only covers a few years (1848-1851) but the 18th brumaire of louis bonaparte is the most obvious one, and its a really great and entertaining read too (with incredibly obvious parallels to the recurring pratfalls of bourgeois electoralists ever since)

heres a decent twitter thread with some linked articles - one of the articles is from a more marxist perspective too although the arguments are very similar

i think theyre definitely right about the charity trap and the need for such groups to keep their actual aims front-of-mind, but i think my counterpoints would focus on:

• even if it isnt a threat to the state itself, an explicitly socialist mutual aid group is potentially able to pivot to support activities that are a threat to the state. e.g. feeding striking workers to prolong their ability to strike, which your local salvation army sure as shit isnt ever going to do. i think that kind of support work is potentially more valuable than just extra numbers on the pickets.

• in times like these where the left is small and fragmented, its hard to do praxis that leads to substantive meaningful change anyway. bringing together and building community networks among like-minded leftwing people is real and important work right now, just about as much as anything else is, and mutual aid groups are great ways to build and reinforce such networks

• the skills and knowledge and logistics for how to feed a whole group of people (or whatever other activity) cant just spring up overnight - its not as straightforward as people might think, and its a valuable set of “institutional” skills and knowledge. its a good way to ensure such skills are prevalent in leftist communities, and help communities “hit the ground running” if/when times get really dire or suddenly spicy

• it promotes vegan food as normal and good, and food as a right for all, and provides a vision of what a better world might look like as an antidote against the crushing weight of capitalist realism

• all of this stuff is in the context of an activity that also feeds the hungry, which is a solid, concrete good even if it turns out to be useless from a pure political praxis perspective. and apart from being good in its own right, just doing something objectively good and useful is a valuable antidote to burnout from activism that so often ends in failure and that voice in your head saying “whats the point of any of this?”

very disappointing to read from peter gelderloos of all people

there are quite strong anarchist critiques of food not bombs and similar service-provision mutual aid groups because they walk such a fine line with being functionally indistinguishable from bourgeois charity rather than part of an actual radically political program (i should note that these critiques are not saying that charitably feeding the homeless isnt a good thing to do of course, just that theyre not political praxis). i dont 100% agree with these critiques and i think food not bombs is a really worthwhile group (that ive also had some involvement with), but they raise important points that i think need to be kept front-of-mind. and if youre going to try to walk that line, you absolutely cant abandon your core principles just because its a bit more convenient

the height of hypocrisy to label yourselves with a group that is even named for its opposition to unnecessary violence, and then feed people food thats full of unnecessary violence

yes but have you considered: national socialist party

mic drop