What do you think?
Rate this book
Real Utopia: Participatory Society for the 21st Century
What if we had direct control over our daily lives? What if society’s defining institutions—those encompassing economics, politics, kinship, culture, community, and ecology—were based not on competition, individual ownership, and coercion, but on self-management, equity, solidarity, and diversity? Real Utopia identifies and obliterates the barriers to an egalitarian, bottom-up society, while convincingly outlining how to build it. Instead of simply declaring “another world is possible,” the writers in this collection engage with what that world would look like, how it would function, and how our commitment to just outcomes is related to the sort of institutions we maintain. Topics participatory economics, political vision, education, architecture, artists in a free society, environmentalism, work after capitalism, and poly-culturalism. The catchall phrase here is “participatory society”—one that is directly democratic and seeks institutional solutions to complex sociological and economic questions. Contributors Michael Albert, Barbara Ehrenreich, Steve Shalom, Robin Hahnel, Maria Trigona, Justin Podur, Tom Wetzel, Cynthia Peters, Andrej Grubacic, and Mandisi Majavu, among others. Chris Spannos is an activist, organizer, and anti-capitalist. He is a full-time staff member of the internationally acclaimed ZNet, a website dedicated to social change, hosting works by many of today’s leading social commentators, organizers, activists, and analysts, with 300,000 users weekly. He resides in Woods Hole, Massachusetts.
420 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 2008
9 people are currently reading
163 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
August 28, 2009
Chapter 8, 20, 28, 30, 31 were all really great essays (5 star). These essays identified and enhanced the radical scope of the parecon model. They provided a coherent, rational and realistic vision of the social, economic and political relations that most libertarian activists espouse. The essays also identify problems within the current left, notably the lack of coherent popular movements.
Other essays focused on the struggle of real businesses and organizations attempting to enact parecon or parecon-like models. Much seems to be occurring in South America along these ends, notably Venezuela. The essays of global north parecon-ish organizations I found to be less uplifting, because of the issues they have to deal with in their particular political/social/economic climate. They were educational nonetheless, but less interesting than the aspects of Real Utopia that identify grand vision and discuss details.
One thing that irked me about the book is that I was unfamiliar with the term "participatory economics" at the outset. The book does little to explain what parecon actually is until some of the later essays cite the 4 main ideas behind that economic model. Maybe they could have organized the essays better, because parecon is talked about throughout the book. I wholeheartedly agree with the parecon model and believe that it is probably one of the fairest economic models yet worked out. Aspects of the model are by no means "new" or "innovative" but combining them in a coherent framework that explains aspects of economic interaction is the real substance.
Plenty of books and authors are name-dropped as inspiration for many of the organization and experiences talked about in the essays. This book was enough to make me interested in reading more about parecon and ways to build the institutions discussed.
Other essays focused on the struggle of real businesses and organizations attempting to enact parecon or parecon-like models. Much seems to be occurring in South America along these ends, notably Venezuela. The essays of global north parecon-ish organizations I found to be less uplifting, because of the issues they have to deal with in their particular political/social/economic climate. They were educational nonetheless, but less interesting than the aspects of Real Utopia that identify grand vision and discuss details.
One thing that irked me about the book is that I was unfamiliar with the term "participatory economics" at the outset. The book does little to explain what parecon actually is until some of the later essays cite the 4 main ideas behind that economic model. Maybe they could have organized the essays better, because parecon is talked about throughout the book. I wholeheartedly agree with the parecon model and believe that it is probably one of the fairest economic models yet worked out. Aspects of the model are by no means "new" or "innovative" but combining them in a coherent framework that explains aspects of economic interaction is the real substance.
Plenty of books and authors are name-dropped as inspiration for many of the organization and experiences talked about in the essays. This book was enough to make me interested in reading more about parecon and ways to build the institutions discussed.
May 4, 2009
Real Utopia: Participatory Society for the 21st Century
Edited by Chris Spannos
Review by James Generic
Edited by Pigpen
Parecon is an economic school coming from the libertarian socialist and anarchist school of thought, in opposition to traditional liberal economics or centrally planned economies. It seems to argue three basic things.
The first is that in society, there is a capitalist class, a working class, and a coordinator class, updating Marxist work of dividing the entirety of society into bourgeois and proletarian classes, with all else being outside the historical class struggle. Parecon argues that this really leaves out a coordinator class in modern capitalism. A class consisting of people like professors, professionals, managers, supervisors, police, small business owners and other people who do not own large means of production, but do in fact have powers over the working class as the experts of society. This would explain such phenomena like after the Russian Revolution where the Bolshevik Party became the new rulers, ruling in the name of the workers.
The second part of parecon theory explores future economies, and argues that society should be run by a mixture of workers councils running workplaces and consumer councils determining how to distribute goods and materials. Neighborhood organizations would also run neighborhoods, with any delegation being recallable. In addition, boards would plan out further economics.
Some of the other features are that where things effect people more, like if you live in a certain place, your voice means more. Another main feature is that "rote" work (or "shitwork") and "empowering" work (enjoyable work) is regularly rotated. Participatory economics originated between work of Robin Hahnel and Michael Albert, much of which came from direct experience working in collectives. They try to emphasize deconstructing gender roles, ecology, democratic processes, fair distribution, balancing talent and time, education, and empowering work.
"Real Utopia: Participatory Economics for the 21st Century", edited by Chris Spannos, is a collection of essays by not only Hanel and Albert, but a multitude of others who have developed parecon theory, used it in real collecive work, and have written extensively in defense of participatory economics. It is divided into sections like theory; exploring how parecon could be used in a future post-capitalist world; how parecon can be used in places outside the US like Africa, the Balkans, or Argentina, applying parecon theory to historical examples like the Russian Revolution or the Spanish Revolution, or Social Democracy in the 20th century; parecon in practice from examples like South End Press, Mondragaon Bookstore and Cafe in Winnipeg, the Newstandard magazine, the Vancouver Parecon Collective, and the Austin Project for Participatory Society; and then how to incorporate parecon into larger social movements and fights for social justice and a new world.
Before I read this book, to be perfectly honest, I didn’t really understand Participatory economics beyond the really bare essentials, and couldn’t really read Michael Albert’s books because of some of the dryness in them. The basics that I was familiar with seemed a little wonkish, even totally utopian. The only thing that I really took away from from Partipatory Economics was the “Coordinator Class” theory, which really helped explain a lot of the co-optation of social movements over time. Reading this helped it make a whole lot more sense, especially in how people use it in everyday life.
I especially liked the section on Parecon in practice, as someone who’s worked in collectives for years and didn’t realize that we were using forms of parecon already. It certainly helps to emphasize shifting tasks around between the non-glorious rote stuff that is the meat and potatoes of any successful project, and the glorious stuff like dealing with press or being a recognized voice in the organization. Parecon also specifically leaves out how to arrive at such economics in society, since it does not call for a state takeover or even gradual reforms, but a vague confrontation with social institutions, something probably better since anyone who says they have 100% of a blueprint is probably full of shit. Some of the other criticisms I’ve heard, from anarchosyndicalists, is that a parecon world would be overly bureaucracitized and too technical. There might be some validity to that argument when parecon is presented in its purest theoretical form, but as a basic philosophy, I’m starting to think that it has a lot of merits to learn from.
Of course, the question remains how to get to such a society? The quote of, "building a new world in the shell of the old," seems to be what parecon advocates, but what about repression? Perhaps that is not really the aim of parecon, and it simply wishes to deal with the economics and political questions, not how to arrive at that or deal with confrontations with the old order. So much of the literature of the Left deals with criticism of the existing systems and not a lot of print on what to do afterwards beyond vagaries. Chris Spannos did a wonderful job assembling essays dealing with how organizing another world would work from the bottom up, with the thought in mind that smashing capitalism or the state does not solve the worlds problems in a day, lest worse problems arise (as seen in Russia). One needs to take a good look at what sort of society you’d want to live in and take steps to try to achieve that society, here and in the future.
Edited by Chris Spannos
Review by James Generic
Edited by Pigpen
Parecon is an economic school coming from the libertarian socialist and anarchist school of thought, in opposition to traditional liberal economics or centrally planned economies. It seems to argue three basic things.
The first is that in society, there is a capitalist class, a working class, and a coordinator class, updating Marxist work of dividing the entirety of society into bourgeois and proletarian classes, with all else being outside the historical class struggle. Parecon argues that this really leaves out a coordinator class in modern capitalism. A class consisting of people like professors, professionals, managers, supervisors, police, small business owners and other people who do not own large means of production, but do in fact have powers over the working class as the experts of society. This would explain such phenomena like after the Russian Revolution where the Bolshevik Party became the new rulers, ruling in the name of the workers.
The second part of parecon theory explores future economies, and argues that society should be run by a mixture of workers councils running workplaces and consumer councils determining how to distribute goods and materials. Neighborhood organizations would also run neighborhoods, with any delegation being recallable. In addition, boards would plan out further economics.
Some of the other features are that where things effect people more, like if you live in a certain place, your voice means more. Another main feature is that "rote" work (or "shitwork") and "empowering" work (enjoyable work) is regularly rotated. Participatory economics originated between work of Robin Hahnel and Michael Albert, much of which came from direct experience working in collectives. They try to emphasize deconstructing gender roles, ecology, democratic processes, fair distribution, balancing talent and time, education, and empowering work.
"Real Utopia: Participatory Economics for the 21st Century", edited by Chris Spannos, is a collection of essays by not only Hanel and Albert, but a multitude of others who have developed parecon theory, used it in real collecive work, and have written extensively in defense of participatory economics. It is divided into sections like theory; exploring how parecon could be used in a future post-capitalist world; how parecon can be used in places outside the US like Africa, the Balkans, or Argentina, applying parecon theory to historical examples like the Russian Revolution or the Spanish Revolution, or Social Democracy in the 20th century; parecon in practice from examples like South End Press, Mondragaon Bookstore and Cafe in Winnipeg, the Newstandard magazine, the Vancouver Parecon Collective, and the Austin Project for Participatory Society; and then how to incorporate parecon into larger social movements and fights for social justice and a new world.
Before I read this book, to be perfectly honest, I didn’t really understand Participatory economics beyond the really bare essentials, and couldn’t really read Michael Albert’s books because of some of the dryness in them. The basics that I was familiar with seemed a little wonkish, even totally utopian. The only thing that I really took away from from Partipatory Economics was the “Coordinator Class” theory, which really helped explain a lot of the co-optation of social movements over time. Reading this helped it make a whole lot more sense, especially in how people use it in everyday life.
I especially liked the section on Parecon in practice, as someone who’s worked in collectives for years and didn’t realize that we were using forms of parecon already. It certainly helps to emphasize shifting tasks around between the non-glorious rote stuff that is the meat and potatoes of any successful project, and the glorious stuff like dealing with press or being a recognized voice in the organization. Parecon also specifically leaves out how to arrive at such economics in society, since it does not call for a state takeover or even gradual reforms, but a vague confrontation with social institutions, something probably better since anyone who says they have 100% of a blueprint is probably full of shit. Some of the other criticisms I’ve heard, from anarchosyndicalists, is that a parecon world would be overly bureaucracitized and too technical. There might be some validity to that argument when parecon is presented in its purest theoretical form, but as a basic philosophy, I’m starting to think that it has a lot of merits to learn from.
Of course, the question remains how to get to such a society? The quote of, "building a new world in the shell of the old," seems to be what parecon advocates, but what about repression? Perhaps that is not really the aim of parecon, and it simply wishes to deal with the economics and political questions, not how to arrive at that or deal with confrontations with the old order. So much of the literature of the Left deals with criticism of the existing systems and not a lot of print on what to do afterwards beyond vagaries. Chris Spannos did a wonderful job assembling essays dealing with how organizing another world would work from the bottom up, with the thought in mind that smashing capitalism or the state does not solve the worlds problems in a day, lest worse problems arise (as seen in Russia). One needs to take a good look at what sort of society you’d want to live in and take steps to try to achieve that society, here and in the future.
June 3, 2009
I would have given this book 2 1/2 if I could have. It's a hard book to say I liked. It was interesting and thought provoking, but often a chore to read. Some of the essays came across like a grad school paper. It's the kind of book where they talk about how to connect with the working class and then write academic and thoroughly unreadable sentences. Still, the essays are diverse. Participatory economics has a lot going for it. And since so few people talk about real economic alternatives to capitalism, particularly egalitarian ones, it's worth a read.
July 30, 2020
"Work cannot be so boring, alienating, or demeaning that it's impossible to feel desirable or desire after a long day. In fact, there shouldn't be long days of work. Maybe one of the principles around which work should be organized is: Does it leave people enough time and energy to go home and have sex?" -Cynthia Peters.
August 5, 2020
Partisans of parecon pitch slow, soft questions at each other about their pet projects in self-management. A major opportunity to examine one of the most important theoretical accomplishments in radical/left thought is missed.
October 9, 2011
This is a book worth skimming through the table of contents and reading the handful of chapters that stand out. It's a collection of essays and interviews on a variety of examples and perspectives on participatory economics, a modern, extremely democratic take on social and economic structures.
What's nice about this is that you actually get practical discussions of these utopian economic visions. You get your share of starry-eyed idealism, but there's also a good bit of honest discussion on the difficulties of putting together societies like these, and even some actual examples. Not the sort of thing you normally find from these writers, so it's refreshing.
I said above that these writers are "extremely democratic". What I mean is that they almost completely (and sometimes completely) reject hierarchy. They seem to be rejecting the very idea of a social structure with built in authority, with the powerful over the powerless, and this is their attempt to work that out.
Of course, I'm not being completely fair in that assessment. They are radically democratic, but the political vision does emerge as a hierarchy of sorts. Just very bottom-up and guarded against political corruption.
Since you get a lot of different writers in this book working out complicated, practical details, it's great for seeing shades of nuance in their different perspectives, really valuable for a subject that's usually so pie-in-the-sky.
What's nice about this is that you actually get practical discussions of these utopian economic visions. You get your share of starry-eyed idealism, but there's also a good bit of honest discussion on the difficulties of putting together societies like these, and even some actual examples. Not the sort of thing you normally find from these writers, so it's refreshing.
I said above that these writers are "extremely democratic". What I mean is that they almost completely (and sometimes completely) reject hierarchy. They seem to be rejecting the very idea of a social structure with built in authority, with the powerful over the powerless, and this is their attempt to work that out.
Of course, I'm not being completely fair in that assessment. They are radically democratic, but the political vision does emerge as a hierarchy of sorts. Just very bottom-up and guarded against political corruption.
Since you get a lot of different writers in this book working out complicated, practical details, it's great for seeing shades of nuance in their different perspectives, really valuable for a subject that's usually so pie-in-the-sky.
October 10, 2013
I had been putting off reading this for a number or years because I'd already read about 3 of the parecon books. I used two selections from this for a course on Workers' Self-Management and the response from my students was pretty good.
Overall this is a really great book. It has a good variety of selections from the historical to the theoretical to the practical. It is an excellent companion book to any of the other classic parecon books by Albert and/or Hahnel (Thinking Forward, Looking Forward, Pareceon, etc.)
The only weakness is that this book can be a touch repetitive because all the contributors are taking Albert & Hahnel's ideas and then re-working them or applying them in a different context.
I'm not fully convinced about all the features of parecon as a model (particularly the continuation of use of money), but I think there is a serious lack of visionary writing on the left and this is a well thought-out model which deserves to be studied and debated.
I was pleasantly surprised how much I enjoyed this.
Overall this is a really great book. It has a good variety of selections from the historical to the theoretical to the practical. It is an excellent companion book to any of the other classic parecon books by Albert and/or Hahnel (Thinking Forward, Looking Forward, Pareceon, etc.)
The only weakness is that this book can be a touch repetitive because all the contributors are taking Albert & Hahnel's ideas and then re-working them or applying them in a different context.
I'm not fully convinced about all the features of parecon as a model (particularly the continuation of use of money), but I think there is a serious lack of visionary writing on the left and this is a well thought-out model which deserves to be studied and debated.
I was pleasantly surprised how much I enjoyed this.
April 14, 2017
Definitely a "pick-and-choose" anthology. Some essays are interesting, some are pretty boring. Interesting vision of the future, but it doesn't seem very likely.
Then again, most radical visions aren't. ;)
Then again, most radical visions aren't. ;)
Currently reading
August 25, 2008I am one of the 35 or so co-authors of this book, so I will defer from commentary about this book.
Currently reading
May 4, 2011It seems to be what I am interested in so I ordered it at Coles today (June 15th, 2009)
It arrived! (June 23rd)
It arrived! (June 23rd)
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews