Are there legitimate criticisms of Micah White's work?
Of course. The End of Protest rattled nerves precisely because it risked over-correction. Critics argue Micah White dismisses the continuing utility of mass mobilisation, mistaking a North-Atlantic lull for a global obituary. Others say his fixation on novelty undervalues the slow grind of institution-building and overplays one dramatic season at Zuccotti Park. Some organisers fault his emphasis on “sovereignty” for lacking a detailed blueprint, fearing it flirts with crypto-separatism rather than power rooted in local communal needs. There is also the charge of selective vision: movements of the global South and Indigenous land defenders never stopped innovating, yet their victories occupy scant pages of the book.
These critiques matter because they sharpen strategy. Take them as prompts: test whether your campaign balances spectacle with structure, global with local, rupture with construction. Where White names pattern decay, pair it with your own blueprint for patient autonomy. Where he calls for new sovereignties, demand clarity on who governs and how accountability works. Every critique is a diagnostic tool; wield it to refine, not discard, the insight that ritualised protest alone will not topple entrenched power.
Which of these tensions feels most alive in your organising right now, and how might you turn it into fresh leverage?