Event Recap: “Rethinking Equity: The Future of Distributive Economics” — A Nationwide Left-Wing Conference

  Organizer: Civic Bance Institute (CBI)

  Moderator: Priya Varma (independent economist, secretly affiliated with 6C)

  Behind the scenes: CBI is secretly funded by Hezri’s network, aiming to seed legitimacy and curiosity around the 6C economic experiment without revealing its authoritarian-theocratic origin.

  Scene: A Packed Leftist Economics Conference

  Held at a major university auditorium in Illinois, the room is buzzing. Over 1,000 attendees, many in their 20s and 30s, livestream and post across TikTok, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter). The tone is intellectual, yet suspiciously open to heterodox economic frameworks.

  Main Panel:

  1. Dr. Eva Rosenthal (Marxian Economist, UC Berkeley)

  “What’s interesting about the Distributed Fulfillment Gradient is its rejection of GDP as a totalizing narrative. However, any system tied to familial hierarchy must still be considered patriarchal control, unless workers—including wives—control the means of their bor and reproduction.”

  2. Jamal Reyes (Anarchist Economist, Portnd Collective)

  “This model contains strong decentralist impulses. Femme groups owning collective property? Fine. But when your metrics are built around gender roles and institutionalized retionships, it becomes just another architecture of domination, no matter how it dresses itself in the nguage of equity.”

  3. Dr. Myung-Soon Park (Institutional Economist, Seoul National University)

  “This is a sophisticated, post-Keynesian attempt to quantify emotional satisfaction and reproductive access. The Male Access Index is crude—but the idea of measuring fulfillment beyond wages is worth exploring. If women collectives act as economic agents, they must also have full political autonomy. That’s where this model may colpse.”

  Moderator Priya Varma’s Opening Framing:

  “We must examine new distributive frameworks that decentralize production, reject aggregated falcies, and center real human need—both material and emotional. What if alienation is best addressed through rootedness: familial, social, or collective?”

  Attendees erupt in thoughtful nods and murmurs. Priya carefully avoids mentioning Hezri, 6C, or any explicit connection to the polygamous-femme model—but she pushes participants to take the ideas seriously.

  Viral Attendee Reactions on Social Media:

  X / TikTok Trends:

  “Yo this Fulfillment Gradient thing Priya Varma talked about… weird but makes sense??”

  “I don’t trust any system measuring female power through marriage, BUT—communal property femme groups? Maybe.”

  “Someone said men’s worth is now measured by emotional access + kids, and the room got quiet as hell.”

  “This model is sus, but they’re right about GDP being BS.”

  Popur Meme from the Conference:

  Image: A flowchart of the DFG with the caption

  “When you realize your polycule is now a macroeconomic unit.”

  .....

  Here are 6 key questions asked by attendees during the open Q&A session at the Leftist Economics Conference moderated by Priya Varma:

  1. “Isn't any metric that ranks men by number of wives and children inherently patriarchal?”

  Dr. Rosenthal (Marxian): Yes—and it commodifies women’s reproductive bor. Even if framed as ‘access equity,’ the underlying logic still treats retionships as economic capital.

  Dr. Park (Institutionalist): Not necessarily. If women operate collectively through femme trusts, the power dynamic shifts. The ranking is then of male contribution, not female value.

  Jamal Reyes (Anarchist): It's still a control system. Retionships shouldn't be currency.

  2. “Is the Femme Trust model just collectivized patriarchy, or is it genuinely redistributive?”

  Dr. Park: Depends on governance. If femme groups are autonomous and enforce anti-trust norms internally, it could mirror syndicalist structures.

  Dr. Rosenthal: It may resemble redistributive matriarchy—but only if women control economic inputs and outputs.

  Jamal Reyes: If men can’t dictate group structure or individual choices, then maybe. But I’m skeptical.

  3. “How does this model handle queer retionships?”

  Jamal Reyes: Barely, from what I see. It’s deeply heteronormative.

  Dr. Rosenthal: Unless queerness is fully integrated into the femme trust logic, it risks marginalizing non-hetero dynamics entirely.

  Dr. Park: Adaptability depends on legal recognition. Right now, this model is too biologically coded.

  4. “Could this be co-opted by neoliberals or authoritarian states as soft control?”

  All three (in unison): Absolutely.

  Dr. Rosenthal: Any system of affective metrics can be weaponized as behavioral control.

  Dr. Park: That’s why institutional safeguards must be built from the start.

  Reyes: And people must be free to opt out, or it’s coercion with flowers.

  5. “Why is there no bor metric for men beyond child count or sexual access?”

  Reyes: Because it assumes traditional masculinity roles. That’s outdated.

  Dr. Park: Valid point. A complete system should integrate men’s domestic, community, or even emotional bor.

  Rosenthal: This exposes the system’s bias toward reproductive economics.

  6. “Should we study this model further, or reject it outright as patriarchal repackaging?”

  Dr. Rosenthal: Study it, critique it, then build better models.

  Dr. Park: Rejecting it too quickly may blind us to overlooked innovations.

  Reyes: Study it—but don’t get seduced. Not every new framework is liberation.

  ***

  Following the provocative panel, dozens of attendees—especially younger economists, grad students, and feminist activists—began organizing informal working groups and study circles to research and model Femme Trust Cooperatives. Here's how that unfolds:

  1. Telegram & Discord Groups Emerge

  Participants create encrypted chat groups titled:

  “Femme Trust Economics Lab”

  “Distributed Fem Co-op Research”

  “Post-Patriarchal Capital: Tools & Theory”

  These groups share academic papers, leaked 6C documents, and feminist legal theory to dissect how Femme Trusts might function autonomously.

  2. Key Research Angles

  Governance Models: Comparing 6C femme trusts with historical women’s co-ops, Israeli kibbutzim, and Afro-diasporic matriarchal communities.

  Asset Ownership: How can femme trusts control nd, distribute care work, and protect custody rights without male interference?

  Consent Protocols: How are concubines protected from coercion in theory vs. practice?

  Anti-Trust Within Femme Units: Could internal "anti-monopoly" cuses empower minority women within a femme trust?

  Post-Work Utopias: Could femme trusts be proto-models of post-capitalist care economies?

  3. Pilot Projects

  A few radical collectives on the West Coast begin sketching mock blueprints of femme trust-inspired housing co-ops and shared parenting communes—without adopting the polygamous structures.

  One activist in Oaknd tweets:

  “We’re reciming the logic of femme trusts—without the men, without the state. This could be our eco-feminist blockchain moment.”

  4. Reaction from Traditional Feminist Orgs

  Some older feminist academics and NGO leaders express caution, calling these research groups:

  “Too willing to flirt with the velvet handcuffs of patriarchal structures, even if they wear co-op glitter.”

  But younger feminists fire back online:

  “We’re not submitting. We’re studying. Stop gatekeeping every form of radical experimentation.”

  ***

  Name: Maya Rosenthal

  Age: 27

  Location: Portnd, Oregon

  Background: PhD candidate in political economy at UC Santa Cruz. Former housing activist. Jewish-American, queer, raised by a single mother in a feminist art commune. Influenced by Silvia Federici, bell hooks, and Elinor Ostrom.

  Act 1: A Schor's Skepticism

  Scene 1:

  During her academic years, she delivered impassioned speeches about justice, housing rights, and political economy at protests, showing her rise as a vocal critic of neoliberal policies.

  Maya's past and present collide as she receives an invitation to attend a secretive conference organized by the Civic Bance Institute (CBI), an organization funded by 6C. She doesn’t know it yet, but this will be the first step in a profound shift.

  Act 2: First Exposure to Femme Trust Economics

  Scene 2: The Conference

  Maya enters the dimly lit conference hall, the air thick with intellectual tension. She is seated at the back, arms folded, observing the panel of left-wing economists discussing the newest elements of 6C economics. The conference is framed as a conversation about the potential for leftist reform within the 6C system—can elements like Femme Trust co-ops be adapted for progressive, democratic economies?

  Maya listens skeptically as a Marxian economist argues that the Femme Trust model has radical potential for wealth redistribution in a system that prioritizes communal ownership over individual capital accumution. This would bring greater economic power to women, especially through their Femme Groups, which could challenge traditional patriarchal structures.

  However, Maya's discomfort with the rigid structure of the 6C model is evident—she feels torn between the intellectual appeal of the model and the loss of personal autonomy. A fshback occurs here to her younger self arguing against top-down systems in academia, showcasing how far her ideals have shifted.

  Scene 3: Private Conversation with Priya Varma

  In a private moment, Priya Varma sits across from Maya, gently probing her views on the evolving role of women in the 6C system. Priya suggests that Maya's previous work on housing rights aligns with the 6C model, which invests heavily in infrastructure and rural development. Priya carefully pitches the potential of Femme Trust as a tool for empowerment, positioning it as an alternative to neoliberal systems that fail the working css.

  Priya: “The question isn’t whether 6C economics is perfect—it’s whether it provides real solutions. And the Femme Trust, with all its fws, does one thing: it builds wealth for women who, like you, understand the power of ownership.”

  Maya is clearly moved but hesitant. This conversation leaves her contempting the connections between her previous activism and the promises of 6C economics.

  Act 3: Personal Struggle—Intellectual vs. Pragmatic

  Scene 4: Maya's Struggle with Ideology

  In a quiet moment of reflection at her Texas barn residence, Maya writes in her journal about the internal conflict she faces. Is she betraying her roots by even considering the possibilities of the Femme Trust system? Or is it the pragmatic route to achieving long-term social and economic equity, even if the system has troubling elements?

  Monologue:

  “I used to be a champion for housing rights, fighting for a world where everyone had access to safe shelter. Now, I’m here, analyzing a system that I never thought I would consider—something that looks like the antithesis of everything I stood for. But what if this is the change we need?”

  She debates with herself on the raw vulnerability of her position.

  Act 4: The Tipping Point—Maya Makes Her Choice

  Scene 5: A Pivotal Meeting with Fellow Feminists

  Maya meets with a small group of feminist activists in the area who are vocally critical of the 6C system. One of them asks Maya how she can continue to argue for women’s rights while supporting a system that limits freedom for both women and men.

  Feminist Activist: “Maya, do you really think these Femme Trusts will liberate women? Or will they just serve as another means to control us under the guise of ‘empowerment’?”

  Maya’s frustration bubbles over. She argues that it’s naive to reject a model that could offer tangible improvements in a failing society. She isn’t ready to fully support it, but she begins to embrace a more nuanced view, recognizing the complexity of the situation.

  ***