There is no consensus about how to do this.
In fact, there are probably more questions than there are answers. To begin the conversation of how we ought to rebuild our economies as Indigenous people, there are a number of questions that we need to ask ourselves and our communities.
1. How does the culture behind mainstream economic processes compare with our own culture?
2. Are we seeking to change our own culture to align better with the economic system that is out there or do we prefer to shape the economic system to our culture?
3. What will we define as economic success?
The mainstream economic culture that currently exists, is largely based upon individualism, infinite profit, “bottom line” thinking, economic value worldview. The conventional thinking here is that in order for an economy to succeed, you must encourage individuals to have ambitions and pursue those ambitions for personal gain. Individuals with great personal wealth will spend that money buying products and services and paying taxes.
As we look at businesses, the principle of infinite profit comes in. Here, businesses are only seen as successful businesses if their profits are increasing quarter after quarter, year after year to no limit. To achieve such growth, businesses and companies are forced to use their bottom-line as the primary criteria in any decision. If it doesn’t increase the money they make or decrease what they spend, it is not worthwhile. In this way, we shape our entrepreneurs and business leaders to view the world as something that must be labelled with financial value. Each activity, person, object is then given a relative value, and is hence, prioritized.
There are many who are comfortable with this economic culture. There are, however, many who are not. Typically, those who are not comfortable with this economic culture have conflicting values from their own culture. Consider those cultures where collective wealth is a value (ie. Communal vs individual). Or those where the land and water are valued above personal or even communal gain.
Understanding the mainstream economic culture and comparing it with our own culture is critical to understanding what directions we need to take as communities and nations.
With that understanding, we then need to ask whether we desire to align our culture with the mainstream economic culture or whether we wish to take what we can adapt to our culture. This is important because if a community is not willing to assimilate into the larger mainstream economic culture, then conventional methods of economic development will not work.
Revising the economic models to fit a different culture than what the mainstream has to offer requires far more creativity and innovation than conventional approaches. It also requires that a community consider what its definitions of success will be. Adopting a different economic model will mean that people and communities cannot expect the same economic results (it’s possible that not everyone will have big screen TVs and two fancy new cars). That is not to say they will not have the same or greater level of success. But it is all in how we define success.
For some, the conventional approach to economic development is to recognize that there will always be the rich and the poor and the goal is really to move away from being poor, up the ladder, towards being rich. We see this in most Western nations as the gap between the rich and poor continually grows.
If this is not the path that a community wishes to take, then the approaches must be different. Entrepreneurship and corporate empire building that rewards only a small percentage of people in the backs of legions of workers, will not lead to such values as communal sharing and collective wealth creation, for example.
So, defining success, then, becomes critical to deciding what approach to take. Is economic success defined as greater wealth among individual members of the community/nation? Is it defined by a strong and vibrant Indigenous government? Is it defined by collective ownership and wealth generation? Or by improved health or social conditions? Might it be defined by greater sustainability and health of the environment and people?
There is no correct answer, although some will be more or less damaging to various aspects of our world and peoples. Selecting an answer doesn’t require a PhD either – just an honest introspection and plenty of discussion.
