ResoluteReader

Tuesday, December 16, 2025

Stephen King (Richard Bachman) - The Running Man

I have not yet seen the new version of The Running Man film released earlier this year. Its release however has been the occasion for me watching the original film, the 1987 one starring Arnold Schwarzenegger and finally reading the book. I am very glad I read the book - Schwarenegger's film much less so - as it is a remarkable novel.

Few readers of this blog are likely to be unfamiliar with the story. Written by Stephen King as Richard Bachman in 1982 it is set in the early 2000s in a dystopian world where poverty and lawlessness are endemic and the US state manages its citizens through a combination of violent repression and distracting TV programmes that offer tantalising prizes to the poor while offering viewers the voyeristic chance to see the players die horribly. What twisted mind could imagine such a future one asks?

This is familiar territory. The 1987 film turned the idea of a man hunted for dollars, risking his life to a massive prize into a gameshow and the trope is now a realtively common one. But, and its a big but, leaving that aside I want to recommend King's book very highly indeed. Because what King does is to turn the story into one about an ordinary, poverty stricken working class man whose daughter desperately needs medication that they cannot afford, into a story about class, power and revenge.

Ben Richards is the titular running man. He's a working class bloke who has been almost broken by the system. Blacklisted for punching a foreman, he has nearly destroyed his health working casual, manual work. His wife is a sex worker whose earnings keep the family afloat. Richards enters the running man because he has to make some money to pay for medicine. But he enters as an embittered and angry man whose frustrations are aimed much higher than those out to hunt him down. When the gameshost is waiting with Richards for a lift to go to the ground floor of the games building, Richards has feted with wealth and power. As he steps into the lift he asks the host of the Running Man, but "who could I kill if I went up?" A good question. Class runs through this book like a red thread. One good piece of advice Richards gets from the games host is "stay with your own". Because what Richards finds is solidarity - from people who look after him, to people who turn their eyes the other way.

As Richards travels he learns more, and in the most powerful bit of the book he finds himself protected by a group of Black radicals who have taught themselves in the libraries about the world they live in. They've uncovered a conspiracy by the state to hide the fact that millions are dying from appalling pollution, but that the rich have all been given nose filters to protect them. The deaths of millions of children like Richard's daughter are the result of a greedy government, not poverty. Richard's attempts to use his position on the show to expose the reality. But his urging of people to "read about pollution", "go to the library" are drowned out by mocking, middle class audience jeers. As Richards flees further he argues with a woman he kidnaps, showing her that her reality is the unreal one. Soon it becomes clear to the network that Richards is actually quite dangerous.

I have always enjoyed Stephen King's books for their insights into the dark underbelly of US history. The Running Man is perhaps the book of his I've read that is most clearly about class, poverty and resistance. There's no collective action here (though a few strikes are mentioned) but Richards is supported by a lot of people. At one point a couple of cops watch his car escape and they mutter to each other - I hope he wins says one. The ending is much more radical and satisfying than the sanitised pseudo super-hero film that Schwarenegger stars in. I've heard that the remake is closer to the original novel. But read the book - its a remarkable novel that speaks a great deal to modern times.

Tuesday, December 09, 2025

Amarpal Singh - The First Anglo-Sikh War

In the early 19th century only one power on the Indian subcontinent stood against British rule. That was the Sikh empire ruled by Ranjit Singh. Singh's kingdom was rich, cultured and big. He ruled with determination and sensitivity. The British East Indian Company looked at the Punjab where Singh ruled with greedy eyes. Singh died in 1839 and in the vacuum that resulted a series of ineffectual rulers struggled for position. In this situation the British readied themselves for war, while carefully manipulating the various Sikh rulers. In 1845 war finally broke out, with the British assuming that their force of arms and numbers would swiftly overcome the Sikh armies. That they did eventually win had little to do with their strength, and everything to do with the betrayal of the Sikh rulers.

Amarpal Singh's account of the First Anglo-Sikh War is an excellent introduction to these events. It is, however, primarily aimed at those who would (either in person or on their armchairs) explore the battlefields. Today these are hardly recognisable, and the British war memorials erected after various battles are in a delapitated state. Nonetheless for enthusasts these are useful guides.

But the strength of the book is that it draws out the day to day experiences of the combatants. Wherever possible the author has used contemporary accounts, diaries and newspaper reports to describe events. He laments that there are few surviving Sikh accounts, though those that do survive are useful.

Much rested on this war. A British victory would open up the Punjab to exploitation. A defeat would have dire consequences for the whole of colonial India. As one of the British commanders Sir Harry Smith said, "all India was at gaze and ready for anything." He continued by criticisng the tactics of his opponent Ranjodh Singh:

He shold have attacked me with the vigour his French tutors would have displayed and destroyed me, for his force compared to me was overwhelming; then turned about upon the troops at Ludhiana and beathen them and sacked and burned th ecity - when the gaze I speak of in India would have been one general blaze of revolt.

And defeat in the Punjab almost happened. Had it done so, India would have risen (as it did only slightly more than a decade later, but this time having already seen the defeat of the British army). It was close. At the battles of Mudki and Ferozeshah the British came close to significant defeat, and had huge casualties. After five hours of hand to hand combat the British at Ferozeshah fell back. Singh describes:

Few soldiers knew where their officers were and who was giving orders. As the British weakened, the Sikh army staged a significant rally and launched a counterattack all along the line. Although Lal Singh had played little part in the proceedings, the Sikh soldiers had lost none of their morale. Less weary than the British, the Sikh line moved forward and began to progressivel recapture the southern area of the Sikh camp.

British arrogance, overconfidence and no doubt racist attitudes to their opponents was once again nearly their undoing. So bad were conditions that officers offered Indian troops months wages for water and licked dew from the cannons. But they were saved by betrayal at the top of the other side. Ferozeshah should have been a supreme victory for the Sikh army, instead it was a defeat that meant that the British would likely win the rest of the war. Other things worth noting. The battles were a precussor to the industrial slaughter of World War One. Take the battle of Sabraon. For two hours both sides shelled each other with artillery, in a "grand contest between the heavy guns". A contemporary account asked the reader to "pause and imagine the thunder of 120 guns on both sides... Never shall I forget the majesty of the whole scene."

But it was the industrial slaughter of the victorious British Army that cost the Sikh army 10,000 men at the end of Sabraon that mean the campaign is shrouded in infamy. Many of those dead were murdered as they swam the river, or failed to escape. It was, says Singh, "[Commander in Chief Hugh] Gough's command to his men not to spare any Sikh soldier [that] turned what had been a battle into a massacre." Not all followed orders. "British soldiers sick of firing at their helpless counterparts offered help to wounded to drowning Sikh soldiers". Many of them refused. It was a tragic, violent end to the campaign. The British victory however only postponed further rebellion and war.

Few people in Britain today know about the first (or indeed the second) Anglo-Sikh War. More know about it in the Indian Sub-Continent, though the events are seldom marked. Amarpal Singh points out that it is the betrayal of the Sikh commanders that is the most commentated event of the war for people in the area now. Indeed without this betrayal the Sikh army would certainly have triumphed in the early battles and it is entirely possible that the history of colonial rule would have been very different.

While this book is very much designed as an introduction to the War and to the sites, it is well written and accessible. I'd recommend it.

Related Reviews

Hibbert - The Great Mutiny: India 1857
Ward - Our Bones Are Scattered: The Cawnpore Massacres & the Indian Mutiny of 1857
Newsinger - The Blood Never Dried
Dalrymple - The Anarchy: The Relentless Rise of the East India Company
Wagner - Amritsar 1919

Hal Lacroix - Here and Beyond

To escape a world ravaged by environmental crisis, biodiversity loss and economic collapse a billionaire builds a generation ship to travel to another planet. 600 people join a voyage that will last almost 400 years, far longer than anyone will hope to survive. Their children's children's children might make it. Here and Beyond is the story of what happens to the generations who live on shipworld.

Science-fiction novels that deal with generation ships are not uncommon, but the best of them allow the author and reader to play with concepts that are elusive in other environments. Communities trapped in deteriorating conditions, or limited space, is one common theme. Others play with the thoughts and frustrations of people trapped in conditions that they would not have asked for. Hal Lacroix's book looks at both of these, and interestingly the bulk of his novel doesn't concern those who arrive at HD-40307G, the exo-planet that is their destination. What concerns Lacroix is the relationships of the generations that are shipbound.

These go through various phases - there are those that remember Earth, including those that were on Earth. Then there are those that that have a connection to Earth through their parents, but as those die out the community begins to develop its own culture, theories and ways of coping. Here one of the fascinating aspects to Lacroix's book is the cultural limits imposed by the billionaire who built it. There are only 100 recordings of music that he liked, and only books from his personal library (which means our intrepid explorers have a strange collection of business books to cope with - though library is eventually recycled). Readers might see in this a metaphor for how the super-rich see themselves and what they consider of value. Its notable that one of the items on the ship is a Olmec head, stolen no doubt and placed there by the billionaire. Another is a painting that has symbolic meaning for the recipient, and is interpreted differently by its subsequent owners.

Readers looking for a scientific account of the 42 light-year trip will be disappointed. Lacroix very much focuses on the people and their relationships, and how they cope, survive and experience the various crises on route. There's some interesting commentary - youngsters go through a phase where they doubt the reality of their mission, believing they are an experiment and have to be shown the outside. Others wonder what clouds are like or what deviled eggs are. Some people rebel against the constraints of the ship. Sometimes they win. The billionaires carefully constructed eco-system quickly breaks down - when doesn't it? Birds die and spices are short.

This is very much a novel to provoke thinking. Lacroix doesn't dwell on some of the experiences - the reader can never understand, like his characters, what happens with one strange encounter. Nor is there a great deal of information on what happens after landing. That's perhaps the beauty of this work. Its not to be read for science, but to provoke you to think what it's liked to be trapped in a failing ecosystem created by the billionaires. Now there's a metaphor.

Related Reviews

Solomon - An Unkindness of Ghosts
Aldiss - Non-Stop
Robinson - Aurora

Friday, December 05, 2025

Stuart Easterling - The Mexican Revolution: A short history 1910-1920

In my favourite film genre, the Spaghetti Western, the Mexican Revolution is usually portrayed as a event led by revolutionary bandits, whose combination of greed and hatred drives the revolution. Meanwhile other social classes are left by the wayside. However, having recently watched the 1966 film A Bullet for the General which subverts some of these and is perhaps the finest of the subgenre of Zapata Westerns I decided to learn more about a revolution that is seldom discussed among European revolutionaries.

I could not have picked a finer introduction to the subject that Stuart Easterling's "Short History", which despite its length is exemplary in its description of events and personalities and its location of the revolution within wider social forces.

The revolution arose out of the contradictions caused by the dictorial politics of Porfirio Diaz, which on the one had was leading to some economic development, but on the other was constraining almost every class of society through corruption and violence. Easterling quotes one future revolutionary who said that "I began to feel the need for change... when I was 19... back in my town.. I saw the police commissioner get druunk, almost every day in the town pool hall, in the company of his secretary, with the local judge who was also the ...tax collector, with the head of the post office; and with some merchant or army officer, persons all of whom constituted the influential class of that small world."

The Diaz regieme was unable to change in the face of such "deep and widespread dissatisfaction", but the discontent was first expressed through the abortive attempt by Francisco Madero to introduce democratic and economic reforms through a Presidential bid. While unleashed social movements from below in a revolutionary wave that brought down the old regime and began to introduce very radical reforms. This story has no doubt been told before, but it is Easterling's analysis that I found so helpful in understanding the revolutionary dynamics. He writes:

A key point to understand concerning the Mexican Revolution is that it did not consist of a single movement. It was not led by a single political party, nor did it mobilise only one social class. Indeed, of the major camps within the Reovlution, only that of Zapara and his allies, based in the campesinos of the 'free' villages, was highly homogeneous in class terms. The Revolution is thus best understood by looking at the various social forces it unleashed - from campesinos to middle-class reformers to industrial workers to disgruntled landlords - and the goals and aspirations they developed. The different revolutionary camps and leaders did not simply float unattached above these various sort of people... it was from this source... that the Revolution's camps formed political programs and leaders formed worldviews.

Thus the Revolution was not a working class revolution rather it was a revolutionary movement whose base reflected the uneven development of Mexican capitalism, and its poor rural base. This is where the revolutionary bandits beloved by this reader found their base. Easterlin recounts how one of the most famous Pancho Villa made the transition from bandit to revolutionary precisely because of his connections to the rural poor. His revolutionary actions thus became those of a Robin Hood type figure:

[Villa's] first act was to attack one of Luis Terrazas' largest estates and summarily execute the administrator. The latter was a man despised by the local peones for numerous abuses, including reserving the privilege of sleeping with bridges on their wedding night.

Other acts of revolutionary violence including forcing a priest to acknowldge a child he had fathered. But Villa's military forces were his real contribution to the struggle, and army that "effectively nationalised wide swaths of territory previously owned by the state's hacendados as well as a number of factories owned by Huerta supporters... In cities and towns under Villista control the Northern Division distributed generous food rations to the urban poor, the unemployed, wiows and orphas. The price of beef was radically reduced".

But it was the tensions between the different revolutionary camps that would prove the revolutions undoing. By Summer 1915 the government had fallen and the radical Carranza was in charge. He was to turn on his previous allies having used his base in urban areas to defeat the government. But Carranza was too tied to the officer class in the army, who were unwilling to tolerate real social reforms. To appease them he turned on his former supporters in the trade union movements. "The destruction of the tyranny of capitalism... [should not be followed] by the tyranny of the workers". The most bizarre anti-capitalist justification for imposing the death penalty for striking and the smashing of the workers' movement. But Carranza himself would not survive these competing interests. He was ousted and then assassinated by the very forces he sought to appease.

The Mexican society that emerged from 1920 was one dominated by military officers, a state which "had acquired an exceptional degree of power relative to the rest of society." The "military caste" was interested in developing capitalism, and this did require a degree of social reform. This meant the state had to make "concessions to the campesino and worker when necessary" to "ensure peace and stability" for the development ocapitalism. Class struggle was to end, and instead a new "perspective was often proclaimed with radical language, and the new leaders often identified this state-supervised capitalism as a form of socialism. This was not seen as the civtory of labour over cpaital, or campesino over landlord, but rather a careful balance between the different sides". That this required the destruction of the most radical and revolutionary forces tells who was really in control.

Easterling's book is by no means a full account of the Mexican Revolution. But it is a brilliant introduction, particularly because its starting point is not just that of description of events, but rather an attempt to understand the often complex and interacting social forces that were emerging in the early 20th century. It really is a brilliant read and it is probably one of the best starting points I could find for a subject that continues to be an inspiration to radicals in South America today. Highly recommended.

Saturday, November 29, 2025

Seishi Yokomizo - The Little Sparrow Murders

In Japan a Temari Song is sung by children as they bounce balls and play together. The titular Little Sparrows Temari song tells the story of three young women, from different backgrounds, who are all "sent away". In other words they are murdered. In the song the women are from different families, whose surname, "locksmith" for instance, tells the listener who they are and what their family does. Such names are common in small rural towns, but this is post-War Japan and a society is going through rapid changes. The song is a link to the past, but it has a shocking echo during the period of the novel as three young women are, indeed, murdered.

The novel is set in Onikobe where the "famous" private detective Kosuke Kindaichi has travelled on holiday. Two decades previously it had been the scene of an intriguing and unsolved murder. But Kindaichi is not drawn there to solve a crime, but to find rest and recuperation. Nonetheless there are connections to the past and early into his holiday the village Chief disappears, leaving traces of blood and poison. An intriguing letter shows that an old lover from the past has reappeared. Has the chieftain been killed for something that happened twenty years before?

As Kindaichi's stay unfolds murder follows murder. The reader will be distracted however by the descriptions of rural Japan, and the fascinating characters. The arrival of a famous singer and actor who grew up in the village further complicates matters, as does the discovery that one of the villagers was an esteemed "silent film narrator" (a role that was peculiar to Japan and makes for a fascinating diversion). The murders are horrific and seem to follow the Temari Song. But I was a little overwhelmed by the number of characters and the convoluted plot. As such I tended to read it more for the atmosphere and aesthetic. Nonetheless I did draw some comparisons with other media - the two rival village families offered some similarities with the setting of the classic Kurosawa film Yojimbo, though perhaps its fairer to say that the context is that of many rural times with families growing rich, or loosing their once esteemed position. In fact there are some intriguing class contexts here but they aren't really fleshed out.

The Little Sparrow Murders was not my favourite Kosuke Kindaichi mystery, but it does have its merits. Readers should start with the earlier books.

Thursday, November 27, 2025

John le Carré - The Russia House

The Russia House feels unusual for a le Carré novel, not because of the plot or the characters, but because it takes place as the Soviet Union is on its last legs. But much else about the novel will feel familiar. It is main characters are ordinary people drawn into complex, dangerous and unusual circumstances - two of them figure - workers in the publishing industry who both visit Moscow to take part in the annual gravy train of publishing conferences and drinking sessions, and try and sell their books (or import Russian ones). On one visit Niki Landau receives a package from a woman called Katya with instructions to get it to "Barley" Blair, a British publisher and heavy drinker.

Landau realises that this is no ordinary manuscript but is a document containing details of Russia's nuclear weapons systems. It's important info, and British intelligence encourage and train Blair to return to Russia to verify the information and make contact with its source - the designer Yakov. Blair and Yakov have history - they'd discussed peace and the post-Soviet world. But British intelligence is skeptical that the source is genuine and worries they are being played. So do the Americans.

While making several trips to Russia Blair grows fond of Katya. The endgame of it all won't be ruined here, but involves Blair making a series of complex decisions that require the reader to follow the text carefully.

But as with most of le Carré's novels the genius is in the interactions between people. In particular the way that the intelligence services treat Blair, and to a lesser extent Landau. How they manipulate, coerce and dig into people's brains is fanatastic, and Blair's interactions with the US intelligence services are particularly entertaining and well written. As with all of le Carré's books this is a book about people caught up in the twists of history. It's excellent, but you might need to read the ending a couple of times.

Sunday, November 23, 2025

M.V.Ramana - Nuclear is Not the Solution: The folly of atomic power in the age of climate change

A few years ago I had the arduous task of reviewing Bill Gates' book on dealing with climate change. I noted that Gates' was obsessed with technological solutions to the climate crisis, in particular nuclear power - an industry which he has got a material interest in. The hunt for technological fixes to environmental crises has a long pedigree. Gates was just one of the billionaires who is most open about it.

The nuclear industry is both wealthy and adept at using the media to put across its case. The argument that nuclear is not a solution is not necessarily straightforward or obvious. So the environmental movement, and indeed the movement against nuclear weapons, should rejoice that M.V. Ramana's new book is available.

Ramana is a trained physicst, who has researched and written extensively on the nuclear industry. He is also greatly concerned about the climate crisis, and understands the intimate connection between the question of energy and reducing emissions. The book demolishes the case for nuclear in two ways. Firstly Ramana challenges the promises of the nuclear industry, both in terms of the potential for nuclear energy and in terms of the technology itself. More importantly though Ramana shows how nuclear power is closely connected with the very systems of imperialism and capitalist accumulation that drive the climate crisis. Let's look at his arguments in turn.

This review is not the place to rehash Ramana's arguments against particular corporations or particular types of nuclear reactors. If you want that I would urge you to read the book itself. But in general Ramana's book explains that

expanding nuclear power production is neither a desirable nor a feasible solution to climate change. Due to the use and production of radioactive materials at reactors, expanding nuclear energy to mitigate climate change will inevitably result in a variety of undesirable risks and environmental impacts. Not is it compatible with environmental and social justice. The consequences and burdens of such an expansion will fall primarily on ecommunities that are distant from the centers of power and economically and politically too marginal to figure in the calculations of decision makers.

Let's take one example - the cost of nuclear power. Ramana discusses research by the "financial firm Lazard" (not a hotbed of radical politics).

Lazard calculated that the average construction costs of a utility-scale solar photovoltaic plant in the United States... was $875 per kilowatt of generation capacity. (For comparison, the cost of a residential rooftop photovoltaic system in the US was about $2,600 per kilowatt.) These estiamates are averages over many different projects and thus smooth over the peculiarities of individual locations, differential labour costs, and geographical variations. Lazard estimated that a nuclear plant costs around $10,300 per kilowatt - or nearly twelve times the corresponding cost for utility-scale solar photovoltaic plants.

Interestingly while the cost of energy generated by renewables such as solar has dropped dramatically, that of nuclear has risen. The costs of "building a new nuclear reactor rose from nearly $6,800 per kilowatt in 2013 to $10,300 per kilowatt in 2021".

Given the problems of potential accidents, nuclear waste storage and the length of time taken to build new nuclear plants, the starting point for opposition to nuclear power should not be the costs. But Ramana's book makes the point that the costs matter precisely because nuclear continues to be touted as the solution by the industry, governments and politicians (of centre-left and right). In other words powerful groups remain committed to nuclear power despite its extremely high cost. Why is this?

One part of the problem is that these groups ignore or downplay the impact and threats of nuclear waste, potential accidents and the impossibility of deploying nuclear power plants on the scale and in the numbers to deal with the existing climate threat. But the real problem is that nuclear power is being promoted by people who have a lot to gain from the investment in nuclear power. Here Ramana's knowledge of the industry proves fascinating. In several examples he shows how nuclear companies have promised to build nuclear plants, then seen costs mushroom and profits leap. Sometimes the costs (and timescales) are astronomical. The now discredited company Westinghouse plannted to build a nuclear reactor in Georgia, which despite their claims it would cost $4 billion and take 36 months, ended up costing "$35 billion for such two reactors and a construction time of over ten years".

It doesn't take a genius to conclude as one commentator told the press, that "every euro invested in new nuclear power plants makes the climate crisis worse because now this money cannot be used to invest in efficient climate protection options". Indeed the "nuclear renaissance" that George W Bush launched in 2005 has cost $40 billion dollars, but "has not yet avoided a single molecule of carbon emissions".

This brings us to the second theme of Ramana's book: the wider context. I was intrigued to understand the cross over between nuclear power and the fossil fuel industry. Ramana shows how many nuclear companies also have investments in coal and oil. He points out that "talking about future nuclear power... is a strategy to shift attention away from their current energy mix". I would add though that it is also a way of maintaining the status quo. Such companies can claim they are reducing emissions elsewhere and continue with their fossil fuel activities.

But the biggest example of how nuclear power is promoted and desired, despite its dangers and costs, is its links with nuclear weapons. Here, I must confess, I learnt a great deal. In fact my own writings against nuclear power have underplayed this angle. The argument is best made by a quote that Ramana has from the physicist Robert Oppenheimer, the man who led the Manhatten Project. Oppenheimer said of a proposal for the international control of nuclear weapons:

We know very well what we would do if we signed such a convention: we would not make atomic weapons, at least not to start with, but we would build enormous plants, and we would design these plants in such a way that they could be converted with the maximum ease and the minimum time delay to the produciton of atomic weapons.

As Ramana shows the nuclear power industry has often been used by countries as a stepping stone to nuclear weaponary. The intimate links between the industry and nuclear bombs, submarines and so on, are carefully documented. Ramana says, "it is remarkable that whenever the nuclear power industry is in trouble, the strongest argument that officials use in order to obtain government support is to emphasize the overlap with military uses." This overlap is in producing raw materials, skills and training. The industry however is wary. The Dalton Nuclear Institute at Manchester University warned that the links must be "carefully managed to avoid the perception that civil and military nuclear programmes are one and the same".

Those in favour of nuclear power argue for it against all logic. They do this because they recognise that nuclear power plays a role within a wider economic and political system. Ramana quotes the billionaire Sam Altman (who runs OpenAI). One of Altman's concerns is of course having enough power to run the computer banks that power AI systems. But his fears for the lack of energy are also about wider critiques of capitalism:

The alternative to not having enough energy is the crazy de-growth stuff people talk about. We really don't want that... I think it's insane and pretty immoral when people start calling for that.

What Altman says here is just what the capitalist class think. As Ramana concludes:

Nuclear energy is being promoted by powerful elites in governments and businesses precisely because it comes with the promise, even if it will be ultimately a false promise, that the economic system can continue more or less along the same path while avoiding large-scale climate change.... Talking about nuclear power from new reactors serves to delay dealing with the climate crisis. Procrastination might be the thief of time, but it is good business strategy for companies that profit from the current system.

Ramana's book is a comprehensive demolition of the lies and technological limitations of nuclear power. But it is particularly powerful because he places these lies within the wider context of capitalist society and the logic that has caused the current environmental crises. While I felt that some of his points could have been expanded - I would have liked more on the carbon costs of the nuclear cycle (from mining to storage of waste) - there is plenty of material here to arm those looking for a rational, and sustainable energy policy. You don't have to be anti-capitalist to oppose nuclear power on the grounds of danger, waste or cost. But understanding the position of the industry in wider capitalist society illuminates a great deal. MV Ramana's book is thus urgent and necessary.

Gates - How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The solutions we have and the breakthroughs we need
Bird & Sherwin - American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer

Sunday, November 16, 2025

Thomas King - The Inconvenient Indian: A Curious Account of Native People in North America

One of the first things that struck me about Thomas King's famous account of "Native People in North America" is that The Invonenient Indian doesn't particularly take much notice of the border between Canada and the United States. After all this imaginery line is really only that. Imaginery. The people who lived in North America (or Turtle Island as some groups describe it) didn't distinguish between the two nation states that were eventually imposed upon them. This ought to be an obvious point.

But so used are we to thinking about the nation state, that we impose it backward. King's book doesn't make that mistake, though in his history of people he does deal with the different paths that have led to different laws, politics and struggles among indigenous people. He writes "while the line that divides the two countries is a political reality, and while the border affects bands and tribes in a variety of ways, I would have found it impossible to talk about the one without talking about the other."

The second thing that struck me was one of King's comments about the hunt for the correct term for the people of North America. First Nations, Indians, Native Americans. What was the correct phrase to use? "Why do we need one?" he counters. After all these were not a single group of people at all.

The point I got from these initial thoughts was how easy it is to slip into very crude and simple approaches to people that stem from the world we live in today. "Being", Marx said, "determines consciousness". And the modern framework of nation states, imperialism and earlier colonialism still shapes these thoughts.

Thus King's book is refreshing in that its narrative is not a simple linear one of conquest, defeat and oppression. Though this material is all there - and sometimes it is shocking and unpleasants. Rather it is a discussion of what it means in terms of how Native Americans (for want of a better term) are seen, indentified, protrayed and understood by non-Native Americans today. King uses two categories to explain this, the Dead Indian and the Live, or Legal, Indian. The former is acceptable in a sense, because it is the Indian that lives in the imagination - in a thousand western films, or in books, or on food containers. It is the Native American of fantasy. It is one that can be dressed up as. The Legal Indian is the existing one, who has rights and land and as King says in a reprinted interview at the end of this book, "the Legal Indian is the Indian that Canada is trying to kill. They don't want no more Legal Indians".

Here King touches on the way that the "Legal" indian, with their land and (some) rights is a barrier to North American capitalism. Their land ownership, their legal rights, their reservations stop the profit machine. Here is the "inconvenience" of the title - the fact that Indians have fought for their rights, to defend and extend them - from the Indian Wars to the Wounded Knee Occupation in 1973. Some of the best parts of the book are those where King describes these more rescent struggles - or at least the battles of the 20th century over fishing rights, land access or wealth.

King makes a final, and important, point. He rejects the idea of a static Native American culture, or indeed one that is particularly mystical. Instead he says that "the fact of Native existence is that we live modern lives informed by traditional values and contemporary realities and that we wish to live those lives on our terms." Reality means that doing that will mean a constant struggle - against racism, oppression and exploitation. King's book shows that there is a long tradition of that and he does this with verve, passion and humour. Highly recommended.