In Trade We Trust, In Trust We Trade
This post is part of a series of reflections on re-imagining the role of partnership brokers where we (Sarah Patterson and Rita Dieleman) explore how we can shift the way we connect, relate, and anchor our ways of being away from what we think we should do (a state of mind), toward what our hearts beat for (a state of heart).
Photo by Christophe Hautier on Unsplash
Deals, deals, deals
Every time we open the news, we see ‘deals’. Trade deals that should result in more profit and economic growth on some level. I believe they are great examples of the (hidden) power dynamics and ethical blind spots we are confronted with every day.
Trade means one party wants something and gives something in return. The value of what we buy and sell depends on how much there is and how many of us want it. The free market floats on(trade) deals with their underlying assumptions, namely that anything can be bought as long as there is something and someone to trade with in return.
Trade or coercion
Difficulties arrive when power dynamics enter (and they always do). Trade can shift from mutual exchange to exploitation when imbalance is present. If I want something you have but I don’t have anything you want, there is not much to trade. Except for when I can coerce you to sell or give it to me anyway. Which is only possible when I am a power position to do so. If I am not the one in a power position, coercion might mean something is taken from me that I didn’t want to give. That is called exploitation.
Exploitation
Exploitation as we know comes on all levels in many forms and shapes, from domestic violence and child abuse to land grabbing and modern slavery, from mining of metals and pollution to genocide. It can also take a more ‘subtle’ shape, when 'help' is offered under preconditions. I will give you food, but only if you go to this food point and leave your home for ever. I will join your fight against an aggressor, but only if you raise the Defence budget and hand over your resources to me. Those kind of deals centre around taking. Ethics and morality are not part of the equation. The ‘Do no harm’ principle only stands in the way of growth and profit as we see now with US trade being weaponized. Truths are negotiable and the rule of law is only applicable and desirable when it serves a particular interest; my own.
We buy and sell trust
We have to be aware that trust and coercion often intertwine. Currently, we buy and sell trust. We say: if you want to belong with me and my group, you have to adopt our truths, our behaviour, our principles. You have to trust us to do what is best for you too. If you give me your trust, I will help you grow and maximize your return on investment. And that is what you want, isn’t it? It might seem there is an opt-out opportunity, but actually there isn’t; the threat is real although not explicit.
From taking to sharing
But what if we would turn around this idea of trade and trust? What if we wouldn’t centre it around selling and buying, around taking leading to exploitation and finally depletion, extinction and collapse? What if we would focus on sharing things that have a multiplying angle to them? Things that can’t be depleted when shared, because they themselves actually grow? We don’t need ‘free’ markets and trade systems to share renewable resources like love, kindness, courage and to work on relations.
The heart of relations
Relations in our time are often considered instruments for growth. We need relations and networks to get somewhere or something. The focus on growth based on trade has taken the heart out of relations. To such an extent that we now protect and defend capital over democracy. Because we must grow, at all costs. We put results (profit, growth margins, network gains) before relations. And I am wondering what my role as partnership broker is and should be in that context.
Because what if we treat relations as an end in itself rather than a means to an end? Taking care of eachother without trading it for something in return? Wait for what will be given, rather than taking it? And be grateful for that? Not being in competition but rather in collaboration for something greater than just our self-interest? There are existing examples of real world applications of generosity based systems such as community economies. What can we learn from those? And what are the implications for me as partnership broker? Because it means that I can’t be a ‘neutral’, objective facilitator, but that in my role as a broker, I stand for certain values and be explicit about it while brokering.
More than the sum of parts
I wonder: Is it possible in this time to still rise above ourselves to be more than the sum of parts together? To have a clearer sense of purpose focusing on fulfilment rather than success? Can we do that on a political, societal and personal level? Can we be more conscious that this is not merely idealistic but actually achievable and the better option? By not wondering exclusively what others can contribute and what we can gain, but what we can contribute?
Maybe we can just start small today by asking someone: how can I be of service?
Do you have examples of generosity based systems? And suggestions about the role of a partnership broker in that context? Please share!