We Do This 'Til We Free Us: Abolitionist Organizing and Transforming Justice

“Defund the police” became a prominent slogan in 2020 after the murder of George Floyd. What do you make of Kaba’s contention that public safety depends not on reforming the police but on inhibiting and ultimately abolishing them?

Kaba refuses to make any exceptions to the principle that no one deserves imprisonment, that rehabilitation should take place in a public and collaborative setting. Do you think there are exceptions? If so, is that reconcilable with an overall attitude of abolitionism? If not, what would you say to someone who cites a particularly egregious case of violence?

Kaba admits that specific examples of transformative justice are relatively few, that the concept is inherently unclear so long as the punitive model remains in force. Can you think of specific practices that might help convince a skeptic that transformative justice is a viable concept?

Kaba says that she values relationships over narratives, but still chooses to present her views in the form of an actual narrative in the short story “Justice.” How does this format, especially its science fiction premise, help frame her arguments in ways different than the rest of the book?

What are the most important lessons that Kaba has learned over decades of activism and organizing? Do you agree or disagree with these lessons and why?

What are some of the key differences between the kinds of reforms that Kaba accepts and those she rejects? Do you agree with her evaluations of these reforms?

What is the “perfect victim” fallacy, and how does it help legitimize the logic of incarceration? What does Kaba suggest as a way to get past this harmful idea?

Kaba is torn between her role as a leader in the movement and her evident desire to shun the spotlight in favor of the movement itself. What are the values and drawbacks of having leaders in protest movements, and how might Kaba be able to maximize the value and minimize the harm of becoming a public figure?