We have already crossed six of the nine planetary boundaries (including climate change, biodiversity loss, land-use change, biogeochemical flows, chemical pollution and fresh water change) and we are already in the midst of the Sixth Mass Extinction with over 200 species a day going extinct, a thousand times the baseline rate of extinction.56 How could we even fathom continuing to grow the global economy 3% a year and consuming the way we currently do? What is the ideology at the root of the civilisational cancer of growth?

The short answer is capitalism. In other words, a system that is organised around extracting and accumulating surplus value, and then reinvesting that capital for increased expansion through ever-more exploitation of human labour and the natural world. Of course, capitalism is not a static system. It is constantly morphing and mutating. In the 1980’s, the dominant form of capitalism became neoliberalism – an accelerated, globalised incarnation that purposefully deregulated the global economy, cheapened labour and expanded corporate control to keep the engine of growth going.

Think of neoliberalism as a snowball still gathering heft and momentum from a five- thousand year progression into ever more complex forms of hierarchy, patriarchy, monoculture, abstraction, ecocide and alienation. Every time we have chosen the expansion of capital over the living inputs in each accretion of capital, we helped expand the neoliberal snowball – even if we did so with the well-intentioned belief that the accretion of capital would support life in the long-run

1. Humans are inherently selfish and competitive.
2. Hierarchy is inevitable, and in fact, necessary for order.
3. The individual is the primary unit of power.
4. Material wealth and power determine well-being, meaning, life success and virtue.
5. Separation and materialism define our relationship with the world; and this reality can be understood rationally.

The dominant global ideology of neoliberalism has at least five major philosophical tenets.

From the Enlightenment onwards, a core tenet of Western thought – which has been super-charged by neoliberalism – is that human beings are inherently egoistic and competitive by nature. This “human nature” defines our relationship to other beings through a competitive lens (e.g. am I better, richer, etc.). This worldview was mainstreamed through the logic derived from selective half-truths about the Darwinian theory of natural selection, the philosophies of David Hume and Thomas Hobbes, and the political economy of Adam Smith.59 Essentially, the belief dictates that we are all engaged in a battle for survival with other aggressive, survivalist humans who are “red in tooth and claw”.60

The second is the belief that hierarchy is inevitable and, in fact, important for order. Without clear hierarchy and rule of law, society would descend into “mere anarchy” or a Hobbesian state of war. This belief justifies the nation-state, governments, war, taxation, constitutions and other laws. The ordering of this hierarchy is also sustained and perpetuated, as determined by God, genetics and superiority. The white male rests at the top of this hierarchy, embedded within a manifest destiny and supremacy as the “natural order” of the world.

The third tenet is that the individual is the primary unit of power. As Margaret Thatcher, one of the key architects of neoliberalism summed it up: “…there’s no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first.”61

The fourth pillar of neoliberalism is that material comfort, wealth and power equate to well-being, meaning, and life success – which are then equated to virtue. Therefore, rich people and powerful institutions are good, while poor or disenfranchised people are bad, lazy, irresponsible, inept or just need more ‘personal opportunities’.

…

Finally, the metaphysical aspect of neoliberalism states that separation from the natural world and materialism (i.e. that the world is made of fixed, separate material objects) define our relationship to the “outside”. We are separate, atomised beings battling Nature itself with the aim of conquest and domination. We ourselves are dualistically split between mind and body, our advanced, God-like nature and our mere physical shell. All of our interactions with the material world can be understood rationally through our unique and advanced minds. Homo economicus, the rational man, is the pinnacle of the human ideal, and therefore the pinnacle of all Life. As Descartes infamously stated: “I think therefore I am” (cogito ergo sum).63

How do the core tenets of neoliberalism play out in your day-to-day life? In your workplace; the organisations you interact with; your understanding of the role of government; your ways of engaging with family, community and society more broadly?

Relatedly, neoliberalism prioritises private property over collective wealth and well-being, which in turn leads to what the late Harvard economist J.K. Galbraith described as “private affluence and public squalor” – manifesting in privatised benefits but socialised costs. This is not an externality, or unintended consequence, of capitalism.

Having wealth is unjustified, but the Rockefellers justify it by doing good. I had to cut through all this and understand that there is no rational justification for my family having the amount of money that it has, and that the only honest thing to say in defence of it is that we like having the money and the present social system allows us to keep it.

Steven Rockefeller

And then there’s the kicker: corporations often actively subvert democracy to further entrench their power and wealth. Research from Harvard’s Safra Center for Ethics shows that corporations receive up to $220 return on investment for every dollar invested in lobbying the United States Congress.91

Colin Greer, a long-time philanthropic practitioner and the president of the New World Foundation (a progressive funder based in New York), defined philanthropy as money thrice stolen: “The money is first stolen through the unfair, rigged lottery of cut-throat neoliberalism. Then it is stolen again by redirecting public money through significant tax breaks, supporting the ongoing expansion of the initial endowments which are largely invested in the very same extractive system. Then finally, these funds are ‘morally cleansed’ when a small portion of the funds go through the public enactment of supporting civil society, energetically, reputationally and physically extracting once more from the fabric of society to confer more power, intelligence, goodness, magnanimity, etc. upon the benevolent benefactors.”97 All the while, there is a steady imposition of conservative values, cultural tropes, mores, and norms on the grantees – those distant practitioners who must fit into philanthropic siloes and interest areas and undergo tedious applications, milestone reports, and other funder-imposed requirements, to create a “theatre of effective philanthropy” and to maintain good funder-grantee relations.

In 2018, philanthropy as a sector represented a $1.5T dollar industry globally.98 This accounted for roughly 1.7% of global GDP that year. That is roughly the size of a major G7 country like Canada.

The assets of philanthropic foundations in 23 countries and Hong Kong identified in this report total close to USD 1.5 trillion.

Foundation assets are significant, with the potential for substantial social impact. The global assets of philanthropic foundations in 23 countries and Hong Kong identified in this report total close to USD 1.5 trillion. Because this study does not include all countries, or all foundations in the subject countries, and because many foundations are reluctant to make public financial information, the true figure is certainly greater.

Globally, foundation expenditures exceed USD 150 billion per annum.

Let’s break this down further. In 2020, the average rate-of-return for foundation endowments was 13.1%.103 If we take a $100M foundation as an example, it would be required to give away$5M over the course of the year, but its endowment would have grown to $113M minus$5M for a year end sum of $108M

It does not take an accountant or economist to understand the implications of this model. The extractive-based capital market system and the donors are the two prime beneficiaries. Only a fraction of tax-exempt philanthropic funding is actually used to address social issues while the majority is reinvested in life-destroying activities via the capitalist market with high returns-on-investment. As one interviewee quipped: “Most foundations are hedge funds with a small charitable arm attached on the side.”104 One trustee of a foundation described foundations as: “Mainly private wealth management firms for white people, with side marketing arms focused on dressing up tax avoidance strategies in so-called public and community-spiritedness.”105

What was clear from the hundred plus interviews we conducted was two main insights. The first is that the vast majority of people believe the current model of philanthropy is not working, yet they believe they cannot break out of the existing paradigm. We will call this the philanthropic paradox of powerlessness. The second is that there was an almost universal motivational interest in wielding power (which also includes control, status, entitlement as well as the well-meaning intent of contributing to change) yet a dearth of understanding of the consequences or responsibilities this power may have. We will call this the philanthropic paradox of power.

The juxtaposition of the paradox of powerlessness and the paradox of power leads to a striking image of a seemingly helpless elite class of philanthropic decision-makers who sense the dominant paradigm coming to an end; a recognition that their existing seat is a privileged, albeit temporary position; and a careless, almost callous disposition towards what more or what else could be done given their circumstance, access to wealth, and existing power base.

Of course, on one level, this may feel like a caricature of the sector, when in fact there are countless others who do not feel powerless and are trying to grapple with their power and privilege in earnest. On another level, this description could also be true of any ordinary beneficiary or bureaucrat of the capitalist system who has a sense of the impending cascade of crises but carries on as they are.

However, what is unique about philanthropy is the disproportionate power it has as a sector, largely determining the activities and parameters of civil society, actively reinforcing the status quo, all the while receiving the benefits of directing public funds, including tax breaks and social legitimacy. Also, given how interwoven philanthropy is with the fabric of society – community organisers, activists, cultural centres, educational institutions, care workers, etc. – it is critical to examine the dynamics and drivers of individuals within the sector.

Some key aspects and values for an emerging mycelial superstructure (i.e. a post capitalist, trans-local political economy) should include (but not be limited to) the following:

• Creating and supporting local, bio-regional sovereignty. This does not mean there would be no government, per se, but rather, the role of the state would be to de-evolve power to the level of lived experience (i.e. local communities and bio-regions that can self-govern).
• Promoting practices that build the currently atrophied muscles of community and citizenship in the web of life, including direct democracy, citizen’s assemblies, co- operative ownership, community decision-making and commons stewardship, as tending to the web of social, ecological cultural relations.
• Re-calibrating notions of ‘work’ and ‘value’ to focus on the (re)cultivation of life- force and symbiosis with the natural world to create a spiritual/cognitive/creative renaissance for human and more-than-human flourishing.
• Preparing for coming changes through the preservation of life-centric ways of being, including diverse cosmologies, cultures, geographies and languages.
• Assisting an ecological transition for an adaptation to new environmental contexts.
• Synthesising the best aspects of capitalist modernity (we are not anarcho-primitivists and nor do we idealise an Edenic past; we are open to the idea that there are some things worth preserving and continuing) with the best of human nature (as understood through other contexts, from Palaeolithic cooperation and creativity to surviving Indigenous cultures)198. Some have called this merger between past, present and future, the creation/remembering of Ancient Futures.199
• Cultivating deeper humility, reverence, curiosity, and wonder as driving forces for post colonialist, post patriachal, anti-racist and post anthropocentric thinking and embodiment.
• Honouring the fractal nature of reality by promoting practices of inner-outer mirroring so that the work we support also supports deeper onto-shifts and a deeper intimacy with the living world.
• Embracing other ways of knowing and being, including (and especially) animistic and fugitive worldviews that allow for a deepening of new-ancient-emerging onto-ethico- epistemologies.

Work in this area can include funding and aligning with land and water protectors, food/land/water/medicine/cultural sovereignty projects, indigenous sciences, resistance movements, the Rights of Nature200, legal jurisprudence, elders/wisdom circles and supporting the Life Plans201 and the myriad efforts led by Indigenous communities that preserve and uplift their self-determination.

On the right-hand side of the Restoration and Solidarity continuum we have the element of Fire, with a focus on being in solidarity with social movements. Some of the most critical economic alternatives can be found amongst these groups, as they condense the lived experience of oppression whilst living and embodying other ways of knowing and being that in many cases already exemplify a state of post capitalism.

In terms of a few initial examples within the Fire element, this is where the philanthropic biome can nurture the social ecologies focused on issues such as:

• Economic justice – This includes de-growth & post-growth economics, universal basic income, a global wealth tax, abandoning GDP, the abolition of tax havens, a living wage, a shorter work week and universal basic assets including healthcare, alternative modes of education, and other issues.
• Commons justice – Infrastructure and policy that supports things such as co- operative ownership structures, the right to community spaces etc.
• Freedom of expression – This includes preventing extra-judicial killings, the right to protest, and other traditional human rights issues.
• Democracy – Including alternatives such as direct democracy and citizen’s assemblies. Racial justice – Dismantling systemic racism and engaging in reparations and reconciliation work.
• Food/land/water/medicine/cultural sovereignty – Bio-regional self-sufficiency and support for movements, especially those facing agri-business interests, the World Bank and other encroachers of the commons.
• Labour issues – Including support for trade-unions and worker-owned cooperatives. LGBTQI rights – This includes the gender justice movements more broadly.
• Education issues – This includes both alternative education and “alternatives to education.”.202
• Migration rights – This will become increasingly important as the climate catastrophe worsens and the traditional nation-state unravels. This work may include the abolition of borders and even ultimately the nation-state altogether.

The Earth element includes, but is not limited to, supporting commons-based land stewardship (including creating local land trusts); alternative communities (and other experiments “outside the grid”); mutual aid networks; alternative currencies; open- source knowledge systems for locally tailoring decentralised models of production and consumption; ecological restoration and protection; and bio-regional resiliency and sovereignty (including work involving land, water, food, energy, medicine, health, education, cultural regeneration and sovereignty).

On the other side of the Transformation and Creation continuum is the element of Air: supporting new-ancient-emerging cultural contexts. In addition to creating the post capitalist infrastructure, we must also shift our cultural conditions, the memetic landscape of beliefs, and our dominant ontologies and cosmologies in order for emerging alternatives to take root and flourish. Given the contextual and place-based nature of this work, it is important to note that culture change work is extremely hard to propagate. It may be less the engine of the onto-shift and more of a context cleanser to make the environment less toxic and to help prepare the conditions for the change. We must open up spaces to create, imagine, and dream together.

This is the realm of artists, poets, culture hackers, shamans, educators and others. Here we include supporting cultural narrative work; artistic and creative interventions; emerging media approaches; sacred activism (work that goes beyond the binaries of traditional activism to include prayer and other trans-rational approaches); gatherings and other ways of accompanying and deepening relations (which are often not seen as a viable programmatic areas in and of themselves but are critical to nurturing a connective/relational fabric); and even the work that disrupts the philanthropic sector itself.

 The final element is Ether: (Re)cultivating Life-Force. As we have discussed, this is especially critical because neoliberalism is an onslaught against our reproductive and regenerative abilities to heal and participate in the continuum of life and death. The perpetual trauma-inducing context of struggling to survive the spiritual desert must be countered by an equivalent or greater resurgence of life-force energy. The thought-form and experience of individuation and separation thwarts us from experiencing and connecting to the swelling currents of life that move through us and all around us in each moment.

In some ways, this is the most difficult element for which to give examples, as there are infinite paths into the work of healing and connecting to Life, all of which are highly subjective and must be contextually determined. We recognise that some of the modalities may be perceived as focused on individual healing; regardless, we are including a broad umbrella for Ether as we don’t know what will crack us open, or what could transform our being.

Some examples include: reconciliation and restoration circles; family constellations, trauma, and somatic-based therapies; ancestral healing work; physical embodiment practices, meditation and contemplation; rites of passage work; place-based spiritual practices (such as the Lakota Inipi or Sweatlodge); cultivation of personal and communal creativity; supporting the resurgence of mystery schools; nature-based education; grief circles and other communal rituals; and working with psychedelic medicines (especially those rooted in traditional cultures with the skillful means for true healing, such as Amazonian shamanic traditions).

Again, with all of these practices, it’s critical that we do not replicate the coloniser’s approach of consumption and acquisition, which keeps us locked in egoic, self- centred states of asking only “what I can gain” from this experience. We not only recommend the support and accessibility of these modalities for practitioners, but especially for wealth holders and wealth granters. Just as all oppression is connected, all healing is interconnected. The deepening of inner practices by all who are affected by and entangled in the murky, complex world of social change (especially social change that requires money) must continually strive to heal, integrate and reconnect themselves and their awareness to the present moment and the continuum of life.

We also recommend the abolition of milestone reports and bureaucratic processes, including reimagining and redesigning the entire due-diligence process. We suggest moving towards relationally-based giving practices focused on generosity, reciprocity and trust. This could include other democratic means of giving, such as giving circles and/or flow funding, where embedded activists are given set amounts of funds to distribute within their respective communities.

Another obvious practice is to diversify the board and leadership to include more activists and practitioners who will challenge power, ontological biases, and institutional comfort.

Then comes the endowment work. We believe it is a necessary precondition that foundations begin divesting from equity markets and engage with the critical work of historical reparations. This will require a fundamental shift in the notion of organisational preservation, growth, legacy and other historical entitlements.

All of these practices require onto-shifts at their core: they are about letting go of the very idea of private ownership and decision-making, entitlements and privileges. These practices are not merely being made because they are the right thing to do, but because this wealth is the world’s collective endowment; stewardship is a shared responsibility; and capital should be liberated in service to the living world.

… letting go of the very idea of private ownership and decision-making, entitlements and privileges