Democratic by Design: How Carsharing, Co-ops, and Community Land Trusts Are Reinventing America

by Gabriel Metcalf

Americans have, since our founding, participated in a variety of alternative institutions--self-organized projects that work outside the traditional structures of government and business to change society. From the town meetings that still serve as our ideal of self-governance, to the sustainable food movement that is changing the way we think about farming the land and feeding our families, these secondary structures have given rise to many of our most exciting and important innovations. Yet most people still know little about them, even as their numbers and their influence increase. In today's climate of widespread economic inequity, political gridlock and daunting environmental challenges, we sorely need a fresh approach to social and political change. In Democratic by Design , Gabriel Metcalf sketches out a strategy that starts with small-scale, living examples of a better society that can ultimately scale up to widespread social transformation. Using examples like car-sharing organizations, community land trusts, credit unions, workers co-ops, citizen juries, community-supported agriculture farms, mission-driven corporations, and others, Democratic by Design shows how alternative institutions can be the crucial spark for a broad new progressive movement.

Genres: Economics, Nonfiction, Politics, Business, Political Science, Social Change, Urban Planning

256 pages, Hardcover

First published November 17, 2015

Reviews

[kz · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book showcases a bunch of “alternative institutions” (as the author likes to call them) in a short 200 pages, they go over their own consumer co-operative organizing experience and then delves into the some choice berry pickings of the American Revolution, mainly the New England Town Hall meetings. Which worked more like Murray Bookchins “libertarian municipalism” in those times.

There is also some light touching of communes and the origins of them. Community Land Trusts, Housing For All and City Planning all get their own chapters dedicated to them, alongside the National Farmer’s Alliance and the Seattle General Strike of 1919.

All and all not a bad book but definitely more of an introductory text into the above topics.

[Kate · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was exactly the book I was looking for. I've been involved in CSAs, a collective bookstore, and am currently involved in a community land trust, and I was looking for a book that would give me an introduction to the intellectual foundations of alternative institutions and collectives/co-ops. This was it. The annotated bibliography alone (in the appendix) was worth my time, and will probably cause me to buy the book for my bookshelf after I return my borrowed copy to the library.

The book makes the argument that progressives should focus their efforts on alternative institutions and not just social movements and organizing in order to effect social change. I found the argument convincing insofar as alternative institutions can be the means by which communities (and their constituents) can take control of the means of production, obtain better working conditions and greater bargaining power, connect with like-minded communitarians, achieve self-education and "wokeness" (for lack of a better term), among other aims. In anarchist terms, alternative institutions are demonstrations of direct action; they are "forming the structure of the new society with in the shell of the old."

The author acknowledges the critique of alternative institutions as sometimes exclusive (occasionally only appealing to whites or upper classes only) and inward focused or escapist. The author does not try to claim that the development of alternative institutions is the only means of social change; rather, he asserts that alternative institutions are necessary preconditions to social change and act synergistically with social movements. However, to the extent the author seems to advocate a kind of piecemeal social reform, I'm not sure I entirely agree. The author seems comfortable with the idea that some organizations are doomed to failure and that competition, baked into the capitalist system, is good because it separates the wheat from the chaff. But many organizations fail to be competitive because the system is skewed in favor of capitalist firms that maintain their competitive edge by outsourcing costs as externalities that are borne by the rest of us. The author discusses the local food movement as a model of success, yet fails to engage critically with the fact that the organizations of the movement are plagued with poor labor conditions, lack of adequate markets, dependence on wealthy elites (the only ones who can afford to buy food grown in urban/periurban communities by a group of largely college educated whites), and a decentralized distribution system that actually makes local foods (sometimes, not always) worse for the environment than non-local foods.

In addition, I think the author could have said more about the problem of co-optation. He discusses the failure of public housing and "slum clearing" as an example of what can go wrong, but I didn't think he adequately addressed the question of how alternative institutions can avoid co-optation. He appears to raise up Whole Foods as an example of success; whereas I see Whole Foods as a co-optation of the market that had been identified and cultivated by food co-ops and buying clubs, which are actual democratic community organizations and not passive moneymakers for absentee shareholders. There are so many examples of communitarian ideas being co-opted by corporate interests to line the pockets of capitalists that it seems a glaring oversight to not address this issue. Uber comes to mind. If car owners owned the Uber platform and Uber was organized as a co-op, then car-sharing as a democratic ideal could have been realized. But instead, Uber is owned by a corporation that not only fails to fairly distribute its profits to its workers but has fostered a misogynistic corporate culture little different from the days of Mad Men.

Even so, my takeaway from reading this book is that cooperatives absolutely have the potential to be liberating as well as to create organizations that are both democratic and can successfully compete (or at least co-exist) with capitalist enterprises.

[Jonathan Betz-Zall · Rating 5 out of 5]

Written by someone who has actually organized an alternative institution that meaningfully changed people's relationship with the earth, this book brings together numerous strands of thought about how people could more effectively and humanely work together than we can in the present economic morass. The result: a sense of the magnitude of the effort required, an appreciation of the lessons of the past and some ideas for future actions.

[Erin · Rating 2 out of 5]

interesting idea, poor execution

[Jeramey · Rating 2 out of 5]

Decent idea, execution doesn't quite rise to the idea. On the plus side, the book is very short.

If you're familiar with car sharing, co-ops and land trusts I don't think you'll learn much from this book.

[Adam Ross · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a book I wanted to give four stars to, and ordinarily would have, save for a pervasive flaw running throughout.

But first, the good. Metcalf was one of the founders of a car-sharing program in San Fransisco designed to reduce the number of cars and to encourage alternative modes of transportation except in cases where cars have to be used. His book is, if nothing else, a strongly practical primer of real ideas that can be implemented pretty much anywhere, and for that alone there is much good here. He discusses community land trusts, affordable housing, community design, and how change is accomplished in institutions and systems. As an example, he suggests that the emergence of self-driving cars will help us restore our towns and cities as "garden-cities," reclaiming empty lots and parking spaces as parks and other green areas, while encouraging roadways in our towns and cities to be narrowed for foot and bike traffic, while cars, rail systems, and bus lines travel between these contained neighborhoods and towns.

The problem with the book that I see is that its prescriptions are mostly superficial to the real problems. That is, he still operates in a capitalist mode that encourages competition and locating the ownership of production and wealth in the hands of a few. Even his own car sharing organization was not built around participatory democracy (that is, where everyone effected by a decision has a voice in making that decision) which empowers the people. He is still interested in making alternative energy, housing, and business "competitive" with capitalist organizations. Despite his reassurances and advice about resisting getting co-opted by the managerial and capitalist classes, he is already continuing to think within their paradigm. If part of the problem is competition, for example (as is pretty clear it is), then getting alternative organizations to compete more efficiently is already a losing proposition.

There are a ton of great ideas here, and the book is well documented, which makes it extremely valuable in this regard. But the larger framework in which these alternative ideas are explored has to be more systemically and carefully thought out if they are to truly provide alternatives to the prevailing systems.

[Du · Rating 3 out of 5]

Better concept then execution. The idea of sharing resources and working together as a community is an idea scenario, but the reality is harder to accomplish. The author does a good job of communicating his theory and has some decent examples of how you could encourage this. Downside is that he doesn't present a downside. That is, there is no clear discussion of both sides of the equation. Also the author sounds like a he had came up with a mediocre project that he ended up leaving, and decided he'd been successful enough, he could write a book about it. He is idealistic and enthusiastic, but not really practical.

[Alicia · Rating 4 out of 5]

very quick and easy to understand! I've never heard the term "alternate institutions" before, but when I thought about it it's basically everything I'm all about lolol. I liked how he explained the history behind a few alternate institutions like carsharing and community land trusts (and even the origins of our government) but also emphasizes that there are multiple institutions that exist and can't possibly be all be changed with one overarching societal solution (basically how society is an ecosystem of numerous institutions)

anyway, interesting topic and explained in an easily understandable way

[Jonathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A quick-paced, thoughtful, and optimistic review of various efforts on the ground to build a better society from within, with attention to what has worked and what has not. The author speaks from experience (having co-founded City Car Share in San Francisco) and has done a lot of comprehensive complementary research, particularly around theories of institution building and institutional change.