interested in stories that reflect these concerns. We publish
pieces that actively engage with and intervene in contemporary
movement debates

The UTA Interventions Pamphlet series is an accessible and free way
of getting both previously published and new content out to new
audiences. Please feel free to make copies of these pamphlets and
o distribute them yourself

To find out more, go to our website at wwwuppingtheanti.org for
information about how to subscribe to our journal and how to
submit articles, artwork, and other content for publication.

SUBSCRIBE

One Year: $23.50, $34.00 (USD)
Two Years: $40.00, $62.00 (USD)
50.00, $86.00 (USD)

(free subscriptions available to those incarcerated)

Subscribe online at uppingtheanti.org or send cheques pay-
able to "UTA Publications” to;

998 Bloor Street West
Toronto Ontario

Canada M6H 4Hg