A while ago I came up with the idea of writing a book titled, ‘The invention of competition: How the upper class met together in 1850 and invented competition in sports, education, and business, but only for everyone else except them, and how it has ruined the world ever since.’ But the title pretty much says it all by itself.
Thanks. I have edited a couple political books, one of which is coming out soon, and have written a novella with political / moral themes that may be out in a few months.
Someone did recently point out to me that I’m now writing a books worth of articles every 2-3 months. But the problem is that I’m writing lots of zine-sized series.
So - as you suggest - I would need to write twice as much on one subject to make it to something book length, or find someone else to write the other half - I’d love that idea. It would just be a question of finding the right theme or concept, and figuring out who would write what part.
I wonder? Might there be a way to assemble what you’ve already written as a collection of essays for a book, then get an advance 😊 for this idea?! I am a clueless person with no experience of the publishing world, but I and my husband and adult sons read a lot of quality political, cultural, historical and philosophical commentary between us and I think there’d be a place on bookshop shelf for your writing!
I really like your confidence in me. If only I could find a publisher who likes my work as much. I do have a good friend who is an editor at a scholarly publisher, but I think my articles (which I try to make accessible for everyone) aren’t scholarly enough for that. I’ll see what theme / concept ideas I can come up with, and make a goal to get something finished next year.
Marx, Kropotkin, and their political manifestos appear to be a series of articles rearranged and connected to each other in a straight line of thought.
If you are writing a zine-sized series, perhaps the best option to handle that is to line out those zines in an order that reflects the points you want to make and then turn that subject from a series of organized zines into a chapter on a single subject.
Throwing articles together into a book seems to be how some of the most influential books were made - even Dickens did it that way.
Funny you should suggest zines … I have not long been asked to produce a zine version of my ‘Who will do the dirty jobs after the revolution’ series in time for our local radical book faire, but wasn’t sure anyone would be interested in reading it.
I’ll have a think about what series might work together, or what else I could / should write to make any of these into a book. I had considered covering more politics in Sci Fi, so if I added some more shows / movies that could be a book. I’d love to do a book on internal Anarchism - the personal morality and ideals aspect of it, but would have a lot more to write on that.
I believe that if you deeply extensively cover governance, economics, and human nature you have a foundational setting for at least between 60-90 pages depending on how extensively you can discuss each subject. A standard intellectual chapter is 20 pages.
That would work - Your suggestion sounds like the book I wish someone else has written already, but until they do maybe I'll have to. I've been compiling notes and resources for a detailed Anarchist programme for a while now, covering all the practical organisational and distribution aspects, but should cover the philosophical too.
That has the potential to be one of the most comprehensive works released into the world of Anarchy. I've rarely seen more than zines these days, which hold little interest, I find myself disagreeing with more prominent contemporary figures such as Chomsky. Anarcho-Capitalism having it's time has been a blow for An-Com ideology and I think if a few An-Coms are willing to be courageous we could see a shift back towards a thinking revolution as was seen in the middle to late 1800's.
Absolutely love your articles. I've learned so much reading them, stuff that I had kind of somewhat realized somewhere in the back of my mind living in a system like this, but that your articles have really brought to light and articulately explained. Thank you.
Thanks so much! It’s only relatively recently I realised anyone was reading them - my early ones didn’t get more than a handful of views and no likes so I wondered if I was just speaking to myself! So I really appreciate that you like them so much.
I remember as young grad student naively asking my econ professor: Who decided scarcity, which is the foundation of supply-demand curves, cost, and consumption, is a natural fact of the world? She didn’t have a good answer but the gist of it was that great men took years to come up with these models and they drive our economy, or something like that. Today I teach at a large urban university that is endowed by defence contractors and other corporations, which is why dissent is squelched — and why we have a huge shiny business school in a building that looks positively palatial. Business students tout themselves wealth builders of the future…and don’t take the same courses in literature, history, and science as other students. The campus feels more like a factory farm than a place that cultivates intellect and critical thinking - because it is. Vertical integration of capitalist managers and consumers of tomorrow who want the almighty A grade that gains entry to the meritocracy. It’s hard to be a teacher in this environment and has shaken my faith in the worth of what I do.
I've been somewhat torn by the duality of man with regards to competition and cooperation. I've found a rather sweet middle ground. "Mutual Struggle", mutual struggle lays the ground work for mutual aid. It enhances it. Catalyzes it. The struggle each human faces for daily survival and the drive to not need to live like that anymore spurs us as humans beings on to cooperate and participate in not only mutual aid, but solidarity as well.
Competition oppresses the somatic intelligence. Because the body creates this knowledge Nx collaboration is needed to share it with othrs.
Anyone who can't see this is inherently lower in somatic intellegences and higher cognitivly Intelligent.
Circle back with them in 5 years when they have been devalued by AI and now have no value to society. Ask them if they like destitution and competing with a machine for berries.
Can I just say that I love your writing? Your exploration of cooperation vs. competition resonates deeply. In women’s health innovations, collaboration has consistently driven breakthroughs, from shared research to collaborative ecosystems. I truly think that to drive major change, we need collaboration.
Thank you for your sweet words. This was the kind of personal article I sometimes hesitate to post, maybe it is because with articles dealing with history or information it is easier to be accurate or to rely on others who I think know better, but when it comes to matters that involve feelings or being kind I always know someone will say I’m being unrealistic and the world isn’t like that. But as the example of women collaborating shows people are capable of amazing things together, even if those breakthrough are not always as appreciated as they should be.
I occurs to me that much of the intractable disagreement between left and right (apart from the trolls who just want to fight) comes from differing definitions.
What you are calling "competition" the right would call "conflict".
When the right hears the word, they say: "good; there's more than one plumber in the neighbourhood". This kind of competition keeps people honest. If the plumber has monopoly, they can be lazy and overpriced, even engaging in criminal behaviour, and there is very little anyone could do about it.
Also; both and right generally agree that this guy was not a good man:
Glad you liked it! I’m definitely anti-conflict, at least the mean spirited and destructive kind, and I’m against monopolies too.
However in my ideal world I wouldn’t have money so that would affect how everything works. You might have seen my five part series on plumbing that covers how that would work in such a world:
I think you should write your book! Collaboratively or as you will 😊
Thanks. I have edited a couple political books, one of which is coming out soon, and have written a novella with political / moral themes that may be out in a few months.
Someone did recently point out to me that I’m now writing a books worth of articles every 2-3 months. But the problem is that I’m writing lots of zine-sized series.
So - as you suggest - I would need to write twice as much on one subject to make it to something book length, or find someone else to write the other half - I’d love that idea. It would just be a question of finding the right theme or concept, and figuring out who would write what part.
I wonder? Might there be a way to assemble what you’ve already written as a collection of essays for a book, then get an advance 😊 for this idea?! I am a clueless person with no experience of the publishing world, but I and my husband and adult sons read a lot of quality political, cultural, historical and philosophical commentary between us and I think there’d be a place on bookshop shelf for your writing!
I really like your confidence in me. If only I could find a publisher who likes my work as much. I do have a good friend who is an editor at a scholarly publisher, but I think my articles (which I try to make accessible for everyone) aren’t scholarly enough for that. I’ll see what theme / concept ideas I can come up with, and make a goal to get something finished next year.
Marx, Kropotkin, and their political manifestos appear to be a series of articles rearranged and connected to each other in a straight line of thought.
If you are writing a zine-sized series, perhaps the best option to handle that is to line out those zines in an order that reflects the points you want to make and then turn that subject from a series of organized zines into a chapter on a single subject.
Throwing articles together into a book seems to be how some of the most influential books were made - even Dickens did it that way.
Funny you should suggest zines … I have not long been asked to produce a zine version of my ‘Who will do the dirty jobs after the revolution’ series in time for our local radical book faire, but wasn’t sure anyone would be interested in reading it.
I’ll have a think about what series might work together, or what else I could / should write to make any of these into a book. I had considered covering more politics in Sci Fi, so if I added some more shows / movies that could be a book. I’d love to do a book on internal Anarchism - the personal morality and ideals aspect of it, but would have a lot more to write on that.
I believe that if you deeply extensively cover governance, economics, and human nature you have a foundational setting for at least between 60-90 pages depending on how extensively you can discuss each subject. A standard intellectual chapter is 20 pages.
That would work - Your suggestion sounds like the book I wish someone else has written already, but until they do maybe I'll have to. I've been compiling notes and resources for a detailed Anarchist programme for a while now, covering all the practical organisational and distribution aspects, but should cover the philosophical too.
That has the potential to be one of the most comprehensive works released into the world of Anarchy. I've rarely seen more than zines these days, which hold little interest, I find myself disagreeing with more prominent contemporary figures such as Chomsky. Anarcho-Capitalism having it's time has been a blow for An-Com ideology and I think if a few An-Coms are willing to be courageous we could see a shift back towards a thinking revolution as was seen in the middle to late 1800's.
Absolutely love your articles. I've learned so much reading them, stuff that I had kind of somewhat realized somewhere in the back of my mind living in a system like this, but that your articles have really brought to light and articulately explained. Thank you.
Thanks so much! It’s only relatively recently I realised anyone was reading them - my early ones didn’t get more than a handful of views and no likes so I wondered if I was just speaking to myself! So I really appreciate that you like them so much.
I remember as young grad student naively asking my econ professor: Who decided scarcity, which is the foundation of supply-demand curves, cost, and consumption, is a natural fact of the world? She didn’t have a good answer but the gist of it was that great men took years to come up with these models and they drive our economy, or something like that. Today I teach at a large urban university that is endowed by defence contractors and other corporations, which is why dissent is squelched — and why we have a huge shiny business school in a building that looks positively palatial. Business students tout themselves wealth builders of the future…and don’t take the same courses in literature, history, and science as other students. The campus feels more like a factory farm than a place that cultivates intellect and critical thinking - because it is. Vertical integration of capitalist managers and consumers of tomorrow who want the almighty A grade that gains entry to the meritocracy. It’s hard to be a teacher in this environment and has shaken my faith in the worth of what I do.
I've been somewhat torn by the duality of man with regards to competition and cooperation. I've found a rather sweet middle ground. "Mutual Struggle", mutual struggle lays the ground work for mutual aid. It enhances it. Catalyzes it. The struggle each human faces for daily survival and the drive to not need to live like that anymore spurs us as humans beings on to cooperate and participate in not only mutual aid, but solidarity as well.
Competition oppresses the somatic intelligence. Because the body creates this knowledge Nx collaboration is needed to share it with othrs.
Anyone who can't see this is inherently lower in somatic intellegences and higher cognitivly Intelligent.
Circle back with them in 5 years when they have been devalued by AI and now have no value to society. Ask them if they like destitution and competing with a machine for berries.
Can I just say that I love your writing? Your exploration of cooperation vs. competition resonates deeply. In women’s health innovations, collaboration has consistently driven breakthroughs, from shared research to collaborative ecosystems. I truly think that to drive major change, we need collaboration.
Thank you for your sweet words. This was the kind of personal article I sometimes hesitate to post, maybe it is because with articles dealing with history or information it is easier to be accurate or to rely on others who I think know better, but when it comes to matters that involve feelings or being kind I always know someone will say I’m being unrealistic and the world isn’t like that. But as the example of women collaborating shows people are capable of amazing things together, even if those breakthrough are not always as appreciated as they should be.
Well my friend, you just gained a subscriber!
Nice work. Very clear and easy to follow.
I occurs to me that much of the intractable disagreement between left and right (apart from the trolls who just want to fight) comes from differing definitions.
What you are calling "competition" the right would call "conflict".
When the right hears the word, they say: "good; there's more than one plumber in the neighbourhood". This kind of competition keeps people honest. If the plumber has monopoly, they can be lazy and overpriced, even engaging in criminal behaviour, and there is very little anyone could do about it.
Also; both and right generally agree that this guy was not a good man:
"Competition is a sin." - J.D. Rockefeller
Glad you liked it! I’m definitely anti-conflict, at least the mean spirited and destructive kind, and I’m against monopolies too.
However in my ideal world I wouldn’t have money so that would affect how everything works. You might have seen my five part series on plumbing that covers how that would work in such a world:
https://peacefulrevolutionary.substack.com/p/who-will-do-the-dirty-jobs-after