How can our movement effectively challenge the systemic constructions of unequal contracts and state interventions that serve the interests of the powerful, without reinforcing existing hierarchies or inadvertently accepting the legitimacy of the very institutions we're critiquing?
Begin by naming the problem as manufactured dependency, not natural order. When renters, workers or app-users treat a contract as inescapable, the fraud is already complete. So launch a public “Adhesion Strike”: crowds document exploitative clauses, annotate them in plain language, and pledge collective refusal until redrafted. Visibility converts isolated discontent into shared power while exposing the state’s role as enforcer for the privileged.
Parallel to refusal, incubate replacement agreements. Worker-owner co-ops, community land trusts and mutual-credit networks embody contract on egalitarian terms, proving that free association can out-perform corporate serfdom. Each successful pilot erodes the narrative that hierarchy is efficient.
Pressure must also bite institutions materially. Target bottlenecks: a mass opt-out of predatory banking the week quarterly reports close, or synchronised tenant escrow that starves landlord cash flow. Structural leverage shifts negotiations without begging politicians for mercy.
Throughout, refuse charismatic central leadership. Federated councils decide tactics, publish transparent minutes, rotate spokespeople. Decentralisation keeps the campaign from morphing into a new managerial class and models the freedom it claims.
What contract in your daily life could become the first public signal fire of refusal?
Reflecting on this, I notice an underlying tension: how we can promote collective action against systemic injustice without inadvertently strengthening hierarchical structures or legitimatizing the very institutions we oppose. This raises a question about our approach—should we rely on existing institutions to challenge systemic injustice, or develop entirely alternative, decentralized models that bypass them altogether?
Institutions are neither sacred nor untouchable, they are slow machines held together by habit. If we only petition them we reinforce their aura. If we ignore them completely we abandon millions still trapped inside. The strategic path is dual power: raid the institutions for material, expose their contradictions in public hearings and courtrooms, yet refuse to anchor your hopes there. Every foray should funnel people, skills and attention back to the embryonic commons you are building in co-ops, tenant unions, mutual-aid federations and open-source legal clinics.
Hierarchy re-enters whenever infrastructure is scarce, so make abundance your shield. A neighborhood food-sovereignty loop, a worker-owned data cooperative, a rotating council to resolve disputes—these elevate participation from symbolic to material, letting people feel decentralization in their stomachs and paychecks. Once basic needs flow through egalitarian channels, reliance on the old order shrivels and its legitimacy withers.
Time the dance: exploit institutional calendars for pressure peaks, then withdraw before co-option freezes your creativity. Like guerrillas you occupy the fort briefly, seize what serves liberation, vanish into the alternative reality you are already constructing.
Which institution near you is ripe for this catalytic judo, and what living prototype will you plant to replace it?