What do you think?
Rate this book
Post-Growth Living: For an Alternative Hedonism
An urgent and passionate plea for a new and ecologically sustainable vision of the good life
The reality of runaway climate change is inextricably linked with the mass consumerist, capitalist society in which we live. And the cult of endless growth, and endless consumption of cheap disposable commodities, isn’t only destroying the world, it is damaging us and our way of being. How do we stop the impending catastrophe, and how can we create a movement capable of confronting it head-on?
Philosopher Kate Soper offers an urgent plea for a new vision of the good life, one that is capable of delinking prosperity from endless growth. Instead, Soper calls for renewed emphasis on the joys of being that are currently being denied, and shows the way to creating a future that allows not only for more free time, and less conventional and more creative ways of using it, but also for fairer and more fulfilling ways of working and existing. This is an urgent and necessary intervention into debates on climate change.
Reviews
The reality of runaway climate change is inextricably linked with the mass consumerist, capitalist society in which we live. And the cult of endless growth, and endless consumption of cheap disposable commodities, isn’t only destroying the world, it is damaging us and our way of being. How do we stop the impending catastrophe, and how can we create a movement capable of confronting it head-on?
Philosopher Kate Soper offers an urgent plea for a new vision of the good life, one that is capable of delinking prosperity from endless growth. Instead, Soper calls for renewed emphasis on the joys of being that are currently being denied, and shows the way to creating a future that allows not only for more free time, and less conventional and more creative ways of using it, but also for fairer and more fulfilling ways of working and existing. This is an urgent and necessary intervention into debates on climate change.
Reviews
225 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2020
90 people are currently reading
2145 people want to read
About the author
Kate Soper
19 books23 followersKate Soper is a British philosopher and the author of and contributor to over a dozen books on feminism and Continental Philosophy, addressing the works of Jean-Paul Sartre, Karl Marx and Simone de Beauvoir, among others. She has also been involved in several environmentalist and peace movements in both the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe and some of her work addresses ecological issues. She regularly contributes columns or editorial content to the journals Radical Philosophy, New Left Review and Capitalism, Nature, Socialism. She is known to be a critic of post-structuralist feminism.
She has lectured on many of the above topics at University of North London (which became part of London Metropolitan University in 2002) since 1987. Previous to this she worked in the field of journalism and had studied at the University of Oxford.
She has lectured on many of the above topics at University of North London (which became part of London Metropolitan University in 2002) since 1987. Previous to this she worked in the field of journalism and had studied at the University of Oxford.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 69 reviews
January 16, 2022
the sentence that made me give up on this book:
"he also argues that the impasse of the antropocene forces us to accept that aspects of our modern thought systems are very poor reflections of the bio-physical world in which we are immersed: a view developed in his powerful critique of the non-naturality of capitalist-inaugurated technology and its central role, alongside money, in concealing the injustice of the hugely asymmetrical bio-physical resource flows in the global economy." what are you saying? that our theories don't reflect the physical world we live in? that many of our technologies are unnatural and hide inequities? could you have not worded that more clearly??????
academics who can't write clearly and accessibly are bad academics imo. especially if you are writing a book - surely the purpose is to have your work read by a wider audience than the standard academic paper. not the case with this book! if i, a person with a phd and a trained social scientist, cannot understand half of what you're writing then you've clearly done a bad job.
i really wanted to like this book, too. the topic is important and it seemed like it would have some good ideas. but it turns out the ideas were so bloody impenetrable that i never figured out what they were! sorry kate, but if you want your ideas to be picked up widely then figure out how to write more accessibly. we get it, you're a smart person who thinks about lots of big and important ideas! but please share your ideas in a way that people can actually understand them!
"he also argues that the impasse of the antropocene forces us to accept that aspects of our modern thought systems are very poor reflections of the bio-physical world in which we are immersed: a view developed in his powerful critique of the non-naturality of capitalist-inaugurated technology and its central role, alongside money, in concealing the injustice of the hugely asymmetrical bio-physical resource flows in the global economy." what are you saying? that our theories don't reflect the physical world we live in? that many of our technologies are unnatural and hide inequities? could you have not worded that more clearly??????
academics who can't write clearly and accessibly are bad academics imo. especially if you are writing a book - surely the purpose is to have your work read by a wider audience than the standard academic paper. not the case with this book! if i, a person with a phd and a trained social scientist, cannot understand half of what you're writing then you've clearly done a bad job.
i really wanted to like this book, too. the topic is important and it seemed like it would have some good ideas. but it turns out the ideas were so bloody impenetrable that i never figured out what they were! sorry kate, but if you want your ideas to be picked up widely then figure out how to write more accessibly. we get it, you're a smart person who thinks about lots of big and important ideas! but please share your ideas in a way that people can actually understand them!
March 29, 2021
Looks like I'm bit of an outlier here, in not being a huge fan of this book. I am, however, very familiar with the subject, and I didn't need any convincing that we need to change the way we live. Consumer capitalism is gruesomely harmful for people, the planet and society, and we need to escape it.
Unfortunately, this book is big on theory (which is presented in a rather inaccessible way), and very light on what we can do to change things. I think the author puts far too much faith in big government and political action, which is like fiddling while Rome burns. While the world falls apart due to the pandemic, it's pretty obvious that just about all politicians everywhere will prioritise growth over everything.
Too much rather patronising theory on display here. For a much, much more accessible, practical, inspiring and interesting read on the subject, with plenty of ideas for things you can actually do right now, try "How to be Free" (UK)/"The Freedom Manifesto" (US) by Tom Hodgkinson.
Unfortunately, this book is big on theory (which is presented in a rather inaccessible way), and very light on what we can do to change things. I think the author puts far too much faith in big government and political action, which is like fiddling while Rome burns. While the world falls apart due to the pandemic, it's pretty obvious that just about all politicians everywhere will prioritise growth over everything.
Too much rather patronising theory on display here. For a much, much more accessible, practical, inspiring and interesting read on the subject, with plenty of ideas for things you can actually do right now, try "How to be Free" (UK)/"The Freedom Manifesto" (US) by Tom Hodgkinson.
February 7, 2021
The politics of prosperity that we need today must dissociate pleasure and fulfilment from intensive consumption, from the endless accumulation of new machines and gadgetry, from tourist space travel and the like, and from so much else based on unworkable assumptions about what would constitute globally sustainable modes of life.
Given that we cannot have infinite growth on a planet with finite resources, at some point we need to confront our economic models of prosperity that are based on growth and consumerism. The need to reduce consumption is usually presented as being something akin to punishment, to a need for ascetism. However, in this book, Soper argues in favour of embracing an "alternative hedonism" that recognises the pleasures inherent in a life uncoupled from excessive consumption. She considers this in relation to such areas as transport, work and culture.
Although at times I found the writing a little dry and academic, I am very much convinced by the overall arguments in this book and think it is an important contribution to contemporary environmental literature. It deserves a much wider audience than I fear it will reach.
Given that we cannot have infinite growth on a planet with finite resources, at some point we need to confront our economic models of prosperity that are based on growth and consumerism. The need to reduce consumption is usually presented as being something akin to punishment, to a need for ascetism. However, in this book, Soper argues in favour of embracing an "alternative hedonism" that recognises the pleasures inherent in a life uncoupled from excessive consumption. She considers this in relation to such areas as transport, work and culture.
Although at times I found the writing a little dry and academic, I am very much convinced by the overall arguments in this book and think it is an important contribution to contemporary environmental literature. It deserves a much wider audience than I fear it will reach.
December 5, 2020
This is the kind of book that offers a vision on the world that has never gotten old, though it has evolved over time. Soper calls the idea of living with less consumption and enjoying one's life "alternative hedonism" in comparison with the kinds of sybaritic hedonism that contemporary consumption offers, and along the way she frequently disparages the "fully automated luxury communism" offered by accelerationists and techno-utopians.
Soper claims that "alternative hedonism" isn't nostalgic but forward-looking, and that might even be true - I agree with the premise and also with Soper's plainspoken interest in locating people's notably ambiguous if not realistically depreciating vision of consumerism as the point where change should emerge. However, in the end, ideas that are philosophically integral and coherent have rarely been broadly held when they seek to up-end a powerful system with almost universal, if inequitably distributed investment. All the Greta Thunberg speeches in the world haven't yet afforded the United Nations a power beyond that of the plaintive cry, though they make for compellingly visceral soundbytes. Because consumption goes far beyond material consumption - and sybaritism is darkly compelling, even in its vanilla, "black Friday" formation.
Still, to her book's benefit Soper is careful and thoughtful if not always eloquent, and I find this a compelling stylistic mixture. This is a text that I would certainly recommend to others, and I would say it is a cut above the current crop of Verso offerings. (On which note, I think Verso's book club is about the smartest thing they have done and I highly recommend it!)
Soper claims that "alternative hedonism" isn't nostalgic but forward-looking, and that might even be true - I agree with the premise and also with Soper's plainspoken interest in locating people's notably ambiguous if not realistically depreciating vision of consumerism as the point where change should emerge. However, in the end, ideas that are philosophically integral and coherent have rarely been broadly held when they seek to up-end a powerful system with almost universal, if inequitably distributed investment. All the Greta Thunberg speeches in the world haven't yet afforded the United Nations a power beyond that of the plaintive cry, though they make for compellingly visceral soundbytes. Because consumption goes far beyond material consumption - and sybaritism is darkly compelling, even in its vanilla, "black Friday" formation.
Still, to her book's benefit Soper is careful and thoughtful if not always eloquent, and I find this a compelling stylistic mixture. This is a text that I would certainly recommend to others, and I would say it is a cut above the current crop of Verso offerings. (On which note, I think Verso's book club is about the smartest thing they have done and I highly recommend it!)
March 25, 2023
This book has an extremely captivating thesis: too often we try to convince people to live more sustainably in negative and austere terms (drive less, eat less meat etc etc) - and we need to emphasise the pleasures of living this way by constructing an "alternative hedonism". Unfortunately I felt this was kind of a great idea in search of a book - a lot of the passages were summaries of other writers and theorists, obvious facts about climate change, degradation of nature, etc. The most thought provoking bits were: on the lefts unwillingness to engage in a critique of the consumer, with which I wholeheartedly agree, as someone whose vegan/vegetarianism is a v important part of my politics. Also the critique of the "luxury communism" idea of post capitalist abundance, making the case that we should practise more restraint. Also loved the term "joyless economy" (from another theorist) to capture how having every possible product and service at our fingertips ultimately leaves us cold. However I found the authors faith in ethical consumption as a transformative practise pretty naive.
September 11, 2022
Ok so this book is not very accessible — very heavy on philosophy and theory. Which is fine, but worth saying up front.
Kate Soper lays out a formidable critique of consumerism, including of the Marxist approach to theories of value, which I really appreciated. I also appreciate the spirit of what she suggests is needed — the alternative hedonist way of life she outlines is indeed one of our only likely pathways to a sustainable future imo. The theory she builds in its favor is convincing! However, the path to get there she presents seems to ignore where power truly lies — she names inequality as a challenge but the mainstream culture change she is talking about doesn’t really address how outside of the mainstream the most rich, powerful and climate-offending corporate actors live. She also puts a lot of faith in the state/electoral politics that are becoming so polarized and at risk of pushing us in the complete opposite direction. Overall, it left me feeling pretty dystopian about everything lol.
Read David Graeber instead!
Kate Soper lays out a formidable critique of consumerism, including of the Marxist approach to theories of value, which I really appreciated. I also appreciate the spirit of what she suggests is needed — the alternative hedonist way of life she outlines is indeed one of our only likely pathways to a sustainable future imo. The theory she builds in its favor is convincing! However, the path to get there she presents seems to ignore where power truly lies — she names inequality as a challenge but the mainstream culture change she is talking about doesn’t really address how outside of the mainstream the most rich, powerful and climate-offending corporate actors live. She also puts a lot of faith in the state/electoral politics that are becoming so polarized and at risk of pushing us in the complete opposite direction. Overall, it left me feeling pretty dystopian about everything lol.
Read David Graeber instead!
July 17, 2021
love the concept and beliefs behind this book however it is presented in a really inaccessible way, felt as though every other word in sections was changed with a thesaurus and quite frankly it goes against everything it is supposed to stand for.
April 10, 2023
Strong arguments, artful reasoning. Repositions your thinking, asking, what if it was just much more pleasurable to share more, to live in nicer spaces, and to work less? The kind of book that makes you want to shake people and ask, “why are you buying all this crap while the world is ending?”
October 27, 2022
Ak myslíte na štrikovanie svetrov a neviete si to dobe večnej zaneprázdnenosti ospravedlniť, táto kniha vás argumentačne vybaví. Že klimatický aktivizmus potrebuje adresovať naše predstavy o pôžitku, radosti, hedonizme, nepomôže žiadny severský termín, ale jednoducho viac a viac novších vecí už táto planéta neznesie, tak je čas opravovať, zašívať, šetriť, založiť svoj status na niečom inom než iPhone 13ke (teenageri v tramvaji a ich vážne debaty).
Kate Soper je jasná, aj ostrá, myšlienku alternatívneho hedonizmu opiera o rôzne typy argumentov. Od nešťastia až po kapitalizmus. Keď si spomeniete na Pestří a zelení: Kapitoly o dobrovolné skromnosti. a ďalšie knihy o dobrovoľnej skromnosti, tak viete, že rovnako ako zvonáče, toto tu už bolo. Len inak označené a v inom geografickom priestore.
Kate Soper je jasná, aj ostrá, myšlienku alternatívneho hedonizmu opiera o rôzne typy argumentov. Od nešťastia až po kapitalizmus. Keď si spomeniete na Pestří a zelení: Kapitoly o dobrovolné skromnosti. a ďalšie knihy o dobrovoľnej skromnosti, tak viete, že rovnako ako zvonáče, toto tu už bolo. Len inak označené a v inom geografickom priestore.
December 28, 2020
How we can live well and do so within the limits of the planet is a vital topic, and I appreciated the attempts to address it here. It gets a bit bogged down in refuting competing philosophies instead of advancing its own, and ultimately, it's a bit too theoretical and abstract for my taste. I came away with some inklings of a possible future -- slower travel, fewer cars, more leisure time, more craft -- but I wish there was a bit more time spent speculating on plausible future visions of "the good life" and accounting for our present and hegemonic consumer culture. Still, there's plenty of food for thought for those interested in meditating on the topic.
September 20, 2022
my heart: "<3," "sign me right up for a world where my desires respond more immediately to building my own table than they do to ordering shoes on garmentory.com," "hell yes"
my head: "good luck!"
i.e. core q, from this review: "Can a broad, coalition-based cultural revolution both highlight the virtues of hedonistic activity such as ethical consumption, going local, ‘slow living,’ yet also be sensitive to the fulfilment of actually-existing, potentially obsessive, toxic and neurotic, needs created by capitalism?" .... I would wager the answer is unfortunately "no" ... but even if I don't necessarily see a world where the "alternative hedonistic imaginary" captures the hearts of a nation, this was still a useful and hopeful read.
also liked this review by sarah jaffe.
my head: "good luck!"
i.e. core q, from this review: "Can a broad, coalition-based cultural revolution both highlight the virtues of hedonistic activity such as ethical consumption, going local, ‘slow living,’ yet also be sensitive to the fulfilment of actually-existing, potentially obsessive, toxic and neurotic, needs created by capitalism?" .... I would wager the answer is unfortunately "no" ... but even if I don't necessarily see a world where the "alternative hedonistic imaginary" captures the hearts of a nation, this was still a useful and hopeful read.
also liked this review by sarah jaffe.
Read
December 6, 2021Loved it. This seemed more philosophical/theoretical rather than a concrete approach to alternative hedonism, but still, this was a great synthesis of multiple schools of thought that I ascribe to - UBI, more leisure time, less cars, rejection of consumerism, etc. Her section on techno-utopians vs. alternative hedonists in particular was exactly where I find myself deviating from mainstream consumerist bullshit trying to sell you more stuff in hopes of combatting climate change and making our lives more "efficient". If you're my friend on Goodreads and you're reading this review, I already bought you this book for your birthday.
July 26, 2021
An impassioned plea against accelerationist politics that fail to address ecological concerns and/or consumerist hedonics. A call for both less work and more meaningful work, less consumption and more meaningful consumption. Against economic growth, for social growth.
tl;dr: no to robo mommies! no to tech daddies!
tl;dr: no to robo mommies! no to tech daddies!
August 30, 2025
185 pages is a long time to spend repeating your introduction over and over again
August 14, 2025
sorry chris i wrote all over your copy of this book
July 23, 2024
Amilyen lelkesítő volt az eleje, kicsit annyira semmilyen a vége. Nincs mit tenni, ez egy filozófiai írás, nem fogja megmondani, hogy mi a teendő. Vagyis nem lépésről lépésre, de igazából sok hasznos szempontot vázol fel. Sok új információval gazdagodtam és megint tettem egy lépést előre a struktúra-ágencia kérdéskörben, így összességében örülök, hogy elolvastam.
February 24, 2025
Totally support the idea of this book, unfortunately the execution is not for mass consumption, and reads like Marxist infighting. Wish Soper spent more time outlining the positive vision of alternative hedonism instead of systematically reviewing society's ills.
November 22, 2022
Here are some quick points:
- Alternative Hedonist Approach: a post-consumerist way of life that emphasizes the pleasures to be gained from adopting a less high-speed, consumption-oriented lifestyle; an ethical and environmental imperative given our current ecological and social crises
- Soper is not telling you, "This is what I as an expert philosopher know to be true about making people happy." She is trying to point to existing discontent among consumers with our spending/advertisement/automobile/shopping-mall/work-centered economy. The book borrows from Raymond Williams' "structure of feeling" — there is an existing "structure of feeling" among consumers of affluent societies that we are fed up with long work hours and polluted skies. I thought that this was especially true during the pandemic.
- Soper revises Marxist analyses of political change and future political imaginary. Rather than focusing solely on the working-class as the unit for political change, Soper posits that we must pay more attention to the political power and interests of the consumer class when it comes to addressing climate change. Soper also urges us to reimagine techno-utopian communism and socialist modernity by taking us out of the modernity framework.
Other interesting ideas:
- craftivism (not Soper's idea, but I discovered this through her book)
- "avant-garde nostalgia" : nostalgia reminds us of what we're missing in the present, thus pointing to modernity's limits; this yearning for the past can be concurrent with criticism of the hetero-patriarchal institutions that were present at the time and is simply meant to point to the inadequacies of the present
- "aesthetic revisionism" : a gestalt shift in seeing and feeling towards valuing post-consumerist ways of life
What I really liked about this book was its bridging of altering personal consumption habits and national policy — we need stronger state power to curb the devastating impacts of transnational capitalism on climate change and thus new hegemonic "common sense" among our politicians; given our state of representative democracy, this cultural shift has to come from ourselves. We need to stop valuing consumption and growth as markers of the "good life" in our communities and call out rampant consumption when we see it.
Soper does a good job of qualifying her argument with historical and sociological reasons as to why an emphasis on degrowth might seem paternalistic and only appeal to the affluent/middle-class. I still have that lingering skepticism, of course. But it was really refreshing to read this after all the focus there is on Instagram and social media on identity formation and self realization only through consumption (think about the ways in which we "express ourselves" - through the clothes we buy, the home decorations we display, the media we consume, etc.). The book made me want to get involved with local bike safety campaigns and affirmed my decision to find a life with "time affluence" rather than monetary affluence.
- Alternative Hedonist Approach: a post-consumerist way of life that emphasizes the pleasures to be gained from adopting a less high-speed, consumption-oriented lifestyle; an ethical and environmental imperative given our current ecological and social crises
- Soper is not telling you, "This is what I as an expert philosopher know to be true about making people happy." She is trying to point to existing discontent among consumers with our spending/advertisement/automobile/shopping-mall/work-centered economy. The book borrows from Raymond Williams' "structure of feeling" — there is an existing "structure of feeling" among consumers of affluent societies that we are fed up with long work hours and polluted skies. I thought that this was especially true during the pandemic.
- Soper revises Marxist analyses of political change and future political imaginary. Rather than focusing solely on the working-class as the unit for political change, Soper posits that we must pay more attention to the political power and interests of the consumer class when it comes to addressing climate change. Soper also urges us to reimagine techno-utopian communism and socialist modernity by taking us out of the modernity framework.
Other interesting ideas:
- craftivism (not Soper's idea, but I discovered this through her book)
- "avant-garde nostalgia" : nostalgia reminds us of what we're missing in the present, thus pointing to modernity's limits; this yearning for the past can be concurrent with criticism of the hetero-patriarchal institutions that were present at the time and is simply meant to point to the inadequacies of the present
- "aesthetic revisionism" : a gestalt shift in seeing and feeling towards valuing post-consumerist ways of life
What I really liked about this book was its bridging of altering personal consumption habits and national policy — we need stronger state power to curb the devastating impacts of transnational capitalism on climate change and thus new hegemonic "common sense" among our politicians; given our state of representative democracy, this cultural shift has to come from ourselves. We need to stop valuing consumption and growth as markers of the "good life" in our communities and call out rampant consumption when we see it.
Soper does a good job of qualifying her argument with historical and sociological reasons as to why an emphasis on degrowth might seem paternalistic and only appeal to the affluent/middle-class. I still have that lingering skepticism, of course. But it was really refreshing to read this after all the focus there is on Instagram and social media on identity formation and self realization only through consumption (think about the ways in which we "express ourselves" - through the clothes we buy, the home decorations we display, the media we consume, etc.). The book made me want to get involved with local bike safety campaigns and affirmed my decision to find a life with "time affluence" rather than monetary affluence.
October 1, 2024
I've been working on an idea about the future, and read this book to develop it. I think about people who want civilization to pause its growth, or shrink humanity's footprint, in opposition to those who want to continue growing our world energetically.
Soper gives an interesting example of the first group. She thinks (if I can compress) that humanity is very unhappy in modernity, and would be delighted to inhabit a world without consumerism and individualism. We might not think so now, but Soper assigns much of our unhappiness to go-go neoliberalism.
Such a new world would use the internet for communication, and also rely on green technologies. (100). In it hand-craft work would be precious, recalling William Morris. (102). Consumption would exist, but be more scant, and also more spiritual. (146-7) Economics would organize into cooperatives, locally owned businesses. (180)
To make this change would take using state power against popular opinion at times. Which sounds awful, but might be pedagogically, even therapeutic to the extent such politics would realize nascent, unexpressed human desires. (74)
The go-go technology world, which I've tentatively dubbed "hypermodern," Soper finds painful and even embarrassing. For example, she criticizes another book:
Very useful book for my work.
Soper gives an interesting example of the first group. She thinks (if I can compress) that humanity is very unhappy in modernity, and would be delighted to inhabit a world without consumerism and individualism. We might not think so now, but Soper assigns much of our unhappiness to go-go neoliberalism.
Such a new world would use the internet for communication, and also rely on green technologies. (100). In it hand-craft work would be precious, recalling William Morris. (102). Consumption would exist, but be more scant, and also more spiritual. (146-7) Economics would organize into cooperatives, locally owned businesses. (180)
To make this change would take using state power against popular opinion at times. Which sounds awful, but might be pedagogically, even therapeutic to the extent such politics would realize nascent, unexpressed human desires. (74)
The go-go technology world, which I've tentatively dubbed "hypermodern," Soper finds painful and even embarrassing. For example, she criticizes another book:
In recommending a fascinating with space travel ‘and all the traditional touchstones of science fiction’ for the way they ‘can feed a utopian imaginary beyond the profit motive,” Srnicek and Williams appear surprisingly unaware of how conventional and banal (and environmentally unsound - and boyish?) these astronautical fantasies can seem these days. (94)She goes further, earlier:
“Here, I submit, there are essentially two opposing responses on the left at present: the technological-utopian, and the alternative hedonist. The essential differences is that the tech-utopians trust digital technology and automation to cut out the drudgery they associate with almost all forms of caring and provisioning work, and to deliver an abundance of goods of the kind we already consume. Their post-work future is conceived as greener (thanks to smart energy) and more idle (thanks to robots and drones doing most things for us)...”(85-6)
Very useful book for my work.
May 17, 2022
Post-Growth Living was, I believe, an effort to encourage a shift from consumerism to a 'hedonism' that values non-material qualities of the good life. I'm not sure the diatribe against post-humanism added to her argument (as she seems to take this notion too literally, and takes the position that human's are driving the bus and that is that). But Soper makes some good arguments on what it might take to shake off empty consumerism, material growth and the threats to civilization.
In particular Soper offers a good discussion around state-action as opposed to 'folk politics' - that both are probably needed to encourage a grass-root movement for change while having state mechanisms capable of making the changes under a democratic rubric.
"Some of these activities and developments may be open to the charge of being too ‘immediate’ or ‘localist’ or ‘emotive’: in other words, of belonging within a ‘folk politics’ of the kind that Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams have presented as currently monopolising the practical and imaginative work of the left. For them, ‘folk politics’ (whose traces they detect in organisations such as Occupy, Spain’s 15M, and the Zapatistas, as well as in political localism, the Slow Food movement, ethical consumerism, and much else) embodies ‘strategic assumptions that threaten to debilitate the left, rendering it unable to scale up, create lasting change or expand beyond particular interests’. Leftist movements under the sway of folk politics, they argue, are thus not only unlikely to be successful, but are in fact incapable of transforming capitalism.5 I would agree on the importance of transforming capitalism and on the need for strategic thinking on how to achieve that change, but Srnicek and Williams are, to my mind, overly scornful of the qualities they associate with ‘folk politics’. To remove immediacy, passion and a readiness to participate in actions against particular or local manifestations of larger systemic problems, is to remove much of the needed energy and motivation for political activism in the first place. Such an anti-humanist and sanitised version of politics also risks losing sight of the rationale in everyday human experience for seeking political transformation, and seems more likely to encourage quiescence rather than act as a summons to action" (p.165).
In particular Soper offers a good discussion around state-action as opposed to 'folk politics' - that both are probably needed to encourage a grass-root movement for change while having state mechanisms capable of making the changes under a democratic rubric.
"Some of these activities and developments may be open to the charge of being too ‘immediate’ or ‘localist’ or ‘emotive’: in other words, of belonging within a ‘folk politics’ of the kind that Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams have presented as currently monopolising the practical and imaginative work of the left. For them, ‘folk politics’ (whose traces they detect in organisations such as Occupy, Spain’s 15M, and the Zapatistas, as well as in political localism, the Slow Food movement, ethical consumerism, and much else) embodies ‘strategic assumptions that threaten to debilitate the left, rendering it unable to scale up, create lasting change or expand beyond particular interests’. Leftist movements under the sway of folk politics, they argue, are thus not only unlikely to be successful, but are in fact incapable of transforming capitalism.5 I would agree on the importance of transforming capitalism and on the need for strategic thinking on how to achieve that change, but Srnicek and Williams are, to my mind, overly scornful of the qualities they associate with ‘folk politics’. To remove immediacy, passion and a readiness to participate in actions against particular or local manifestations of larger systemic problems, is to remove much of the needed energy and motivation for political activism in the first place. Such an anti-humanist and sanitised version of politics also risks losing sight of the rationale in everyday human experience for seeking political transformation, and seems more likely to encourage quiescence rather than act as a summons to action" (p.165).
January 9, 2021
Most environmentalists today agree that consumerism, in its current form is destroying the planet. The discourses around how to address the problem generally dwells on what can be seen as a borderline authoritative prescription of what / how one should or should not consume. In this book, the author provides a cultural dimension arguing that new forms of desire and new ways of thinking about human health and well-being, rather than fear of climate disaster is most likely to encourage sustainable ways of consumption. The tenets of 'alternative hedonism' is premised on the idea that even if the hyper consumerist lifestyle was sustainable, it wouldn't really enhance human pleasures, happiness and well-being beyond the point which has already been reached by many in the affluent societies.
Overall, I did enjoy reading the book. I however found it difficult to read (and keep up) at times with all the narrow theoretical and conceptual discussions throughout the book. The author does not prescribe what a post-capitalist, post-growth way of life should look like, but rather provides some texture to a mode of being that addresses concerns expressed by consumers and delineates an alternative structure of satisfactions and pleasures. It is recognised at the beginning that the book focusses primarily on affluent societies. Nonetheless, I was hoping for at least some articulation of what post-growth living could mean in the context of the developing world, rather than just implying that if affluent societies change their consumption behaviour, then other countries would be positively affected. Also, the book is quite vague about the economic system and political institutions through which to realise the vision of post-growth societies, or how the political challenges are to be navigated. I appreciate that it is not meant to be a blueprint for new strategies, but since the reader is invited to imagine such a world, some level of detail in this aspect would help make the idea seem more achievable and less wonderfully quixotic.
Overall, I did enjoy reading the book. I however found it difficult to read (and keep up) at times with all the narrow theoretical and conceptual discussions throughout the book. The author does not prescribe what a post-capitalist, post-growth way of life should look like, but rather provides some texture to a mode of being that addresses concerns expressed by consumers and delineates an alternative structure of satisfactions and pleasures. It is recognised at the beginning that the book focusses primarily on affluent societies. Nonetheless, I was hoping for at least some articulation of what post-growth living could mean in the context of the developing world, rather than just implying that if affluent societies change their consumption behaviour, then other countries would be positively affected. Also, the book is quite vague about the economic system and political institutions through which to realise the vision of post-growth societies, or how the political challenges are to be navigated. I appreciate that it is not meant to be a blueprint for new strategies, but since the reader is invited to imagine such a world, some level of detail in this aspect would help make the idea seem more achievable and less wonderfully quixotic.
January 1, 2024
This makes the case to urgently reconsider what makes for a good life. The conventional capitalist answers to this are more money, more possessions, newer stuff ... more of everything. The ecological consequences of the wasteful production required to satisfy endlessly growing consumption are immense. Soper also draws attention to just how unfulfilling and unsatisfying such unquenchable lusts for more of everything are for most people in the West: both for those who can afford it and for the poorer people who are excluded from it. Her concept of an Alternative Hedonism is portrayed as a complement to degrowth politics - emphasising how slower, less materialistic, more active and more collectivist ways of living will bring much greater pleasure and fulfillment than the conventional hedonism of fast food, big cars and overseas mini-breaks. It makes some good criticisms of the very techno-optimist accelerationist theorists - who are really the far-left wing of capitalist realist politics.
It's an important discussion and I'm pleased to see a serious left-wing take on consumption that is also critical of reactionary nostalgia and moralistic asceticism. The final chapter on political strategies was the weakest and least radical, with it's suggestion that eco-activists should criticise individual consumption choices more stridently. That's long been a hallmark of liberal environmentalism and shouldn't be endorsed by the ecosocialist left. Part of the problem was the chapter's sterile discussion of the importance of campaigning around consumption instead of production. It doesn't really account for how production and consumption are not discreet arenas but are closely linked. People will "consume" more public transport if it is frequent, free and goes a lot of places. People will cycle more instead of drive if it's safer and easier to do so. The high consumption of unhealthy food is tied closely to the industrial production of food as a commodity which makes such foods cheaper and easier to buy, etc etc.
It's an important discussion and I'm pleased to see a serious left-wing take on consumption that is also critical of reactionary nostalgia and moralistic asceticism. The final chapter on political strategies was the weakest and least radical, with it's suggestion that eco-activists should criticise individual consumption choices more stridently. That's long been a hallmark of liberal environmentalism and shouldn't be endorsed by the ecosocialist left. Part of the problem was the chapter's sterile discussion of the importance of campaigning around consumption instead of production. It doesn't really account for how production and consumption are not discreet arenas but are closely linked. People will "consume" more public transport if it is frequent, free and goes a lot of places. People will cycle more instead of drive if it's safer and easier to do so. The high consumption of unhealthy food is tied closely to the industrial production of food as a commodity which makes such foods cheaper and easier to buy, etc etc.
Read
May 27, 2025Ah, to be a first-world citizen whose main political act is a form of ethical consumption — a boycott— while calling it resistance. Meanwhile, I’m haunted by the death of a coal mine worker, months after the privatization of a mine that workers had resisted for over a year, largely unheard.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with much of what Soper argues. Her critique of posthumanism, actor-network theory, and especially object-oriented ontologies— which I’ve long suspected is a rebranding commodity fetishism as theory — resonates with me. Her critique is brief and generalizes across authors (as she herself notes), but it’s refreshing and brave.
One thing I found lacking was a clear definition of “consumption.” Is buying a guitar consumption if I use it to create something? Graeber's essay on this (in Possibilities) comes to mind: "Why is it that when we see someone buying refrigerator magnets, and someone else putting on eye-liner, or cooking dinner, or singing at a karaoke bar, or just sitting around watching TV, we assume that they are on some level doing the same thing, something which can be described as “consumption” or “consumer behavior”, and that all these activities are in some way analogous to eating food?" Consumption is messy, hard to define. While I understand the need to critique overconsumption alongside overproduction, I’m not entirely convinced that reclaiming our role as consumers is the solution.
This brings me back to the miner. One of my main concerns with Soper’s approach is her move away from class-based politics. I'm not from UK, but surely, a working class still exists there —one that is disproportionately burdened and exploited? I’m not invoking a classic proletarian view, but rather noting how the erasure of working-class struggle reflects a troubling trend. Without grounding post-growth politics in material conditions, the politics of pleasure risks becoming a middle-class ethic.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with much of what Soper argues. Her critique of posthumanism, actor-network theory, and especially object-oriented ontologies— which I’ve long suspected is a rebranding commodity fetishism as theory — resonates with me. Her critique is brief and generalizes across authors (as she herself notes), but it’s refreshing and brave.
One thing I found lacking was a clear definition of “consumption.” Is buying a guitar consumption if I use it to create something? Graeber's essay on this (in Possibilities) comes to mind: "Why is it that when we see someone buying refrigerator magnets, and someone else putting on eye-liner, or cooking dinner, or singing at a karaoke bar, or just sitting around watching TV, we assume that they are on some level doing the same thing, something which can be described as “consumption” or “consumer behavior”, and that all these activities are in some way analogous to eating food?" Consumption is messy, hard to define. While I understand the need to critique overconsumption alongside overproduction, I’m not entirely convinced that reclaiming our role as consumers is the solution.
This brings me back to the miner. One of my main concerns with Soper’s approach is her move away from class-based politics. I'm not from UK, but surely, a working class still exists there —one that is disproportionately burdened and exploited? I’m not invoking a classic proletarian view, but rather noting how the erasure of working-class struggle reflects a troubling trend. Without grounding post-growth politics in material conditions, the politics of pleasure risks becoming a middle-class ethic.
June 2, 2021
I really like the overall message and some of the specific pragmatic recommendations of this book, but there are some things that made it much less enjoyable. I can’t understand for the life of me why the author wastes so many words oversimplifying and giving a poor account of other authors and fields when it really doesn’t help her claim at all. None of the necessary viewpoints to support her argument for an alternative hedonism are fundamentally at odds with Haraway or Deleuze. It seems needlessly divisive, and I was honestly drawn to this book because I saw some parallels between her thesis and some other theorists’.
I also wish she did not spend the entire first half of the book trying to convince be why the idea of alternative hedonism is important, that alternative hedonism is less abstract/idealistic than the viewpoints of other theorists, etc. I was convinced of the importance of the idea after the intro, but she never actually gets into the idea until about 2/3rds in! This (and the fact that she stopped misrepresenting and oversimplifying other author’s claims) made the last 50 pages or so, much, much more enjoyable!
tl;dr I liked this book, think the author identifies a crucial change in viewpoint necessary for the left, and I agree with the pragmatic suggestions. Didn’t like how long it took her to get the point and the irrelevant mischarracterization of other authors.
I also wish she did not spend the entire first half of the book trying to convince be why the idea of alternative hedonism is important, that alternative hedonism is less abstract/idealistic than the viewpoints of other theorists, etc. I was convinced of the importance of the idea after the intro, but she never actually gets into the idea until about 2/3rds in! This (and the fact that she stopped misrepresenting and oversimplifying other author’s claims) made the last 50 pages or so, much, much more enjoyable!
tl;dr I liked this book, think the author identifies a crucial change in viewpoint necessary for the left, and I agree with the pragmatic suggestions. Didn’t like how long it took her to get the point and the irrelevant mischarracterization of other authors.
August 31, 2022
I 100% purchased this book without knowing anything about it - the term "alternative hedonism" had me the moment it entered my brain. And yes the concept is as sexy as its name!!!
Turns out I was an alternative hedonist in many ways and didn't even know it - thus I vibed very hard with what the author proposes: an improved (ethically and environmentally) future society must rely on finding sensual pleasure from a non-consumeristic lifestyle, i.e. working less, slow(er) living, or new production and consumption standards.
There's a LOT of information on this book to develop this argument, and now writing this I'm honestly finding it hard to make sense of it all. This book pairs very well with the whole degrowth movement, and I guess it just makes a case for how degrowth could "stick": if people actually found non-growth based activities pleasurable rather than "going back to stone age" or whatever people say when talking about degrowth.
At the beginning of reading I was all like yassss get it! By the middle I was like wow this is a lot of info. And by the end she does a whole chapter of actual political measures that could be taken to promote this which is nice (but doesn't go too much into detail tbh!). But yes, very very nice food for thought, do read it if you're into degrowth!
Turns out I was an alternative hedonist in many ways and didn't even know it - thus I vibed very hard with what the author proposes: an improved (ethically and environmentally) future society must rely on finding sensual pleasure from a non-consumeristic lifestyle, i.e. working less, slow(er) living, or new production and consumption standards.
There's a LOT of information on this book to develop this argument, and now writing this I'm honestly finding it hard to make sense of it all. This book pairs very well with the whole degrowth movement, and I guess it just makes a case for how degrowth could "stick": if people actually found non-growth based activities pleasurable rather than "going back to stone age" or whatever people say when talking about degrowth.
At the beginning of reading I was all like yassss get it! By the middle I was like wow this is a lot of info. And by the end she does a whole chapter of actual political measures that could be taken to promote this which is nice (but doesn't go too much into detail tbh!). But yes, very very nice food for thought, do read it if you're into degrowth!
August 28, 2023
4/5 On one hand this book is amazing and is a must-read for anyone interested in a post-growth world, alternatives to most neo-capitalistic thought, the environment, and/or the future of the world, but on the other hand, it's a book that is not easy to digest and misses in being able to convey its "mission statement". While the contents of this book and its philosophical analysis and proposed solution are phenomenal, I truly feel the "core" philosophy presented could have been distilled and given in a much shorter manner. For instance, an elevator pitch to convince people of the proposed future the book envisions would be 100x more powerful at the start and/or as an alternative rather than by comparing philosophical interpretations of hedonism. I am fully aware that a "fast" and "elevator pitch" style of writing would go against everything the book and the author stand for, but at the same, if the purpose of the book is to inspire, and plant seeds in people to think of a better future, it's unfortunately too long.
Having said that Kate Soper, is someone who should be a lot more recognized for her amazing work and I am sure she will inevitably cause a lot of people to rethink our future.
Having said that Kate Soper, is someone who should be a lot more recognized for her amazing work and I am sure she will inevitably cause a lot of people to rethink our future.
October 30, 2023
It's a needed book for the eco-socialist left, but at the same time it gets bogged down in some areas, to smaller and larger detriments. Two of the most important points of critique is a) that it lacks a comprehensive theory of needs that could argue against the naturalization of prevalent social construction of needs; b) that it at times falls into a very liberal kind of thinking in relation to issues of material reproduction of various social groups, which is only evidenced by the many qualifying statements that surround arguments of this kind that Soper makes. It would be a much better volume if the overarching argument was repeated (far) less and in that space the author would commit to a larger analysis of just transition and issues surrounding it, especially since a lot of literature on the subject was already produced (with very varying quality) by degrowth theorists. The latter issue is also connected to a somewhat weird feeling that for all her criticisms, a transition to a different conception of a "good life" can still be envisioned as possible under the capitalist mode of production, regardless of the mountains of evidence to the contrary - both from social democratic and neoliberal countries and periods.
June 16, 2024
Great ideas, but written so incredibly poorly and unnecessarily difficult to read. Even though I agree with the premise and concepts within the book so much I could not get through it.
As someone who specifically works towards the goals outlined in this book. I was very excited to read this and get a deeper understanding of a larger scale striving for degrowth and a different approach to redefining hedonism or a feeling of luxury/wealth.
Sadly the book also does not go much further than proposing we should create an alternative understanding of hedonism. It does not however try to actually propose ways we might go about that.
Above all I think it is just a shame that a book with such great ideas and the intention to create a movement is just plain unreadable. You should not require a phd in philosophy to be able to read a book like this. Especially if the book itself days that it is trying to motivate people to make a change.
Maybe I will finish it one day, if I particularly feel like giving myself a headache reading simple concepts in a very difficult way.
As someone who specifically works towards the goals outlined in this book. I was very excited to read this and get a deeper understanding of a larger scale striving for degrowth and a different approach to redefining hedonism or a feeling of luxury/wealth.
Sadly the book also does not go much further than proposing we should create an alternative understanding of hedonism. It does not however try to actually propose ways we might go about that.
Above all I think it is just a shame that a book with such great ideas and the intention to create a movement is just plain unreadable. You should not require a phd in philosophy to be able to read a book like this. Especially if the book itself days that it is trying to motivate people to make a change.
Maybe I will finish it one day, if I particularly feel like giving myself a headache reading simple concepts in a very difficult way.
July 25, 2022
This is a difficult book to rate because on one hand, I’m very interested in the subject matter and struggle to find books (rather than collections of articles) on this subject. On the other hand, the author’s style is so pretentious and dense that the book itself is difficult to read and absorb. I found myself re-reading paragraphs of run-on sentences to grasp the point she was making, and even then cannot tell you what exactly the overarching point was. I have page flags and sections highlighted, and yet without looking back, could probably not tell you off the top of my head what I had been marking. While I don’t necessarily think authors have to “dumb down” their writing style for a general audience, particularly since the audience for this book in particularly comes across as pretty specific, it is still an impediment to a wider audience taking in the message of alternative living, especially if I can also not summarize most of what I just read without extensive re-reading.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 69 reviews