Before studying economics at the London School of Economics, I had some sense that the economy was ‘just the way it is’, that a system so large and complex functioned as such because we are in a large and complex world. That our modern needs as humans made this economic system the way it is, and somehow we just needed to do better within it.
As I entered into university in 2008 we immediately began learning about the economic crash, and how it had come to be (from a professor who’s job it has been to predict it but humbly laughed at himself because he hadn’t seen it coming).
Each day, on my way to school, we passed the St Paul’s Occupy movement (Londons equivalent of Occupy Wall Street). I remember listening to people at the movement, who had the deep conviction that something fundamentally had to change, but, perhaps, didn’t understand yet how. Then, speaking to people at university, and within banking, there was a sense that they were being vilified by people who didn’t understand them. They were just learning how to do well within this system, that we are all a part of - i.e. they weren’t inherently bad, but also weren’t really considering whether it should change, because they didn’t believe it really could.
By the end of my time studying economics, my most profound realization was that this was a made-up system, that it absolutely could, and should, be changed at its most fundamental level in the way it operates, drives behavior and prevents the change we need to see in the world. I just didn’t know yet how…
The more I became obsessed with the question ‘how do we make the world a better place’, the more I was forced to keep returning to our economic model. The majority of non-profits, while needed for individual causes, relief work and immediate support, often times create a band-aid, and can’t solve or access the deeper roots of the issues. Many within the non-profit sector get burnt out because there’s an overwhelming sense that we can never do enough. There’s also often times an issue with supporting one cause and actually causing bigger, or other, problems because of it.
One example, is the protection of elephants in Africa that were close to extinction in an area. A noble cause, but because the local poachers need the income to support their families, they started poaching rhinos instead driving them towards extinction. The poachers need another form of income.
Another example is stopping children working in sweat shops in India, without giving them access to schooling or, supporting their families additional needs of income. Because those children helped support their families survival and have no where else to go, they’re forced to beg in the streets or turn to more dangerous forms of work.
We’re told many lies, or let’s say hidden truths, within statistics and analyses of the state of the world. If you listen to Bill Gates, or Steven Pinker, you may get this good feeling that the world is the best it’s ever been (which instinctively doesn’t feel right). They will show you charts of progress and statistics that show people are the least in poverty that they have ever been.
However, they measure populations from the moment they entered into the current economic system at the bottom, and thus they’re right, people are doing the best they ever have in this current model… but there is plenty of proof they were doing far better before taking part in it at all.
If we return to the example in Africa, tribal people have lived in balance with the local ecosystem for millennia (since all of our ancestors began there). They lived like all indigenous peoples around the world, off the land, with barter and exchange, and local economies that placed the Earth and their relationship with her as central. I.e. they didn’t need to poach any species close to extinction because they didn’t rely on the current cash system to afford food and livelihood.
In the example in India, when families could live off and tend to the land, where systems of community care were in place, children are not forced to work in dangerous conditions at all. They get to be raised within lineages of skill, traditions and craft, where the old guide the young, and the young support the old.
There are many examples of peoples around the world living off the land, displaced once land became owned, and food and water becoming a commodity rather than a relationship with the Earth directly. So now they are driven to join a workforce to pay for what they used to access by themselves. Are they better off because of that?
While we’re not going to go back in time, and the world is far more complex and connected now, what can we draw from the past, and many current cultures today, for a better functioning economy? We want an economy that doesn’t force species to extinction, rely on extracting more than its giving, and creates a gross imbalance where many are in poverty unnecessarily.
What is a Mother-Centered Economy?
Simply put, it’s placing mothers, and thus children, at the center of an eco-system, civilization and a principle way of organizing, which naturally holds elders close and recognizes each persons role within the society. It’s also understood as placing Mother Nature at the center, or heart of all decision-making.
An economy is defined as:
‘the wealth and resources of a country or region, especially in terms of the production and consumption of goods and services’ or the ‘careful management of available resources’.
Thus, it makes complete sense to value and hold sacred where all wealth and resources come from - Mother Earth - and to look to Her for how to carefully manage available resources because she has a pretty good track record. Understanding that our future generations - our children - are of the upmost value for the future, means that logically we take care of the mothers or, all primary caregivers, as fundamental for a thriving future.
This isn’t a new concept, it’s been the main way of organizing tribes, communities, villages, and greater civilizations for most of human history, and still today an example of many earth-based cultures approach to surviving and thriving in their ecosystems.
‘If American society judiciously modeled the traditions of the various Native Nations, the place of women in society would become central, the distribution of goods and power would be egalitarian, the elderly would be respected, honored and protected as a primary social and cultural resource, the ideals of physical beauty would be considerably enlarged.’
— Paula Gunn Allen (Laguna Pueblo)
We know this isn’t the case in ‘modern’, ‘Western’ society. Speak to any mother or parent raising children in this current system, and you realize it has not been designed to support you to thrive even if you’re relatively privileged. A village is helpful in raising any child. When looking to the elders placed in care homes, we can see that they are not being respected, honored or protected as cultural resource. Finally, we are all part of, and witness to, the gross imbalance of resources, extraction and pollution of our environments, and dumping of our waste.
‘The majority of pre-contact societies meet the criteria for being peaceful and living in unpolluted environments. We know even today that extinction rates are significantly less or absent where traditional Indigenous people have control of the land, according to a May 2019 biodiversity report issued by the UN.' And we know that most Native cultures were matri-archal. Even in the patriarchal ones, the woman's voice was strong.’1
— Wahinkpe Topa (Four Arrows)
In our society, if women are in leadership positions, it’s in systems that are not designed for values of care, compassion and egalitarian distribution of power, so they learn to operate within the same hierarchical power-over imbalance. Many of us don’t know what it looks like, or feels like, to have a more balanced system because we haven’t allowed women or mothers to design it. We also likely weren’t taught in school about indigenous and traditional ancestral ways of organizing based on egalitarian models,
When speaking about an egalitarian system people often point to the downfall of socialism or communism, which is still based in, how Riane Eisler describes, as a ‘dominator’ model i.e. centralized power-over structure of control. The term matriarchy has become nearly laughable in academia, and treated as if it’s some form of feminist fantasy, and make believe Herstory. Read our article on the work of Marija Gimbutas here.
Heide Goettner-Abendroth points out, that while the term "patriarchy" is associated with domination by males, the etymology of arche in "matriarchy”, because of women's ability to grow life, better refers to "from the beginning" or the "original pattern from which models are made," the meaning related to arche in "archetype."
She writes:
"Lacking a clear scientific definition of ‘matriarchy,' the term has been misunderstood as 'rule by women,' provoking a lasting, ideologically distorted prejudice against it. The field of modern matriarchal studies reorients the field with more precise definitions."
‘Matriarchal societies are centralized around the feminine principle that sources the beginning of every human's life. So matriarchy does not refer to "ruling over" but to egalitarianism and freedom for both genders through complementary functions.
Goettner-Abendroth identified the characteristics of matriarchies around the world: economic mutuality and a gift economy; matrilineal, nondomination kinship; egalitarian consensus; and sacred cultures of the feminine divine.’2
This is a big driver for our work at Soul Seed Gathering to find our collective roots in this more organic way of organizing ourselves based on principles found in nature. To learn about matriarchal, and mother-centered, herstorical and present-day indigenous traditions to invite this wisdom back into our lives. To access a deeper form of change for our collective reimagining of how we can organize ourselves better again.
One question often brought to the forefront is: can this work in todays globalized, more complex and vast world?
We believe we can remain connected as a world, and return back to our local eco-systems and local economies to tend to them from this place, starting with looking at our own lives. At Soul Seed Gathering are here to experiment and live this research.
Looking ahead, we will share more examples of mother-centered economies, and our own experience of implementing this design into our organization structure.
Thank you for being here.
Wahinkpe Topa (Four Arrows) Restoring the Kinship Worldview. Indigenous Voices Introduce 28 Precepts for Rebalancing Life on Planet Earth
Goettner-Abendroth “Re-thinking Matriarchy” via Darcia Narvaez PhD in Restoring the Kinship Worldview