Book Review: Off The Edge

Image: The cover of the book is a red background with a pixelated representation of the horizon on the sea running through the center. At the end is a silhouette of a black sailing boat tipping over the edge. Across the top in white letters is, "flat earthers, conspiracy culture, and why people will believe anything." In large white letters in the center is "off the edge." Under that is kelly weill's name in smaller white letters.
 

Kelly Weill is a journalist who has focused a lot of her work and research on conspiracy theories- especially flat Earth. This made her an excellent choice to pen a very accessible and entertaining book, Off the Edge. Weill navigates difficult subjects with accuracy and compassion. I was drawn to this book due to having someone in my life whose mental health led them into a world of harmful conspiracy culture and I wanted to find new ways to think about and, frankly, better tolerate discussions about it. 

I really enjoyed the way Weill immersed herself in these movements and showed honest interest in how people became involved in these types of ideas. Being a decent journalist has allowed her to remain detached enough to give them a chance and caring enough to look deeper. The way she discusses the lives and beliefs of many of these people showed the diversity of backgrounds and also the similarities of how they are roped in. This allowed her to capture in painful detail just how sad and dangerous things can get when people fall down the conspiracy rabbit hole.

Not knowing Weill's work before this, I thought from the title that this might have more psychological analysis to it. Weill did touch on "why people will believe anything" throughout the book, including what she learned from researchers. But, most of the book was more of a character study of who believes what. Even though I did not get what I thought I would regarding the psychological part, the characters in this story still told me quite a lot.

I also liked Weill's general message encouraging us to try and help people immersed in conspiracy culture rather than immediately blocking them or cutting them off. This is a problem with conspiracy culture and often overlapping mental health struggles like clinical delusions. As leftists we claim to care about mental health, but then immediately sever ties with people who are obviously fragile at best when they promote baffling, oppressive, and/or wild conspiracy theories. I know I have sadly done this. I also think back to a time during the 2009 G20 when we found embarrassingly unskilled undercover cops at a march. Being very new to mass action organizing and also the not-internet-savvy person that I was and still am, I later posted what I did not know was a right wing conspiracy article on police infiltration from a website that also claimed all anarchists are actually infiltrators. A fellow anarchist gently suggested I check the source and that was that. I learned something that day and did not embarrass myself further. 

This is not to say it's always that simple, but I tell that story (still blushing) to show the timeline from real-life-betrayal to conspiracy theory website was a very short one for me. Many people start from a place of understandable mistrust and are then bombarded with algorithms that led them straight into the dragon's den over and over. It's actually quite normal to respond to information the way many conspiracy theorists of certain backgrounds who are led through this sort of trap do. Instead of cutting these people off right away, we should attempt to listen to them and understand how they got to where they are. Some people will never come around, and this is not to say that one should endure abuse. It is saying that often, treating someone who is on shaky ground as human will help them not to isolate further and go deeper into conspiracy culture where they are often preyed upon by far right extremists that deliberately target such movements and individuals.

This doesn't mean I am suddenly going to stop being angry, irritated, sad, or afraid when a loved one tells me an offensive or hurtful conspiracy theory. But, I have found that sometimes, I can get someone to listen to me once I have understood and listened to them. So much of it comes from trauma or mistrust of authority, and I can surely relate to that. And, like Weill states, all of us have likely believed in some form of conspiracy theory before. I don't know what to do when someone is in too deep, but some do make their way out, sometimes with the help of psychologists who specialize in cults and related phenomena. With algorithms in the mix, we have to be creative if we're ever going to combat these sorts of problems.

This was also posted to my goodreads.

Book Review: Goliath

 

Image: The cover of the book shows a transparent close up of a rocky natural structure with grayscale faces of three individuals lined up vertically. They each have dark skin, dark eyes and hair, and are looking straight ahead, to the right, and up to the left. In large yellow letters cascading down the cover is the title "goliath" and moving down the side of the book in white letters is the author's name- Tochi Onyebuchi.

I can see why Tochi Onyebuchi's Goliath wasn't for everyone. It is nonlinear, "political" (I will elaborate on my use of quotes,) and is different than a lot of more well known dystopian scifi in some ways. It was, however, definitely for me. I felt immersed in the story and each character felt real to me. I listened to the audio version despite initially intending to read it in print. I've had very little time to read lately. Those who cast and produced the audio version did an excellent job. I can definitely still enjoy listening to a lower budget, single narrator audiobook and all of them certainly help me to make it through my massive to-read list. But, the multi-narrator approach to this audiobook worked really well. Each narrator, (or should I say voice actor?) performed their narration and dialogue with great skill.

As for the meandering plot and nonlinear style of this book, it performed for me more as an immersive exercise than a typical storytelling. It felt like I stepped into a near-future world and walked through it, listening to people along the way and following some of them throughout their lives. Sometimes I might feel a little lost, but I would find my way back to where I was going. I would see many things in hindsight.

As for people calling it "political" in a negative way, I do understand what they mean. But, I disagree. Honestly, everything seems political to me. Some of it is obvious because the messages step outside of a normative internalized way of being that people are indoctrinated into from birth. This, for instance, is why anything gay or non-cishet is often deemed political. This book often fits into that type of box because it involves a lot of dialogue where many people are discussing their lived experiences of oppression, environmental destruction, and collapse. However, every dystopian book with a white guy hero from a poor background who fights a powerful structure in order to rescue a woman he falls in love with is also quite political, just in a different way. I see how the use of dialogue and story telling could lead some people to feel that they were reading a manifesto, but to me it just read as people speaking their truth in conversation. And, the audio version added great elements to it, showing how each performer and director interpreted these characters. I say all of this as a person who loves manifestos as well, so perhaps my opinion isn't very helpful. But, tl;dr, everything is political.

I will end this here and encourage you to read the story for yourself.

This was also posted to my goodreads.

Book Review: A Participatory Economy

Image: The cover of the book is an out of focus cityscape where the lower half is a floor of yellow plastic and the upper half shows dark sky with lots of bulbs of out of focus white and orange streetlights. In the foreground in large black letters is the cover of the book. Below that to the right is the author's name: Robin Hahnel.
 

 Economist Robin Hahnel's A Participatory Economy is a practical and efficiently organized book which offers a vision of what large scale and even global economies could look like outside of capitalism. Hahnel also takes time to address authoritarian communist and related regimes and their failings while offering an alternative that allows for worker and consumer autonomy that is lacking in both systems.

Texts like these can be dry, especially if you're not super into reading about economics. Yet, solutions and philosophical exercises in anti-authoritarian- or less authoritarian depending on how you interpret things- societies are critical in terms of having practical solutions to massive and complex problems.  This is especially important when addressing the in between times, which Hahnel does well to bring up and address. Even in more practical guides, there is often discussion of what the "after" will be like when the "before" is overcome- if only it were as simple as hopping directly from one to another.

Hahnel also addresses specific criticisms from anarchists and other leftists as well as philosophers and economists across the political spectrum. Even if one doesn't agree with everything he says or puts forward, he offers a way of thinking differently about things rather than just saying others are wrong in big sweeping generalizations. He is able to convey his understanding of their arguments while also expressing why he disagrees.

Throughout the text, Hahnel also specifically addresses issues often left out of economics. In particular, addressing climate change and how to account for not only the human and worker costs of pollutants and emissions, but also the planetary costs stands out. His section on reproductive labor is also important, though it felt a bit more general than the other sections- perhaps because he wanted to make sure he was leaving space for those currently left responsible for most reproductive labor to take the mic. 

I do wish these kinds of books talked about disability more. He does mention that disabled people that could not work would be supported, but disability is such a massive and diverse group that quantifying needs and abilities of each person can be extremely complicated. In a sort of meritocracy based system like this, there always a risk those who no longer can work at a young age, who have not worked much in their life, or who can never work at all to be treated solely as a burden. How do we make sure shit gets done while also valuing people who may not be able to do most or any of it? He does mention ways of making work more accessible, but I would like to read a more expanded take on how disability would fit into things and how to quantify that fairly if the focus is on the autonomy of workers and consumers. I also think he could have gone a bit harder on how much less we would need to consume to have a just and environmentally safer society. He discusses reductions in consumption, but also seems to have the goal of making sure a participatory economy allows for higher consumption than may be necessary (for survival but also enjoyment.) Hopefully, though, a participatory economy or something similar would result in neither the extreme of hyper consumption and overproduction of capitalism nor the constant desire for anything outside of what authoritarian communism provides.

I don't have the solutions, mind you. It just made me think a lot, which is what this book is supposed to do. This seems like the kind of book that any leftist should read and any non-leftist willing to open their mind even a little should definitely read. With Hahnel's willingness to seriously consider arguments and data in all directions, it creates a great place for one to discover what they believe.

This was also posted to my goodreads.