Movements and Parties: Critical Connections in American Political Development

come from a mostly homogeneous group, their experiences as activists differ widely. Stanger discovered gendered differences in participants’ responses and experiences. Men and women described their reasons for joining their respective movements differently, and they described jails, prison camps, and prisons differently based on their experiences in separate carceral spaces. Stanger argues that women tended to leave prison more changed and with a greater desire to participate in prison reform or abolition. But gender is not the sole factor in Stanger’s analysis. She analyzes the differences between religious and non-religious participants, noting how religious beliefs shaped carceral experiences. She also takes time to discuss race and racial identity, including a particularly memorable story where white participants were ‘‘baffled’’ when SOA Watch member Derrlyn Tom had to explain that their prison experiences differed because the other activists were ‘‘not of color’’ (p. 131). Derrlyn’s explanation points to one of Stanger’s recurring points: most of the participants in this study possess what Stanger calls ‘‘privilege power,’’ which allows them to act as they do (p. 100). They can act as prison witnesses because their white skin, economic privileges, high levels of education, Christian/ Catholic faith, heterosexuality or chaste status, and professional achievements make them seem like unlikely prisoners. Privilege often acts as a shield for participants; it serves as a tool that participants can wield, and it also shapes their experiences as prisoners. However, Stanger’s research reveals that this ‘‘privilege power’’ does not lead to universal experiences for the participants in her study. Stanger is clear about what this study does and does not focus on. She does not debate whether or not the actions taken by the participants in her study count as nonviolent to everyone because she accepts that these actors have articulated their actions as nonviolent. She also stresses that while she understands the limitations and shortcomings of the participants and movements in her research, she chose to uplift the stories that provide models for transformative change. Her work does not ignore difficult questions, but it remains focused on her subjects and their voices. There are some weaknesses within this study—notably, in her historical analysis, Stanger fails to fully address the violent aspects of abolition, and she mentions historical figures such as Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman without discussing any of their public stances on the use of violence for tactical means. However, the strengths of this research outweigh its weaknesses. Incarcerated Resistance offers a thoughtful, feminist analysis of justice action prisoners. Stanger’s work can help readers better understand how activists employ privilege to fight injustice, as well as the consequences of their work.