kel smith

When I talk about anti-capitalism, or my anti-capitalist practice, I think it’s important to ground the term. I am not hopeful that we will see an exit from the capitalist system. When I talk about designing for what’s next, I don’t mean that we will move from capitalism into something inherently anti-capitalist. I find that unlikely for many of the reasons post-Marxist theorists point out: capitalism is adaptable, it thrives on crisis, it is globally scaled and pervasive.

By contrast, I believe responses to the oppressive effects of capitalism need to be small scale. They need to be localized, distributed rather than centralized. As Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams argue in their book “In Inventing the Future: Postcapitalism and a World Without Work”, anything capable of replacing capitalism would need to operate at the same scale. I think they’re right about the scale problem. Where I differ is that I believe building something that large without reproducing the same dynamics of abstraction, consolidation, and detachment from lived community would be extremely difficult. Anything global in scale risks losing the capacity to respond to the needs of actual communities.

So what does it mean to be anti-capitalist without hope of defeating capitalism? What can “post-capitalist” mean if not what comes next?

For me, post-capitalism is not a historical stage waiting on the horizon. It is a practice. It is what we build now, from within capitalism, not because we are preparing for a future without it, but because we need ways to survive without total dependency on systems and institutions that are structurally indifferent to our well-being. Post-capitalism is informed by capitalism, not what necessarily comes after it’s death.

Our current model is driven by a pure profit motive. That means it will never reliably be able to provide for those with limited financial access. And as the mantra goes, we cannot be free unless we are all free. So post-capitalism, in this sense, asks us to build tangible and meaningful ways to have our needs met from within the present system, while loosening our dependence on it.

This is not about purity. We still exist within capitalism. We still rely on its infrastructure. But as we explore what it means to meet our needs in bio-regionally appropriate ways, other pathways come into view.

Community gardens. Time banking. Community meals. Co-operatives. Shared childcare. Intergenerational living.

These are not symbolic gestures. They are experiments in distributed infrastructure. They reduce dependency. They build skills. They strengthen relationships. They create systems that deprioritize constant growth or monetization in their functioning.

Let’s be honest. Community potlucks will not replace for-profit restaurants. Local CSAs will not replace grocery chains. But each time we invest in infrastructure that is organized less around profit, and commit to maintaining without profit motive (because, let’s be honest again, it is very easy to want to monetize a good thing), we increase local resilience.

This is why investing in community matters. It’s not nostalgia or lifestyle branding. It’s building post-capitalist infrastructure.

Post-capitalism, as I understand it, is not about toppling the system. It is about building parallel forms of provision that can endure instability, contraction, and crisis. Piece by piece, we create alternatives that allow us to opt out where we can, and rely on each other more where it counts.

---

Srnicek, Nick, and Alex Williams. Inventing the Future: Postcapitalism and a World Without Work. London: Verso, 2015. https://www.versobooks.com/en-ca/products/148-inventing-the-future

---