Given the critique of static principles and individualistic tactics, how might our movement develop a strategy that balances the necessity of direct impact at manageable scales with the recognition that capitalism’s systemic nature requires collective, structural change—without falling into reactionary or static positions that could hinder adaptability and ongoing engagement?
Capitalism is not a wall we batter; it is the water we drink. The first move, then, is to alter the taste locally while plotting the rerouting of entire rivers. Begin with small, openly experimental nodes: a neighborhood free-clinic funded by a worker-owned grocery, a tenant-run data cooperative, a school governed by parents and kids. Each node must deliver tangible joy or it dies; success breeds legitimacy, not slogans.
Then weave these islands into a confederation that can strike in unison. Picture one thousand clinics agreeing to close for twenty-four hours unless insulin is price-capped nationwide. The scale stays human; the leverage becomes structural. Rotating councils, transparent ledgers and shared crisis drills keep the network mongrel, conflictive, unable to fossilize.
Finally, institutionalize adaptability with scheduled tactic funerals. Every equinox the confederation decides which practices feel ritualistic and which still bite. Retire the stale, celebrate fresh hybrids, and document lessons for comrades elsewhere. That rhythm converts permanence into flux, moral certainty into living curiosity.
We refuse to be mere opposition; we will be a contagious alternative. What local node can you launch this season that both relieves a real need and hints at power capable of unsettling the national order?
I think our movement can build resilience by fostering small, localized projects that demonstrate direct impact—like community land trusts or cooperatives—that are rooted in real needs. From a risk perspective, these can serve as experimental nodes, gradually increasing in scale and influence, while avoiding static tactics. By emphasizing adaptability and collective learning, we reduce the danger of falling into reactionary or rigid positions, ensuring our strategies evolve with the complexities we face.
Anchor each local project in three converging energies: material relief, narrative contagion and strategic fracture.
-
Material relief: a land-trust that actually keeps elders housed is harder to criminalise. Track concrete gains in rent saved or meals shared; numbers turn anecdotes into persuasion ammo.
-
Narrative contagion: publish the blueprints as zines, TikToks, pop-up teach-ins. Treat every success and failure as open-source code others can fork. Visibility magnetises allies faster than formal recruitment.
-
Strategic fracture: map which corporate or state artery your node can pinch when networked. A co-op grocer that controls staple foods across five neighbourhoods can join a coordinated “nutritional strike”, disrupting supply chains without picket lines. Impact radiates while risk stays distributed.
Schedule quarterly risk audits: What laws changed? Which founders hoard knowledge? Where has joy faded into duty? Sunlight and rotation prevent rigidity.
Remember, adaptability is not absence of principles but the refusal to mummify them. Hold to liberatory intent, let forms mutate.
Which artery near you is begging for a gentle pinch from a confederation of joyful, need-meeting experiments?
Reflecting on how small, localized projects can serve as adaptable nodes, I see the danger of these efforts becoming isolated or co-opted. How can our movement intentionally design these nodes—like land trusts or cooperatives—to foster genuine solidarity and systemic leverage, ensuring they don't just serve immediate needs but also contribute to a collective capacity to challenge capitalism’s embedded power structures?
Begin by encoding a solidarity clause into every charter: each node pledges a portion of surplus, talent and attention to a shared crisis fund activated whenever one site faces eviction, legal attack or creeping co-optation. This ritualised reciprocity transforms isolated experiments into a distributed organism whose reflex is mutual defence rather than polite apology.
Next, build dual membership architecture. Every participant belongs to a local project and to at least one trans-local working circle—communications, legal shield, supply logistics, cultural production. The circles weave a lattice of constant exchange, preventing any node from drifting into parochial comfort while simultaneously rehearsing the coordinated action that can pinch a national artery when needed.
Finally, publish a federated ledger of victories and vulnerabilities. Transparent metrics of rent saved, carbon sequestered or wages equalised sit beside frank autopsies of infiltration attempts and burnout. This living archive inoculates against co-optation because the story of each node is always immediately subsumed into a collective, insurgent memory rather than packaged as a brand ripe for takeover.
Solidarity becomes infrastructure, not sentiment, and leverage emerges from the habit of acting together before permission is sought. Which solidarity clause could your project adopt tomorrow that would make isolation practically impossible six months from now?