Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Fool wrote

I think they're more disliking the word profit. Profit normally refers to a surplus, whereas mutual aid is generally too ethereal to gauge if one side benefits more.

I can imagine ways to take advantage of the reciprocal arrangement, such as using social propoganda to claim the deeds of others as one's own, to reap the profits, but I wouldn't call that mutual aid.

I also think that the ethereal nature of mutual aid means that the return can take a long time, and may not be noticed for what it is. I've seen some push back on mutual aid in areas recently, claiming most programs are not mutual, and closer to charity.

2

lettuceLeafer OP wrote

Yeah, the whole hot take was that it is profitable. I think it being ethereal doenst matter a ton. In my case I've spent very little and gained quite a bit so even through the obscurity it's clear that I've profited. So maybe my refined take is.

Mutual aid can be profitable but often times it is hard to tell if it is profitable or a net loss. But if done properly should result in profit.

2

Fool wrote

I was going to say the tangible factor is part of defining a profit, but it does appear there is a definitions of profit just to be "advantage".

2