This essay interprets Thomas More’s Utopia, not chiefly through its intended audience, an elite, international circle of humanists and jurists, but through its intentionally excluded audience: the lower classes of Europe. Five centuries of scholarship on the critique of private property in his Utopia have generally overlooked More’s opposition to the largest popular uprising of his time, the German Peasants’ War. This essay argues that More’s polemics against proto-communist movements and thinkers, like Protestant propagandist Simon Fish, are essential to understanding Utopia in context. More’s Tudor schooling trained him in forms of legal play meant to sharpen the faculties to adroitly enforce law and social order. Challenges to law, private property, and authority were “heresies” for Sir Thomas More. The attempt to restrict Utopia’s readership mirrored More’s opposition to heretical, vulgar translations of the New Testament. He feared that the ungovernable play of a literal reading would result in disastrous misinterpretations: in acts of popular uprising that sought to put all things in common.
— Read on journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00905917251345497

In this deeply researched piece, Ben Nadler and Oksana Mironova explore the tactical and ideological parallels between the First Red Scare and the present targeting of Palestinian activists across the United States.
— Read on proteanmag.com/2025/06/26/third-red-scare-same-as-the-first/

Everywhere you go looking for comrades and you usually find snakes instead. 

Before I read this book, I would have thought that psychological warfare was basically strong propaganda. No longer. This was the idea promoted by early US academic researchers into mass communication. Much of their work was funded by and carried out for the US military. The military had its own definition of psychological warfare.

A 1948 US Army document stated that: “Psychological warfare employs any weapon to influence the mind of the enemy. The weapons are psychological only in the effect they produce and not because of the nature of the weapons themselves. In this light, overt (white), covert (black) and gray propaganda; subversion; sabotage; special operations; guerrilla warfare; espionage; political, cultural, economic, and racial pressures are all effective weapons” (emphasis in original). So-called “special operations” include activities behind enemy lines including sabotage and assassination.
— Read on documents.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/94BRgl2.html

Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League by Marx and Engels
— Read on www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm

Strong people need protectors too.

If violence is wrong in America, violence is wrong abroad. If it’s wrong to be violent defending black women and black children and black babies and black men, then it’s wrong for America to draft us and make us violent abroad in defense of her. And if it is right for America to draft us, and teach us how to be violent in defense of her, then it is right for you and me to do whatever is necessary to defend our own people right here in this country.
— Read on www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/malcgrass.html

A key feature of the Iraq war was the prominence of international legal argument. This article argues that the motif of the ‘illegal war’ was crucial in mobilisations against the war. It traces the reasons for the prominence of this ‘illegal war’ motif and the wider political consequences of its adoption.
— Read on www.academia.edu/64028197/International_law_politics_and_opposition_to_the_Iraq_War

Interview http://+%20transcript with Max Fox, M.E. O’Brien, and Tiana Reid, conducted by Nico Millman
— Read on www.full-stop.net/2025/02/25/interviews/nicomillman/pinko-magazine/

This is the second part of a two-part article on the Palestinian question. This part treats the development and trajectory of anticolonial nationalism, focusing on the post-1970s period in the Gaza Strip. It treats the growth and development of the main armed factions in the Strip, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad, and then discusses Israeli policies toward Palestine, broadly, and the Gaza Strip, in particular. It analyses the closure policy post-2006 and the growth of armed organizing and capacity. It then discusses the regional dimensions. It finally engages with different explanations for US policy toward Palestine, discussing the “Israel Lobby” thesis in its various iterations. It concludes with some reflections on contemporary exile organizing and intellectual production.
— Read on journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/22779760241253788