The second English lockdown of 2020, beginning this week, invites a range of comparisons with the first one. A key question is whether we will see the return of the spontaneous up-swell of community action and support that happened under the name of ‘mutual aid’ during the first lockdown or, indeed, if it ever went away.

The question is more difficult to answer than you might think, considering the confidence with which some people talk about the phenomenon.

A long read from The Guardian in May builds a transatlantic case for mutual aid, arguing that, ‘the generosity and solidarity in action in the present moment offers a foreshadowing of what is possible—and necessary.’ And suggests that mutual aid, ‘is not only a practical tool but an ideological insurrection.’ Meanwhile, Conservative MP Danny Kruger argues in a submission to the Prime Minister that the rise of mutual aid groups is, ‘part of a general phenomenon of neighbourliness across the country,’ and Boris Johnson’s reply refers to, ‘tremendous levels of voluntary action,’ alongside, ‘innovation,’ and partnership with the private sector.

A lot of people therefore have a vision of this mutual aid phenomenon, plus perhaps a motive behind why they support it. It could have implications for everything from local government devolution to the future of capitalism. But who’s right, what do we mean by mutual aid? And what’s the future of the movement? Can it help us tackle some of our biggest social problems?

The simple answer is, we don’t know. In fact, the way different camps can interpret the phenomenon so differently is the first sign that there are currently no concrete ideas out there.

This is because, by their essential nature, mutual aid groups are hard to research. They are necessarily informal, they don’t have a uniform structure, mission statement or membership.

Read the full article about mutual aid by Tom Collinge at NPC.