Ethics in Government – Page 9 – greenandprofitable.com

Can We Get This Movie Into Every History and Social Studies Class?

By Shel Horowitz—Green/Ethical Business Expert Posted on February 19, 2017 Posted in Arts & Entertainment, Democracy, Diversity, Ethics in Government, Ethics: General, Events, Peace and War, Politics, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with allegiance musical, ethics, ethnic conflict, family values, George Takei, Japanese internment, racism, World War II

My wife and I were both deeply moved watching a filmed performance of George Takei’s Broadway musical, “Allegiance,” set primarily in an isolated internment camp holding Japanese-Americans during World War II.

“Allegiance” musical-logo

While according to Wikipedia, the play exaggerates the anti-Japanese racism and conditions at the camps in pursuit of the salable story, it has a whole lot to say about ethics, families whose values conflict, and prejudice—98 percent of which still applies even if that is true. Each major character pursues his or her own truth, and acts in the way s/he feels is best for both the person and the wider Japanese-American community. But those ways are in such conflict that a family is torn asunder for 60 years.

Even if the story hadn’t been so engaging, the quality of singing is amazingly high, especially from Lea Salonga (Keiko) and Christopheren Nomura (Tatsuo).

Takei (who is absolutely brilliant as the grandfather and also plays the very emotional role of the male lead as an old man) says he worked on this project for 10 years. But the show ran only several months. Fortunately, it was preserved on film.

It is worth remembering that the Japanese-Americans, many of them citizens, were rounded up during the administration of FDR, a liberal Democrat. That their property was confiscated, their freedom taken away, and the conditions in the camps were often miserable. And that once they were allowed to enlist, Japanese-American men were put in situations where massive numbers would die.

Now, under a right-wing Republican president Takei could not have anticipated when he and his colleagues started work, other ethnic and religious groups are being targeted. We who are not part of those groups must ensure that what happened to the Japanese in America and their Japanese-American US citizen children must never happen again to any ethnic or religious group.

I would like to see this movie shown far and wide. At the moment, I can’t find anything about future showings, but https://allegiancemusical.com/article/allegiance-film-encore/#DPrWhbgSL6O53Ckf.97 would be the place to request that.

This is What DICTATORSHIP Looks Like

By Shel Horowitz—Green/Ethical Business Expert Posted on February 8, 2017 Posted in Ethics in Government, Politics, propaganda, Protests and Crackdowns, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with 45th president, cabinet choices, journalists, judges, judiciary, republican attacks, vote suppression, voting rights

At almost any protest event these days, you’ll hear the chant, “Tell me what democracy looks like. This is what democracy looks like.”

Unfortunately, the targets of our protests—the new US federal government that came into power in January—show us almost every day what democracy DOESN’T look like. It’s looking more and more like dictatorship.

Caricature of Donald Trump by DonkeyHotey, Creative Commons License: https://www.flickr.com/photos/donkeyhotey/5471912349/sizes/m/in/photostream/

The list of every bad thing the government is doing would be far longer than would fit on a blog, but it’s important to keep the overall “doubleplusungood” (as George Orwell coined it in his antitotalitarian classic 1984) trend in mind. A reminder of a few lowlights:

Attempts to silence scientists and employees who don’t toe the party line, at the EPA and other government agencies
DT’s instant removal of the pages about climate change, healthcare, LGBT and civil rights from the White House website on the very day of the inauguration
Constant attacks on journalists (beginning well before the election) and false claims about reportage: a claim that the press doesn’t report terrorist acts, and an equally ridiculous accusation that the press had undercounted attenders at his inauguration, to name to among many
Bullying and name-calling against the Republican judge who overturned the Muslim immigration ban—another tactic that started before the election
DT’s bizarre, utterly unsubstantiated, and oft-repeated allegation that 3 million undocumented immigrants (not permitted to vote, of course) illegally voted for Clinton. Let’s spend a bit of time on this: Not by coincidence, that is roughly the number by which DT lost the popular vote. At first I thought it was just the ravings of a narcissistic maniac. But yesterday, I read a provocative analysis by voter disenfranchisement experts Harvey Wasserman and Bob Fitrakis, who speculate that it’s much more sinister: a weapon to be used to disenfranchise many more (likely-Democratic) voters, especially those of color. And the plot thickens when we discover that the man who first made the claim is registered to vote in three states—and that five senior DT advisors or family members also have multiple registrations.
A Senate whose Republican majority has gone toady, backing up a series of draconian measures and horrific appointments on party lines, despite nominees’ overt lack of qualification—six of his picks have zero experience in government—resistance to disclosing potential ethics conflicts and finances, and severe hostility to the departments they are supposed to head (only in the nomination of DeVos for Secretary of Education did exactly two Republicans break away—three were needed to block the appointment)—and despite the opposition to DT’s tactics many Republican leaders expressed during the primary season last year
These same Senators silenced Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren as she attempted to read a statement by the late Coretta Scott King (MLK’s widow) about the racist history of DT’s nominee for Attorney General
Ramrodding the Dakota Access Pipeline approval through the Army Core of Engineers, even though the ACE had just ordered a two-year environmental impact review
A general attitude that the law doesn’t apply to him because he is the president—a position that even Richard Nixon wasn’t able to get courts to support, and Nixon had an actual voter mandate that DT lacks. This shows itself in a host of issues from refusal to disclose his taxes to violations of the Emoluments Clause.

As I said, I could go on for a long time. The above is not even close to a comprehensive list. Even the right-wing site LearnLiberty sees DT as a serious threat to our liberties.

I DID Give Him a Chance…And That’s Why I March

By Shel Horowitz—Green/Ethical Business Expert Posted on January 22, 2017 Posted in Activism, Business Ethics, Democracy, Ethics in Government, language, Politics, propaganda, Protests and Crackdowns, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with give Donald Trump a chance, Trump counterinaugural, Women's March on Washington

I’m starting this post at 2:30 a.m. on January 21, as I prepare to board a bus to Washington, joining the Women’s March for human rights that will greet the newly sworn in US president on his first full day of office. Hundreds of thousands are expected in Washington, New York, Los Angeles, and many smaller communities. Post-event note: at least 3.3 million to 4.6 million demonstrators came out around the US, plus hundreds of thousands more elsewhere in the world in more than 600 events. I’m finishing it the next day.

Several people have asked me, “Why don’t you give him a chance?” And my father-in-law, a liberal, shocked me with a different question: “He won. Why are you still marching?” Later, someone else asked me the same question on Facebook.

Marching at the Women's March on Washington with my wife and children — Marching at the Women’s March on Washington with my wife and children (from left: son-in-law Bobby, daughter Alana, wife Dina, me, son Rafael)

The Chances DT Has Failed to Take

I have given him not one chance but many, and he has failed to take them. I feel it is my patriotic duty to speak out against his agenda, to remind him that he not only has no sweeping mandate—he lost the popular vote “bigly”—and to remind my fellow Americans that his election was not clean and his behavior has not met any legitimacy tests.

This was already abundantly clear during the campaign. Back in August, I wrote an open letter to DT that called him out for his racism, misogyny, and bullying.

Despite my harsh language, when he eked out his narrow victory, I was still willing to give him lots of chances. But here’s what happened, just to name a few:

I gave him a chance to repudiate the surge of hate crimes in the few weeks after the election. All I got was a weak and insincere “stop it”—followed by senior-level appointments of racists like Steve Bannon and Jeff Sessions
I gave him a chance to take seriously the job of running the most powerful country in the world. I got a president who refuses most of his intelligence briefings and who can’t see his way clear to letting go of his role on TV’s “The Apprentice.”
I gave him a chance to appoint experts in their fields to run the massive government departments, Most of those he has appointed are business people with no experience managing such a large bureaucracy and in many cases have stated opposition to the missions of their departments. The few who do have relevant experience are scary: for Attorney General, a man rejected by his own Senate for a judgeship because of racism; for Homeland Security, a Guantanamo torturer; for Secretary of State, the head of our largest oil company—a company that has foreign entanglements in Russia and elsewhere and created possibly the most effective corporate disinformation campaign ever, attacking the thoroughly documented science of climate change (which even Energy Secretary nominee Rick Perry, a former climate denier, now admits is real).
I gave him the chance to take the job of governing seriously. But he is much too busy trying to make himself look like the hero of every battle. He is so self-absorbed that he has his press secretary make a statement—which contained at least four untruths in five minutes—that the media undercounted the attendance at the inauguration. Oh, that’s so important, ha ha ha (not to mention utterly false, as these pictures make abundantly clear). Yet another “look at me, I’m the greatest” response from a man who loves to criticize others but objects strenuously when anyone criticizes him. This is not presidential timber. It’s 3rd-grader behavior and it’s embarrassing.
I gave him a chance to start telling the truth. Yet just as during the campaign, I’ve seen one outrageous lie after another. Examples: the ridiculous claim that he really won the popular vote and the above-mentioned false kvetching about the media distorting his inauguration’s attendance figures.
I gave him a chance to disclose his taxes and to separate himself from his business interests. He has completely ignored the requests to make his taxes public. And instead of the usual blind trust, he’s turned his businesses over to his children, who also have roles in the government (despite anti-nepotism rules introduced after JFK appointed his brother as Attorney-General, which stopped appointments of family members by Carter and Reagan). He has been in violation of his lease with the GSA from the moment he took the oath of office.

I don’t want to make this blog into a book, so I will stop there. I would love to have been wrong on this. I would have deeply delighted in the emergence of a new and different DT, one who really was trying to “make America great.”

My Patriotic Duty
One final reason why I marched: the most important one of all! As a patriotic American who believes this country is already great and that DT’s and/or his surrogates’ policies on the environment, women’s rights, minority rights, education, freedom of the press and other freedoms in the Bill of Rights, and a whole host of other issues are not just the wrong path, but take us down the ugly (and utterly unacceptable) road that Germany and Russia took in the 1930s. I not only refuse to be part of that takedown, I feel it is my duty as someone who cares about my country to stand up and say NO. When my as-yet-unborn grandchildren ask me, decades from now, what I did to protect our country and planet at this critical time, I will be able to stand proudly, as my mother did about her role in the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s, and say that I was there. I stood up for what’s right.

10 Reasons to Resist Nonviolently, Chanukah, And Barbara Kingsolver’s Message

By Shel Horowitz—Green/Ethical Business Expert Posted on December 24, 2016 Posted in Activism, Democracy, Ethics in Government, Politics, Protests and Crackdowns, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with 2016 presidential election, Barbara Kingsolver, Donald Trump, nonviolence, nonviolent action, nonviolent protest, Washington Post

For many of us, we are one month away from the greatest threat to democracy in the history of our country. The incoming administration presents a threat greater than the Alien and Sedition Acts under John Adams…the persecution of antiwar activists in World War I and the Palmer Raids that followed that war…the McCarthy witchhunts…the George W. Bush coup and the illegal, immoral wars that resulted.

Tonight is the first night of Chanukah. The word “Chanukah” means “dedication,” and celebrates the rededication of the Temple in Jerusalem after throwing out the occupiers. I am dedicating this blog post to all those who feel threatened by a president-to-be who has repeatedly spoken out in hatred and incited violence against Muslims, immigrants, people of color, women, even people with disabilities, and who has done nothing to quell the violence of his supporters against these groups as well as people who identify as LGBTQ and Jews.

It also happens to be my 60th birthday. I made my first action for social change at age 3, and became serious about activism at 12. I’ve been doing what I can to create a better world ever since, and I will “not go gentle into that good night”

I have personally been actively organizing ever since the morning after the election. I’ve attended meetings on how to be an ally for people facing hate crimes in the streets or ICE agents on their doorstep. I’ve written to DT making the business case for keeping the Paris climate accord and I’ve written on how social entrepreneurs can still thrive in the coming years. I’ve signed what feels like hundreds of petitions, made dozens of phone calls, reached out to dozens of activists to show a path of hope and action, attended a “where do we go from here” mass meeting with about 800 people, and marched in front of the nearest state capital while the electors voted—and in the streets of nearby cities for several rallies.

Demonstrators at the Connecticut State Capital as electors voted December 19, 2016. Photo by Shel Horowitz.

I’ve just read two different articles that I wish I’d written.

First, in the Washington Post, a great analysis by Erica Chenowith of the power of nonviolent action, with links to excellent primary sources. She lists 10 different ways nonviolent resistance out-accomplishes violent resistance—with examples including the tens of thousands saved by nonviolent resistance to the Nazis. This is a tiny fraction of the total. The brilliant nonviolence historian Gene Sharp listed 193 different nonviolent activist tactics, decades ago. By now, the number is probably much higher.

And second, an essay by Barbara Kingsolver on why we cannot sit back in paralysis, how we have to act. She recognizes that many of us are grieving. More importantly, she recognizes our tendency as liberals, to make our accommodations and be good citizens, just as we were under Reagan and both Bushes.

But, she says, this time is different. We have no obligation to cooperate with a president who:

Trumpets an agenda of repression, completely at odds with the wishes of most Americans (even many who voted for him)
Has no mandate (having lost the popular vote by the largest margin of any “winning” presidential candidate in history)

“We went to bed as voters, and got up as outsiders to the program,” she writes. And provides a nice list of ways we can agitate and organize, even if we see ourselves as polite Boomers who long ago left behind the 1960s-70s politics of the streets.

Personally, I never left the streets behind. But it’s been nice, in recent years to march as often to celebrate victories as to protest injustice. We may not have that luxury very often in the next few years. But that doesn’t mean we crawl into a hole and give up.

Its perhaps fitting that I found both of these stories through Mary Jane Sullivan, whom I met on an activist bus to an organizing conference in 1978, and who was my housemate for my last year and a half in Brooklyn, 1979-80. Like me, she has spent her whole life fomenting positive change. There are millions of Boomers like us, and millions of Millennials like my kids, who still see activism as a key component of our lives.

We will NOT be silenced!

Why I Found this Democratic US Senator’s Survey Unethical

By Shel Horowitz—Green/Ethical Business Expert Posted on December 20, 2016 Posted in Branding, Business Ethics, Copywriting, Democracy, Ethics in Government, language, Marketing Techniques and Philosophies, Politics, propaganda, Transparency vs. Secrecy Tagged with ethics, Michelle Obama, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, surveys, transparency

Dear Senator Gillibrand,

I have been a fan of your since you took office. However, after following your Facebook link to the Planned Parenthood funding survey, I have to say I felt tricked, deceived, and betrayed.

I’ve used this blog to call out unethical marketing from various companies over the years. And even though you and I share many political views (including a strong commitment to women’s rights)—I have to call you out on this.

The initial question that led to the dead end

I had no problem with the initial one-question survey. But then I opted in to the follow-up questions.

First, as a survey instrument, the questions were useless. Each had only a yes or no option, written in language that showed a clear bias toward one answer. Yes, you’ll be able to prepare a press release that could cite a number like 95 percent of respondents—but it’s meaningless. You’d be laughed off the page, or worse, publicly shamed, by journalists who bother to look at the source data.

Second, after I checked off my answers and tried to submit, my phone took me to a page demanding money. I say demanding rather than asking, because there was no way out except by giving money. My submit button was refused when I left the field blank and refused again when I put in a zero. And when I exited the page without contributing, it tried to post to my Facebook page that I had just contributed to you. I have no way of knowing if my responses were actually counted—but I can tell you I did not appreciate being trapped and manipulated like this.

I don’t have a problem being asked for money at the end of a survey, when it’s my choice whether to give or not. But this felt like a shakedown, quite frankly. It left a very bad taste.

I would find this unacceptable from any politician and any charity. But since you were “the very first member of Congress to put her official daily schedule, personal financial disclosure and federal earmark requests online” and cited by The New York Times for your commitment to transparency, I find this an especially bitter pill.

As a marketer, I am saddened to see you resorting to Trumpian tactics based in dishonesty and lack of transparency. You’re better than this. In Michelle Obama’s famous line, “When they go low, we go high.”

Sincerely,

Shel Horowitz, marketing strategist and copywriter

Going Beyond Sustainability | Home

Top 10 Reasons Why the Electoral College Should “Just Say No” to Trump

By Shel Horowitz—Green/Ethical Business Expert Posted on December 15, 2016 Posted in Business Ethics, Democracy, Ethics in Government, Ethics-International, Politics, propaganda Tagged with 2016 presidential campaign, Alexander Hamilton, cia, Donald Trump, Electoral College, first amendment, lawsuits, Russia, voting

On Monday, the US Electoral College will be officially deciding whether Donald Trump will be president of the United States.

Alexander Hamilton had several reasons for proposing this convoluted structure. Some of them were not so noble, like giving more power to slave states. But one is worth noting: providing a check against the office going to someone unfit to hold it.

And just because that body has never found a winner unfit doesn’t mean it can’t. This time, there are a whole bunch of reasons why it might want to exercise that power. Some of them are about his complex financial empire, some about his personal actions—and some about the questionable integrity of this year’s voting process. Any one of these should be enough to say, “Hey, wait a minute, this is not OK.” Here are ten among many.

Refusal to divest of investments that could influence policy
Unlike every major party presidential candidate in decades, refusal to disclose his taxes
Probable intervention by a foreign government (Russia), according to the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency)—and the request by some Electors for a briefing on this
His opponent winning the popular vote by an astounding 2,833,224 votes
Trump has been named in at least 169 separate lawsuits—for fraud, antitrust violations, discrimination, and sexual harassment (among other issues). One is especially worth highlighting: A consolidated fraud case (including two class action suits plus one filed by New York State’s Attorney General that Trump settled for $25 million alleged that his Trump University was a scam
Interference in legitimate recount efforts in three states where exit polls showed a Democratic victory but the state was called for Trump
Refusal to accept intelligence briefings, a daily part of every president’s morning since forever
Threats to the First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech, press, and assembly
Threats and incitements to violence against a vast range of people, from Hillary Clinton to an 18-year-old college student
Insults both to whole classes of Americans and to individuals who disagreed with him

This, unfortunately, isn’t even the whole story. I haven’t discussed the ludicrous lack of government experience among his Cabinet picks…his own inexperience in any government position…the consistent lying…the well-documented cheating of vendors…the lease he has with the federal government for his new Washington, DC hotel which bars any government employee…his insistence on remaining Executive Producer of Apprentice, as if running the country were a side hustle…the extremist agenda he has embraced…his refusal to meaningfully condemn the hundreds of hate crimes in the aftermath of the election…and on and on it goes.

I hope the Electors in the Electoral College do their patriotic duty, and (in the words made famous by Nancy Reagan) “just say no.”

Note: dozens of petitions to the Electoral College are circulating. Here’s one I like. It allows you to write your own letter (be polite!)

Standing Rock Protector Accuses Other Side of Chemical Warfare

By Shel Horowitz—Green/Ethical Business Expert Posted on November 28, 2016 Posted in Activism, censorship, Diversity, Energy & Sustainability, Ethics in Government, Politics, propaganda, Protests and Crackdowns, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with attacks against protestors, chemical warfare, national monument, police violence, rubber bullets, standing rock water protectors, tear gas

NOTE: You’ll find several action steps at the bottom of this post. If you don’t want to read the whole thing, please scroll down to that section and take action before leaving this page.

Watch this video made by Standing Rock Water Protector Candida Rodriguez Kingbird on November 14.

Read a transcript by clicking this link. She claims that a crop duster was spraying the encampment, and only the encampment. Kingbird’s video, or commentary on it, has appeared on many progressive sites and social media profiles.

We know the level of repression against Standing Rock Water Protectors has been consistently shockingly high. There are numerous reports of the authorities using water cannons, tear gas, and even rubber bullets against this peaceful group of Native people fighting nonviolently to protect their water—from a project that was originally to go very close to Bismark, but was rerouted because of worries about what it would do to the water supply.

The link in the paragraph above is to a Christian Science Monitor story with video. The Monitor is a respected mainstream news outlet known for its good journalism over many decades.

We know that the temperature has been in the 20s (Fahrenheit) at Standing Rock—well below freezing—and we know that both demonstrators and journalists have been injured and are being deliberately soaked: a clear recipe for hypothermia. It’s all-too-reminiscent of the tactics used by police departments in the American South against black nonviolent civil rights marchers in the 1950s and 1960s.

I see no reason to doubt Kingbird’s account.

Although a search for “chemical weapons standing rock” didn’t turn up any video of the spraying or any reportage based on a claim by someone else—or coverage in mainstream media, I find Kingbird’s testimony thoroughly believable. I found her a credible witness, someone clearly not used to being a public figure. I didn’t feel she was acting, just reporting—and speaking from the heart.

Brookings Institution researchers felt the job-creation benefits of the pipeline were only half of what pipeline backers have claimed. Former US Secretary of Labor Robert B. Reich says the entire project is economically unsound and will “go belly-up” (scroll back to his post of November 16, 2016). But Donald Trump stands to gain financially by its completion and is an outspoken advocate of tar sands, fracking, and other highly destructive fossil fuel extraction technologies. If Reich is correct, there is no economic justification for the project. In any case, there’s no excuse for the violence. And even if the project were financially viable, it’s been long-acknowledged that one way to avoid climate catastrophe is to STOP extracting fossil fuels, especially those extracted in the most environmentally destructive ways—like the tar sands at issue in the Dakotas and Western Canada.

There is the (faint, IMHO) hope that Obama will protect the area either by revoking the DAP permit or protecting the land as a National Monument in his final weeks, but I am personally not optimistic that either will happen, or that it will survive a near-certain overturn attempt form the new administration.

Actions You Can Take

Petitions (click the marked text to sign, then share them widely):

Stop the violence (Really American)

Declare the area a National Monument (Bernie Sanders supports this approach)

Of course, personal letters count much more, so if you’re inspired, go for it!

Phone Calls (with script)

Call the Morton County, ND Sheriff’s Department to tell them to stop attacking. Call the Army Corps of Engineers to tell them to revoke the construction permits. And call the US Department of Justice demanding an investigation into police violence at Standing Rock. (Single action page for all three, via Daily Kos—be sure to click “Not Dina?” if that text shows up on the right)

Donate Moneyor Goods to Standing Rock Water Protectors
These organizations were recommended by a friend who was recently out at Standing Rock.

Standing Rock Healers Council: website and Facebook page

Indigenous Youth Council Facebook page

Postal and Paypal addresses for donations :

PayPal: www.paypal.me/ocetisakowincamp

Checks or cash may be sent to:
Oceti Sakowin Camp
P.O. Box 298
Cannon Ball, ND 58528

List of MATERIALS they are seeking
https://www.ocetisakowincamp.org/donate

Trump Voters: Please Speak Out to Stop the Violence

By Shel Horowitz—Green/Ethical Business Expert Posted on November 20, 2016 Posted in Activism, Democracy, Diversity, Ethics in Government, language, People Helping People, Politics, Protests and Crackdowns, Shel's Personal Life, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with actions for justice, basket of deplorables, conflict de-escalation, Donald Trump, election violence, hate crimes, hillary clinton, muslim registry, nonviolence

I have publicly condemned election-related/hate crime violence on both sides. But it’s important to note that there are already more than 700 documented instances of right-on-minority or right-on-female violence and a far smaller number of left-on-Trump-voter incidents.

I do not condone the violence on either side. But I’m sorry, when you have just elected a president who has given license to bullies and attackers for months, it is time for Trump voters also to say “this is not OK.”

Spectators applaud the Forbes Library contingent, #Nohopride 2011 — Spectators applaud an LGBT pride march. Photo by Shel Horowitz.

And if DT is really going to take his own “president for all Americans” election-night rhetoric seriously, he needs to issue a far stronger and more convincing demand to stop that behavior than the wimpy few words he reluctantly issued after a CBS reporter asked him directly to rebuke the attackers. And those who voted for DT for reasons that have nothing to do with the subjugation of women, people of color, and non-Christians need to speak out loudly and publicly. Hate crimes of any kind are not OK—and the Right as well as the Left both need to say so.

Trump voters who refuse to speak out and call for cessation of the violence are proving Hillary’s “deplorables” comment. The way to prove her wrong (and I think she is) is to speak out loudly that you, as a Trump voter, will not tolerate violence and threats against racial/religious/sexual minorities and women. That we as a country are better than this. That we can disagree and still be a democracy.

I am putting a safety pin on my coat as a sign that I am someone willing to intervene if I am a witness to a hate crime. I’ve been trained in nonviolence and conflict de-escalation (though it was long ago). If you’ve had some training, think about joining that movement. And if you haven’t, find a way to get that training. Google “nonviolence training” with your city’s or state’s name. And if DT actually implements his proposed Muslim registry, I will be part of a movement to flood that database with non-Muslim registrants so it becomes useless. These are personal risks I am willing to take. We have seen too many times what happens when good people do nothing while others perpetuate evil in their name.

I understand if those actions might be more than you’re willing to do; here’s one that’s totally safe: Sign this petition. Please note in the comments section of THIS that you’ve signed, or better yet, share your own personal letter that you’ve written to Trump.

And THIS is Why Trump Won!

By Shel Horowitz—Green/Ethical Business Expert Posted on November 11, 2016 Posted in Activism, Democracy, Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Ethics in Government, Marketing Techniques and Philosophies, Marketing Trends/News, People Helping People, Politics, Psychology, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with Boston Globe, Donald Trump, Senator Elizabeth Warren, US presidential election

Two kernels of wisdom to help us all understand what happened on Tuesday.

First, this story in the Boston Globe, “The red state no one saw coming.” A few things worth noting there. First, Hillary’s campaign has only themselves to blame for being complacent, for not shoring up a weak base in states, like Wisconsin, they took for granted.

Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts

When Sanders trounced her by 13 points in the Wisconsin primary, she didn’t see the warning signs. She didn’t see that people were hurt and angry and demanding change. She didn’t bother to campaign in Wisconsin, while Trump visited five times in the past few months. She didn’t even start running ads there until the final week. And a thin wisp of a margin lost her the state. Rinse and repeat in other places, and you see the pattern. The Globe article notes that some Sanders voters switched to Trump, and this pattern (in my very unscientific observation via Facebook and elsewhere) shows up all across the country. Others, of course, stayed home or voted third-party.

Yes, there were those who voted for Trump out of bigotry. But according to Elizabeth Warren, in a powerful post-election speech, more of his voters were voting for economic change. They supported (she claims) the liberal parts of his agenda, such as trade reform, restoring Glass-Steagall (which I don’t remember him supporting), and rebuilding our country’s infrastructure while creating jobs. Undeterred by the lack of specifics and in many cases holding their noses over his character issues, they voted for a Republican with an old-line Democrat domestic agenda and an appeal to the racist populism that propelled the Democratic Party even into the 1960s. The above link takes you to the video. Full transcript: https://www.elizabethwarren.com/blog/president-elect-donald-trump. Watch or read it; there’s much to learn about how we frame this election and where we go from here.

Search Shel’s Sites

Category: Ethics in Government

Why I Found this Democratic US Senator’s Survey Unethical

Top 10 Reasons Why the Electoral College Should “Just Say No” to Trump