Slow Down deserves an award for being the book with the narrowest target audience ever.

Saito's beginner-level introduction to capitalism and exploitation aims toward beginner readers of economic theory, which makes the reading experience exhaustingly boring for anyone with a basic understanding of capitalism, yet he delves into Marx to such a high academic level that any beginner would be fundamentally lost. The distancing from Marxist-Leninist values creates a safe space for liberals who are uncomfortable with the word communism, yet his major argument hinges on a revision of Marx away from the foundation of Marxist values by appealing to the authority of Marx as some sort of dogmatic leader.

So you're left with... the subset of those academic Marxists who worship Marx's word as gospel and are able to understand historical materialism to an advanced degree, but somehow are still so on the fence about Marxist theory that they would be convinced away from productivism and state-led revolution based on a comparably flimsy analysis of Marx's late-life letters?

Ultimately I couldn't shake the feeling that Saito's theory for degrowth fell into radical liberalism. His argument comes across as someone living in the imperial core thinking that capitalism can be stopped by holding hands and believing hard enough. His focus on individual action over state reform often crosses into utopian myth-making. While I appreciate his refusal of liberal greenwashing and the idea that we need something more radical, his insistence on small communal revolution feels like two baby steps ahead, while he presents it as a great leap forward.

Which, to be clear, I find degrowth to be a great strategy, a powerful tool in our kits as individuals trying to create systems that work for us with our often limited power. The issue with Slow Down is that Saito insists it is the only strategy. He frequently states that state-led revolution will "never work", and denies the autonomy of socialist states that currently exist, writing them off as simply authoritarian dictatorships that have done nothing but deepen oppression. Those living outside of the imperial core do not have the luxury of denouncing state power, and it feels disingenuous to borrow from indigenous ideas and practices from the global south without acknowledging that fact.

You simply cannot call yourself a Marxist and also not at least somewhat support the sovereignty of the socialist states that currently exist, and especially not without recognizing that imperial power is the reason socialism "doesn't work". That's not to mention the constant usage of Maoism as a boogeyman, which to Saito's target audience, assumedly just reads as "China bad". All of which is incredibly confusing, because Saito's knowledge of Marx and communist theory is clearly at a level much higher than most.

Slow Down is more like an anarchist utopian imagining. That's fine, but A) that's not exactly how this book was positioned and B) this has been addressed more cleanly and with more pragmatism by other ecosocialists, and indigenous and intersectional Marxists. There's value in presenting theory like this to a larger audience, and I can admit I'm excited to see a book that discusses communism so mainstream, but beyond that, this book feels like little more than a fluffed up thesis published for profit.

Let me preface this by saying I've been trying to clean out my bookshelves, and figured I'd have an easier time getting rid of old books if I'd already read them. It means I might have to plod through some mediocre YA/teen fantasy novels I'd never ended up reading but at least I can donate them after. However, it also means I get struck with stinkers like this too.

I'd assumed the protagonist would be just another generic "tough gal", and then we pulled out the "not like other girls." That would've been irritating enough, but we then went from judgemental and pretentious, to flat out racist. Not only that, but the levels of misogyny and puritanism were frankly, dreadful.

-- "If you're a virgin, the imprint doesn't take right --it's like you're a closed door, and once you have sex that door is opened and some things can take hold. Infect you almost." --That's about one of the worst takes on werewolves I've heard recently, so congratulations, I suppose

And who could forget; "For an ethnic boy, he still got pretty white".

I don't even have words, except that I'd be embarrassed to be one of the authors praising this book, and somehow thinking that it's okay to publish in 2009, let alone ever. It was your generic modern fantasy novel, with some vague semblance of a plot, but the absolute wild takes of the author made it iredeemable.

This is only the tip of the iceberg, and if you're willing to torture yourself with the rest of it, be my guest but don't blame me for saying I warned you.