I've noticed that mutual aid efforts in an org often focus on directing aid outside the organization, essentially operating as a charity. Additionally, many leftist orgs are quite small and could benefit from additional membership.
I'm wondering if it might be better for a mutual aid org to focus its aid efforts internally? It is mutual aid after all. Please understand, I recognize that helping one's community is worthwhile, but an org focusing aid internally materially benefits the self-interest of its members. If one sees material benefit to joining a group surely they're more likely to join?
Am I off base here? Seems like an idea worth developing.
The idea is not just to help people as a one-off in the moment (e.g. "I'm going to feed these people on this date"), but to build durable, long-lasting, self-sustaining dual-power structures. That's what makes a well run mutual aid collective different from a charity: you're not just giving things away and saying "here you go; good luck!" You are (ideally) helping people organize themselves in ways that make their communities more resilient long term. Of course, a necessary first step in that process almost always involves just giving people stuff in a way that looks like a charity--people can't organize themselves effectively if they're starving, or have no blankets, or can't get medication, or whatever--but while charity in the traditional sense just stops there, mutual aid is supposed to go further. You help people get the things they need to survive, and then help them build durable organizations that let them help themselves and other people in their community not just survive but thrive (at least as much as they can under current material conditions). The best mutual aid is like an avalanche: the inciting event that starts the whole thing rolling might look like charity, but it picks up people as it goes along until it's growing under its own momentum.