The Redemptive Frame
No one wants to be your target market
I had already read the Redemptive Frame, as referenced in the round 3 investment principles proposal. Thanks for sharing this version. Honestly, it raises far more questions than it answers.
“Instead, redemptive strategy is about building products, services, programs, brands, and experiences that renew culture by making their sphere of impact somehow more humanizing, truthful, beautiful, virtuous, lasting, and God-glorifying.”
What does the word “redemptive” mean to an Indigenous person?
Please define your terms:
What is humanizing?
What is truth?
What is beautiful?
What is virtuous?
What is lasting?
What is God-glorifying?
According to whom? These are all subjective terms. These are all self-referential within Christian culture, but meaningless in other cultures, especially to the more-than-human world.
The Redemptive Frame begins with “humanizing.” A tree does not want to be “humanized.” A whale is not subject to your definition of “truth.” A jellyfish does not understand what you mean when you say “beautiful.” A bee does not understand how your business model is “virtuous” compared to the flower that humans cut down to put into their flower arrangements. It does not even know that the virtue that it brings to an ecosystem is pollination. The bee does so by virtue of being a bee whose work is to feed the hive. The virtue of a bee is only recognized when they are gone and the agricultural systems of human beings collapse. A nurse log knows that it was good to die to be able to become nourishment for the new life that grows out of her. She lasts long enough, possibly even 1,000 years, if a human would let it grow with the complex culture of an old-growth forest, but what does “lasting” mean when humans cut down the forest to print a book, ostensibly because it is “God-glorifying”? Humans just cut down billions of years of accumulated wisdom in the genetic library of Mother Earth to reproduce one poorly researched book that is the human justification for genocide and ecocide.
Again, what does it mean to be “humanizing?” I was working for six years at a Christian web agency called Domain7 where the brand message was to “humanize the web.” But they marginalized labour to benefit the management class. It was a slow process of attrition and ultimately an actual “dehumanization” as all these former employees needed to find other work because they did not fit the new business model. For example, a woman coming back from maternity leave was told on her return that her job no longer existed.
The company was called Domain7, because it is a reference to dominion in Genesis (and web domain names) and the perfection of the number 7 in the creation story. Upper management ultimately destroyed the creative culture of our group by letting go of those who grew the company over the six years I was there. Ultimately, it was propaganda for the corporatization of the business and the shedding of the humans who gave their lives to build the company in favour of building a better business model. What actually mattered were the profits and the business model, not the people, except for those at the top of the hierarchy. It was ultimately dehumanizing.
Capitalism remains the vehicle of the Redemptive Frame, which renders it irredeemable
Embedded in the principles of capitalism are the enclosure of the commons through legal frameworks that restrict access to the commons to those who have access to capital. (For more on the enclosure of the commons, see The Age of Insecurity, 2023 CBC Massey Lectures with Astra Taylor. Also, Extraction Empire from MIT Press documents in 800 pages the 800-year process of colonization, from the British Magna Carta 1217 to 2017, that has established Canada as an extraction empire.)
Anthropocentrism also remains the bias of the Redemptive Frame, which accelerates the entropic engine that has led to the Anthropocene. Simply put, this means that it is human-centred.
The primary assumption of the Redemptive Frame is that humans and the Earth are the center of the universe. This geocentric model of the universe was the central argument of the church against science. Christians censored people who argued otherwise. The Christian church remains philosophically stuck in the geocentric model of the universe. They stole the land of the Indigenous peoples, because their worldview was incompatible with what they considered to be “God-glorifying.” The Doctrine of Discovery declared Indigenous peoples to be savage animals rather than humans to justify spreading the glories of Western European culture, which were mostly appropriated—without credit—from other people groups (see the Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow). The Redemptive Frame continues to make this argument for Christianity-centered, “God-glorifying” culture.
“Instead, redemptive strategy is about building products, services, programs, brands, and experiences that renew culture by making their sphere of impact somehow more humanizing, truthful, beautiful, virtuous, lasting, and God-glorifying.”
Please define your terms:
What is a product? A dead object, the result of an industrial process to turn life into a saleable commodity for profit.
What is a service? A disembodied industrial process, separated from the living world by automated systems and machines.
What is a program? A system of labour or effort imposed on a lower class or subservient population to increase extrinsic or perceived value through formal accreditation.
What is a brand? The symbol branded onto cattle or a slave to indicate the owner or slave master.
What is lasting? Something that outlives the organic limits of a body by becoming abstracted and archived as data, mechanically reproducible as interchangeable parts, or a corporation that can outlast human beings and in effect become immortal—corporate transhumanism.
What is God-glorifying? A military term used to describe submission to an authoritarian imperial ruler, often when dragging prisoners and the spoils and plunder of war into the city after a conquest.
All of these terms are violent weapons to dominate Mother Earth, which is what Western European science has been designed for since Francis Bacon defined the role of science as advisor to King James.
“Nature must be taken by the forelock . . . lay hold of her and capture her . . . conquer and subdue her.. .” In the unrepentant language of a rape fantasy, he argued that we must see nature as a feminized object, rather than as a larger system of which we ourselves are part.
— Douglas Rushkoff, Empirical Science Began as a Domination Fantasy
The terms, “products, services, programs, brands, and experiences” are corporate language that centers corporations as culture. All of these terms exclude the more-than-human world, as living organisms, cultures, and ecosystems do not factor into the economic balance sheet of business model generation and brand building, because they are not numbers and intellectual abstractions. They are complex living systems and organic bodies. If you assume that bodies burn, but the souls live on, then you have no respect for living bodies. All of these economic terms exclude the Indigenous world view, which recognizes the life of Mother Earth and Spirit in all things—everything is alive.
Corporate personhood
Granting non-human entities personhood is a Western concept applied to corporations.
— Wikipedia: Corporate personhood
A corporation is an idea, a fiction, a legal entity designed to replace human bodies and destroy Indigenous cultures by erasing them. They are colonial and military entities designed for exploitation. The East India Company (EIC) and the Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) were both London-based joint-stock companies that were granted royal charters to monopolize trade in distant lands.
“At its peak, the company was the largest corporation in the world by various measures and had its own armed forces in the form of the company's three presidency armies, totalling about 260,000 soldiers, twice the size of the British Army at certain times.”
— Wikipedia: East India Company
Corporations are military entities built to wage economic warfare at a global scale.
“integrated across leadership, strategy, and operations
in venture creation, innovation, and funding.”
Leadership: a military hierarchy defined by the wielding of power over lesser ranks, often used metaphorically in economics.
Strategy: a military plan for overcoming an enemy in violent conflict, often used metaphorically in economics, defined by a SWOT analysis: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.
Operations: a military operation defined by strategic deployment of violent forces, often used metaphorically in economics.
Venture: a military adventure that spans large distances and several strategic fronts to overwhelm the enemy.
Innovation: the military advantage used to overwhelm enemy forces.
Funding: the energy and resources required to sustain and supply a large military force with weapons to compete against opponents, often the determining factor in the success of a military engagement.
Economic language is Western, European, and colonial. Economic language is military language. Similarly, scientific language is military language that has been applied to the erasure of non-European science.
This weekend, after our discussion in the Trimtab Book Club, Richard Ramsay, Professor Social Work, University of Calgary, President Emeritus, LivingWorks Education, sent me a copy of Colonialism and Science, a paper that documents the military and economic weapon of science in the process of colonization.
As you read this document, consider replacing the word “science” with “economy” and ask yourself if the Redemptive Frame is not still a colonial frame.
Colonialism and Science
Although the domination of European powers opened up new areas of research and provided insights into new fields of study, the main driving force behind the science conducted in this era was the fact that science could be used to aid in this imperialist expansion. It gave European nations an advantage over cultures which they were attempting to bring under control, Adas (2016), and Arnold (2006) referred to different fields of science as ‘tools of empire’. Research into cartography was motivated by the need for an intimate knowledge of the local geography to ensure that imperial troops could push further inland, and advancement in the treatment of tropical diseases was brought about not because of any goodwill towards the people under colonial rule, but to protect the soldiers and agents of colonialism from ill health, Roy (2014).
In fact, the main focus of science in the colonies was to identify and extract natural resources to further the imperialist ideal, Harrison (2005), and Alam (1977) describes this as ‘production science’, which is the idea that any scientific research conducted in colonised areas was done purely to generate profit and provide natural resources to fuel the empire’s industrial needs.
Christianity and Economics
Let us update this to our current context:
Although the [efforts] of [Christian] [impact investors] opened up new areas of research and provided insights into new fields of study, the main driving force behind the [economics] conducted in this era was the fact that [economics] could be used to aid in this [Christian] expansion. It gave [Christian] [nations and corporations] an advantage over cultures which they were attempting to bring under [economic development], Adas (2016), and Arnold (2006) referred to different fields of [economics] as ‘tools of [Christian leadership, strategy, and operations]’. Research into [big data, AI, and GIS technologies] was motivated by the need for an intimate knowledge of the local geography to ensure that [Christian impact investors] could push further inland, and advancement in the [venture creation, innovation, and funding] was brought about not because of any goodwill towards the people under [economic development], but to protect the [Christians] and [citizens] of [USA] from [white guilt], Roy (2014).
In fact, the main focus of [economics] in the [developing world] was to identify and extract natural resources to further the [Christian influence], Harrison (2005), and Alam (1977) describes this as ‘[growing economies]’, which is the idea that any [economic development] conducted in [underserved] areas was done purely to generate profit and provide natural resources to fuel the [American] empire’s [economic] needs.
About a Boy
Imagine being unemployed, but essentially financed by a grandmother’s wealth—generated by being a Proverbs 31 woman, a landlord in Hong Kong, a colonial outpost of the British empire—to learn to work from the inside of the empire. Consider the scenario of a child carried into captivity in Babylon—a city called Vancouver, an economic center of the Canadian extraction empire, to learn how to work inside the empire, learning the language and the art and the science of culture, design, and media.
The child learns to understand the empire as an empire. He believes what he was told. “Be a Daniel,” they said. So he learned not to be the one in charge. Empires fall. Their leaders fall with them. The ones who survive the succession of empires are the eunuchs who hang out in the court of women, seemingly innocent as doves, but wise as serpents. They learn to read the writing on the wall.
This child has had a lot of time on his hands. He has access to books, because his father owns a Christian bookstore. He reads The Complete Works of Francis Schaeffer. He reads Propaganda and The Technological Society by Jacques Ellul, a leader of the French Resistance. He reads American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America by Chris Hedges, war correspondent and journalist. He fills his library with Indigenous authors, reading and learning to deconstruct his faith and decolonize himself. He connects with regenerative communities. He takes courses with the Buckminster Fuller Institute (BFI). He connects with the international membership of the BFI in virtual gatherings and book clubs. He is invited into the core team of the Design Science Studio. He joins the RegenEarth Studio in Colorado Springs, who are involved in the issho project and Oliizoi, developing regenerative communities.
He learns about Deep Design and Inner and Outer Architecture from an ecofeminist Buddhist and architect in Costa Rica. He learns about regenerative systems from a woman who is cultivating a garden across from the Kashi Ashram in Florida. He learns about multi-sensorial experience of landscape from a landscape architect in Detmold, Germany who is drawing wisdom from her indigenous roots in Colombia. He works with the founder of the Design Science Studio on regenerative design projects, including an education project to use a map projection based on the icosahedron that decenters Western European nations and represents landmasses in scale and proportion with each other.
He decides to pursue a Bachelor of Integrated Studies that will focus on Indigenous Peoples Knowledge and creative writing while supplementing his pursuit of art with language studies in Mandarin and Cantonese.
A Regenerative Model is a Life-Integrating Model
In contrast to a human-centered business model, he conceives of a life-integrating model, or more simply a living organism.
Imagine this child spends decades of his life learning how to listen to Spirit and to Mother Earth. His meditation practice is to discern how such a life-integrating model might be visualized. During a lifetime of research, study, and practice, he learns how the design patterns of the living systems of bodies are connected with the living systems of Mother Earth and how they connect with human cultures.
He spends a good part of a year creating a visualization of the living organism of Earth.
https://www.figma.com/proto/6srz9JcglX7uy65QsJbBfJ/Metaphysical-Gravity
He works with NASA, NOAA, and Globaïa to visualize the systems of the Earth so that people can teach Earth systems science to Elementary and Middle School children. The plan is to launch the website and curriculum in the new year.
https://www.figma.com/proto/JZt9NCNDDvg18fK5MB3GMe/Story.Earth-Website
If you want to build affordable, regenerative housing, we need a different model of how we live together on the Earth. Geoship is creating a new model, based on the vision of Buckminster Fuller.
Do you just want to build more of the same poor disposable building infrastructure, or do you want to invest in structures that are built to last 500 years using bioceramics?