Interstitial Strategy
Concept note — building alternatives within the cracks of the existing system. From Erik Olin Wright, Envisioning Real Utopias (2010).
What It Is
An interstitial strategy builds alternative institutions in the spaces where the dominant system doesn’t fully reach — the cracks, the margins, the interstices. It doesn’t overthrow the system (ruptural strategy) or capture the state to reform it (symbiotic strategy). It creates spaces within the system where different logic operates.
Cooperatives, community land trusts, mutual aid networks, credit unions, community-owned broadband, tool libraries, time banks — these are interstitial institutions. They coexist with capitalism. They use its legal frameworks, its banking systems, its supply chains. But internally, they operate on different principles: democratic ownership, distribution by need, mutual aid, commons governance.
The IWW’s phrase: “building the new world in the shell of the old.”
The Three Strategies (Wright)
Wright identifies three transformation strategies, and understanding all three clarifies what the interstitial approach is and isn’t:
Ruptural — revolutionary overthrow. Replace existing institutions entirely through a decisive break. Historically unreliable — often produces new forms of domination (Bakunin’s prediction about the “dictatorship of the proletariat” proved correct). In contemporary capitalist democracies, practically unavailable.
Symbiotic — use state institutions to support alternative development. Public financing for cooperatives. Legal frameworks for CLTs. Municipal partnerships. Tax incentives for community development. The state isn’t captured or overthrown — it’s used as a resource.
Interstitial — build alternatives in the cracks. Don’t wait for revolution. Don’t depend entirely on the state. Create institutions that embody different principles and let them demonstrate viability through practice.
Wellspring is primarily interstitial with significant symbiotic elements. The CLT-LEHC hybrid is an alternative institution operating within capitalism. It uses state-created tools (501(c)(3) status, CDFI financing, municipal zoning) to support its development. It doesn’t require revolution. But it does require that the state tolerate and support alternatives to market-rate housing.
When Interstitial Strategies Succeed
Wright’s analysis of what makes interstitial projects durable:
They fill a genuine need the existing system doesn’t meet. If the market provided affordable, dignified, community-embedded housing, there would be no demand for the CLT. The interstitial institution exists because the dominant system has a gap.
They achieve economic viability. An interstitial project permanently dependent on external subsidy is fragile — the subsidy can be withdrawn. Viability means the institution can sustain itself through its own operations, using subsidy for capitalization but not for ongoing survival.
They build coalitions with sympathetic elements of the state. Municipal support, CDFI partnerships, public financing — these symbiotic relationships provide resources and legitimacy. The interstitial strategy works better with state support than without it.
They develop internal governance strong enough to resist co-optation. The dominant system absorbs or co-opts successful alternatives. The Demutualization protections — ground lease, resale formula, charter provisions — are structural defenses against absorption.
When They Fail
The system actively suppresses them. Hostile regulation, zoning barriers, legal challenges. The procedural capture documented in Abundance - Klein and Thompson can be turned against alternative institutions as easily as against conventional development.
They become dependent on incompatible funding. Grants with strings — reporting requirements, outcome metrics, restrictions on advocacy — reshape the institution to serve funder expectations rather than community needs. This is the co-optation dynamic Spade documents.
Internal governance degrades. Founder syndrome, power concentration, loss of participatory culture. The institution maintains its legal form while losing its cooperative character. See Intentional Community Failure Modes.
They can’t achieve economic sustainability. Operating costs exceed revenues. Capitalization runs out. The institution either folds or converts to conventional forms to survive.
The Tension with Purity
The interstitial strategy lives in permanent tension with Prefigurative Politics. Prefiguration says the means must embody the ends. Interstitial strategy says you have to use the master’s tools — banks, legal systems, tax codes, municipal government — to build the alternative.
The resolution is not ideological but practical: use the tools without becoming the tools. The CLT’s legal shell is capitalist. Its interior logic is not. The CDFI loan uses market-rate financial infrastructure. The housing it finances doesn’t operate on market logic. The skill is holding both — using the system’s tools without adopting the system’s values.
Bookchin would say this is insufficient. The project calls it realistic. Both are right in their own frame.