Scan barcode
cliffhangerbooks's review
informative
medium-paced
3.5
have been reading several books on new economics lately, trying to better grasp what different sides of the green transition imply. I picked up “Mutualism” by impulse, as I do with so many books, so I was probably expecting something that wasn’t there.
Mutualism is conceptually interesting: it is about embedding social benefit at the core of organisations and thinking of ways to be self-sustaining without compromising the values of the communities they serve. This was a particularly timely reading for me since I’m going through very similar discussions at work.
I like this book, but I thought its contextualisation was too American. By this, I mean that there are assumptions of how organisms or communities work that are specific to the US and don’t have much to do with the rest of the world. But again, I liked the main takeaways, so you might enjoy the book anyway if you don’t mind that.
novkap's review
3.0
Very informative-I learned a lot from this book about mutualism and some history about the labor movement in the United States. Only thing- it was sometimes a slog to get through. It might be this topic is just not super exciting for me personally and also because I felt some parts of the book were repetitive. I still would recommend because the information is great and not common knowledge.
nooknook's review
2.0
I appreciated the history of labor and mutualist organizations, but that’s about all I appreciated about this book.
I was in no way convinced by the argument that mutualism (not socialism) is the answer to our problems. The author recognizes that neoliberal capitalism is a problem, but suggests using capitalism to fix capitalism, which makes no sense. Mutualism does mean that workers have control over profit—but I don’t understand why this is somehow better than giving workers the means of production themselves. The idea that we should stop criticizing capitalism and government seems plain defeatist to me. And her rhetoric of personal responsibility and resilience us plain neoliberal ideology. Ultimately, she seems to fundamentally misunderstand communism—in a true communist society, there would be no top-down or forceful revolution; the state would no longer need to exist after the transition occurred, and anyway it would be a more true embodiment of the people than in a capitalist society.
The examples she provided of mutualism did not convince me that it would be worth abandoning a socialist ideal for. We have gaping wealth inequality & deeply engrained racism, which can’t be fixed by local or special-interest groups. We need reparations, and that needs to happen at the government level. (Jeff Bezos won’t willingly give up his stolen profits.)
We also need global reparations, which leads me to another point—the author makes no mention of what this system might mean internationally. Capitalism has unevenly developed the globe, which calls for dramatic redistribution of wealth and resources. Her (brief) use of the kibbutz as a model embodies this failure to account for how wealth has accrued in the West as a direct result of racism and settler colonialism.
It’s a no for me.
I was in no way convinced by the argument that mutualism (not socialism) is the answer to our problems. The author recognizes that neoliberal capitalism is a problem, but suggests using capitalism to fix capitalism, which makes no sense. Mutualism does mean that workers have control over profit—but I don’t understand why this is somehow better than giving workers the means of production themselves. The idea that we should stop criticizing capitalism and government seems plain defeatist to me. And her rhetoric of personal responsibility and resilience us plain neoliberal ideology. Ultimately, she seems to fundamentally misunderstand communism—in a true communist society, there would be no top-down or forceful revolution; the state would no longer need to exist after the transition occurred, and anyway it would be a more true embodiment of the people than in a capitalist society.
The examples she provided of mutualism did not convince me that it would be worth abandoning a socialist ideal for. We have gaping wealth inequality & deeply engrained racism, which can’t be fixed by local or special-interest groups. We need reparations, and that needs to happen at the government level. (Jeff Bezos won’t willingly give up his stolen profits.)
We also need global reparations, which leads me to another point—the author makes no mention of what this system might mean internationally. Capitalism has unevenly developed the globe, which calls for dramatic redistribution of wealth and resources. Her (brief) use of the kibbutz as a model embodies this failure to account for how wealth has accrued in the West as a direct result of racism and settler colonialism.
It’s a no for me.
subdue_provide75's review
inspiring
slow-paced
1.5
This tries to be an inspiration to creating your own mutalist organization, rather than a (grand) theory about mutual aid.
deedireads's review
hopeful
informative
medium-paced
4.25
All my reviews live at https://deedispeaking.com/reads/.
TL;DR REVIEW:
Mutualism was a fascinating, approachable book made me think about the future and the safety net we can build for ourselves in a lot of new ways.
For you if: You’d like to learn about a possible middle ground between the way we’re leaving people behind and ditching capitalism completely.
FULL REVIEW
First of all, thank you to Random House for sending me a free copy of this book. I’m really glad that I read it.
When I heard about Mutualism, I was expecting a book all about mutual aid (which has exploded in the past year, thanks to the pandemic). But while it definitely does talk about mutual aid, there’s also a lot more to it. This book is also about the changing workforce (ie freelancing) and how labor laws and practices can foster a new kind of safety net (insurance, retirement, etc) for all workers.
In the early 20th century, Sara Horowitz’s family built one of the largest unions in the country. Later, she built the Freelancers Union, which today has 500,000 members. She brings that experience together with her labor relations and law degrees to envision a future where we build organizations that meet people’s needs over the long term, with patient, reliable income streams.
On the left, you hear two extremes: the government must provide EVERYTHING, or we must abolish capitalism completely. I found this look at mutualism — legally recognized, self-sufficient organizations that work with the economy rather than against it — as a possible middle-ground solution to be both refreshing and hopeful.
But it doesn’t feel like an economics lesson. It’s approachable and readable and personal. A lot of it really resonated with me, and I learned a ton.
TL;DR REVIEW:
Mutualism was a fascinating, approachable book made me think about the future and the safety net we can build for ourselves in a lot of new ways.
For you if: You’d like to learn about a possible middle ground between the way we’re leaving people behind and ditching capitalism completely.
FULL REVIEW
First of all, thank you to Random House for sending me a free copy of this book. I’m really glad that I read it.
When I heard about Mutualism, I was expecting a book all about mutual aid (which has exploded in the past year, thanks to the pandemic). But while it definitely does talk about mutual aid, there’s also a lot more to it. This book is also about the changing workforce (ie freelancing) and how labor laws and practices can foster a new kind of safety net (insurance, retirement, etc) for all workers.
In the early 20th century, Sara Horowitz’s family built one of the largest unions in the country. Later, she built the Freelancers Union, which today has 500,000 members. She brings that experience together with her labor relations and law degrees to envision a future where we build organizations that meet people’s needs over the long term, with patient, reliable income streams.
On the left, you hear two extremes: the government must provide EVERYTHING, or we must abolish capitalism completely. I found this look at mutualism — legally recognized, self-sufficient organizations that work with the economy rather than against it — as a possible middle-ground solution to be both refreshing and hopeful.
But it doesn’t feel like an economics lesson. It’s approachable and readable and personal. A lot of it really resonated with me, and I learned a ton.
lindsayb's review
3.0
I am 100% on board with all of this (though I still can't find the courage to be a leader), and I loved the inclusion of Horowitz's own family history as union organizers. Unfortunately, I just found parts too dry, and I am still terrible at really understanding business and economics, so I found my mind wandering a lot. That said, I'm excited to continue to seek out more mutualist opportunities in my life.
More...