Beautiful post. I just read the Serviceberry a few months back and similar questions have been rolling around in my head.
I've been thinking about retirement type savings and investing in general. Many of the investments go to the large companies (because they are part of many mutual funds and are "good" companies to invest in) driving the greatest extraction and exploitation.
I don't think my wife and I will forgo any future investments but we have been talking about decreasing our retirement investing in order to do more good now. We are also in a very privileged position and in fairly good financial standing that we are also discussing eventually getting to where we can both work part time and find more ways to actively serve our community.
Heck yeah! I love the way you put this: “decreasing our investment to do more good now.” It feels like such a worthy exploration, especially for people who have enough. It’s almost like there’s no reason not to!
"Oftentimes a major disturbance that clears the former forest creates a gap, with full sun, disturbed soil, and plenty of resources, since the previous inhabitants are now gone"
I just watched a documentary about the origins of London. After the plague wiped out half the population in the 1300s, the survivors found themselves in a similar situation: fewer people in the same space, more jobs to fill, and greater opportunities for upward mobility. The aftermath of devastation created room for renewal, both in nature and in society.
This totally makes sense. It’s a really high price to pay for renewal. AND when the price is being paid already, we might as well renew and build something more loving and interdependent.
"Is it possible, since I have a bit more flexibility and security than many people, to practice generosity and have it come back to me when I need it?" So, I loved and appreciated so much of this post, as another auntie with no kids thinking often about what I will pass on *now,* not just at my death. But this part was a record scratch. I grew up poor, and in my experience, codependency isn't optional in poverty. I think it's a complicated thing to "choose" codependency. While we should not glorify the sadist policies that render people codependent, we also should remember that people with systemically fewer choices have been relying on each other for eons. And, for a more recent example, the wealthiest people I know are the stingiest, while people I know who have lived their lives with nothing have, reliably, been the most generous. And a lot of people I know who have been rendered systemically dependent are simultaneously so proud (and resistant to the stigma) that they refuse help but are overwhelmingly generous themselves. I know that sounds, again, like a glorification, but it's my real life experience. I love the idea that some of us can continue a tradition of choosing interdependence. I also think we need to be careful to remember that the rugged individualism myth was only available to people who could actually afford to "go it alone." Same holds true now.
Thanks for this call-in, Bethann. I appreciate it. I think the fact of having (more or less) enough IS part of what makes interdependence more of a choice, rather than a default necessity. Maybe it's the case that the more wealth, flexibility, security, etc., we have, the more we need to embrace interdependence as a conscious choice? How does that land with you?
Yes, I agree. What seems so heartbreaking is how increasing wealth seems to be an excuse people too-often use to not choose interdependence (or even to claim they got their on their own), while also potentially having more abstract, elite vocabulary with which to talk about how we *should* and they *would* support community and change, if only... I'm by no means the first or only person to say this, but my observation is the more we have, the more we to strive to hold on to it, and much of that striving comes in the form of rationalizing selfishness. There's a koan in all this (or a hundred)! :)
Beautiful post. I just read the Serviceberry a few months back and similar questions have been rolling around in my head.
I've been thinking about retirement type savings and investing in general. Many of the investments go to the large companies (because they are part of many mutual funds and are "good" companies to invest in) driving the greatest extraction and exploitation.
I don't think my wife and I will forgo any future investments but we have been talking about decreasing our retirement investing in order to do more good now. We are also in a very privileged position and in fairly good financial standing that we are also discussing eventually getting to where we can both work part time and find more ways to actively serve our community.
Heck yeah! I love the way you put this: “decreasing our investment to do more good now.” It feels like such a worthy exploration, especially for people who have enough. It’s almost like there’s no reason not to!
"Oftentimes a major disturbance that clears the former forest creates a gap, with full sun, disturbed soil, and plenty of resources, since the previous inhabitants are now gone"
I just watched a documentary about the origins of London. After the plague wiped out half the population in the 1300s, the survivors found themselves in a similar situation: fewer people in the same space, more jobs to fill, and greater opportunities for upward mobility. The aftermath of devastation created room for renewal, both in nature and in society.
This totally makes sense. It’s a really high price to pay for renewal. AND when the price is being paid already, we might as well renew and build something more loving and interdependent.
Appreciate this reframe of what IS possible for our retirement. Both Serviceberry and Sacred Economics are trusted guides in reimagining our economy.
I have not read Sacred Economics but based on Kimmerer's quotation and your endorsement, now I really want to!
This was incredible. So inspiring! Thank you for sharing.
Thank you so much for reading, Kathryn!
"Is it possible, since I have a bit more flexibility and security than many people, to practice generosity and have it come back to me when I need it?" So, I loved and appreciated so much of this post, as another auntie with no kids thinking often about what I will pass on *now,* not just at my death. But this part was a record scratch. I grew up poor, and in my experience, codependency isn't optional in poverty. I think it's a complicated thing to "choose" codependency. While we should not glorify the sadist policies that render people codependent, we also should remember that people with systemically fewer choices have been relying on each other for eons. And, for a more recent example, the wealthiest people I know are the stingiest, while people I know who have lived their lives with nothing have, reliably, been the most generous. And a lot of people I know who have been rendered systemically dependent are simultaneously so proud (and resistant to the stigma) that they refuse help but are overwhelmingly generous themselves. I know that sounds, again, like a glorification, but it's my real life experience. I love the idea that some of us can continue a tradition of choosing interdependence. I also think we need to be careful to remember that the rugged individualism myth was only available to people who could actually afford to "go it alone." Same holds true now.
Thanks for this call-in, Bethann. I appreciate it. I think the fact of having (more or less) enough IS part of what makes interdependence more of a choice, rather than a default necessity. Maybe it's the case that the more wealth, flexibility, security, etc., we have, the more we need to embrace interdependence as a conscious choice? How does that land with you?
Yes, I agree. What seems so heartbreaking is how increasing wealth seems to be an excuse people too-often use to not choose interdependence (or even to claim they got their on their own), while also potentially having more abstract, elite vocabulary with which to talk about how we *should* and they *would* support community and change, if only... I'm by no means the first or only person to say this, but my observation is the more we have, the more we to strive to hold on to it, and much of that striving comes in the form of rationalizing selfishness. There's a koan in all this (or a hundred)! :)