lynn00's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.25
izcanbeguscott's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
3.5
Nice little introduction to anticapitalism, and I like that this does have some good recommendations for at least some steps to be taken in reducing the overwhelming sledgehammer that is capitalism.
Not the most radical book by any means, but something nice to get for a friend who hates their job and wonders why and what they can do.
Not the most radical book by any means, but something nice to get for a friend who hates their job and wonders why and what they can do.
fionamclary's review against another edition
3.25
This was a good introduction to anticapitalist ideas from the perspective of a sociologist/economist for someone who is very much neither of those things. Sometimes it went a little too into the technical weeds for me, but those moments were brief and didn't really hamper my understanding. I liked how the concept of "eroding capitalism" provides opportunities for any kind of anticapitalist to participate, whether your tendency is to form a commune or disrupt the government from the inside. I also liked that he provided lots of varied and concrete examples rather than talking in broad terms or pushing a single specific framework.
That said, I found his writing to be a bit dry and uninspired, which is probably why it took me about a year to actually finish this book. His suggestions also rely on government in ways that I didn't love, but I can grudgingly understand why it makes sense to involve existing structures, perhaps appearing to support them in the short term, but ultimately weakening them.
In short, I'd say this is a good jumping-off point for people interested in what anticapitalism is all about, or who are already anticapitalists but lack the background to form coherent and grounded explanations for and solutions to the problems they observe.
That said, I found his writing to be a bit dry and uninspired, which is probably why it took me about a year to actually finish this book. His suggestions also rely on government in ways that I didn't love, but I can grudgingly understand why it makes sense to involve existing structures, perhaps appearing to support them in the short term, but ultimately weakening them.
In short, I'd say this is a good jumping-off point for people interested in what anticapitalism is all about, or who are already anticapitalists but lack the background to form coherent and grounded explanations for and solutions to the problems they observe.
gingerreader99's review against another edition
4.0
This was solid. A lot of it wasn't exactly new ideas to me, having finished a BA in Political Science but it was a very digestible and easy to read explanation for "Anticapitalism" and how to work towards applying it. Or more specific to the argument ,how to get rid of capitalism, and replace it with a robust socialist system.
Wright touches on a lot of good notes and covers his bases despite the volume being fairly slim. I believe this should be a book profs include in their courses when discussing socialism and the issues of capitalism. To pick 1 chapter to assign ch. 3 "Varieties of Anticapitalism" did a great job of breaking down the different ways it can manifest itself.
It's sad knowing that Wright has passed away since this piece was written and we won't get a follow up, though I'm glad we got this before he passed.
Wright touches on a lot of good notes and covers his bases despite the volume being fairly slim. I believe this should be a book profs include in their courses when discussing socialism and the issues of capitalism. To pick 1 chapter to assign ch. 3 "Varieties of Anticapitalism" did a great job of breaking down the different ways it can manifest itself.
It's sad knowing that Wright has passed away since this piece was written and we won't get a follow up, though I'm glad we got this before he passed.
hberg95's review against another edition
4.0
A concise, systematic overview of historical forms of anti-capitalism and how anti-capitalism can be realized in the 21st century.
The big takeaway for me is the central concept of eroding capitalism as a strategy - Wright talks so clearly about how we can't commit ourselves to only a single strategy, that we must engage in many at once as we maintain the Gramscian "pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will".
The problem with erosion is that it is slow. It seems like a clearly effective means of anti-capitalism, and potentially the only viable one we have, but there is a sense that we may need to act urgently, that erosion might be too slow for what we're looking at.
I'm interested in the relationship between this text and another recent Verso publication, Andreas Malm's How to Blow up a Pipeline. As an intellectual prominently interested in issues of environment and politics, Malm's solution for enacting political change is to advocate for a radical flank of the environmental movement - this may enable us to enact fast change. I think both authors agree that change needs to happen, and that "doom and gloom" responses aren't sufficient, but I think the question of time is interesting here. I'm empathetic to the argument that strategies that imply slow reformism could leave us shrugging on the path to destruction.
I'm a little skeptical of fully embracing Wright's "Analytical Marxism", because I can see it oversimplifying the theoretical questions and neglecting to address how these things work on the ground. For example, increasing democracy is a theoretically excellent goal, but in practice we still have an ideological media apparatus hell-bent on convincing us all to vote against our interests and avoid any kind of solidarity. I'm sure Wright had ideas about this specific problem, but I didn't feel like they were addressed sufficiently here.
The big takeaway for me is the central concept of eroding capitalism as a strategy - Wright talks so clearly about how we can't commit ourselves to only a single strategy, that we must engage in many at once as we maintain the Gramscian "pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will".
The problem with erosion is that it is slow. It seems like a clearly effective means of anti-capitalism, and potentially the only viable one we have, but there is a sense that we may need to act urgently, that erosion might be too slow for what we're looking at.
I'm interested in the relationship between this text and another recent Verso publication, Andreas Malm's How to Blow up a Pipeline. As an intellectual prominently interested in issues of environment and politics, Malm's solution for enacting political change is to advocate for a radical flank of the environmental movement - this may enable us to enact fast change. I think both authors agree that change needs to happen, and that "doom and gloom" responses aren't sufficient, but I think the question of time is interesting here. I'm empathetic to the argument that strategies that imply slow reformism could leave us shrugging on the path to destruction.
I'm a little skeptical of fully embracing Wright's "Analytical Marxism", because I can see it oversimplifying the theoretical questions and neglecting to address how these things work on the ground. For example, increasing democracy is a theoretically excellent goal, but in practice we still have an ideological media apparatus hell-bent on convincing us all to vote against our interests and avoid any kind of solidarity. I'm sure Wright had ideas about this specific problem, but I didn't feel like they were addressed sufficiently here.