Category: Social and Economic Justice

By Posted on Posted in Peace and War, People Helping People, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with

I received a notice today about a photo exhibit of Albanian Muslim rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust—taken by a Jewish photographer, Norman H. Gershman. This rescue took place while the country was under Nazi occupation:

When Hitler’s troops began invading the Balkan States in the early 1940s, Muslims across Albania took an estimated 2,000 Jewish refugees into their homes en masse and welcomed them not as refugees, but as guests.  They disguised these Jews as Muslims, took them to mosque, called them Muslim names, gave them Muslim passports, hid them when they needed to, and then ferried them to inaccessible mountain hamlets.  “In fact, Albania is the only Nazi-occupied country that sheltered Jews,” says Gershman.  The Jewish population in Albania grew by ten-fold during World War II, and it became the only country in occupied Europe to have more Jews at the end of the war than at the beginning.  Records from the International School for Holocaust Studies show that not one Albanian Jew or any of the other thousands of refugees were given up to the Nazis by Albanian Muslims.  “They did this in the name of their religion,” Gershman said.  “They absolutely had no prejudice what so ever.”

If I can manage to get to NYC before January 29, I am so there! I see two key takeaways in this story:

1. Even in the face of unspeakable evil, there will be people who do the right thing, even at great personal risk.

2. This is one of many pieces of historical evidence that Jews and Muslims can coexist, yet another reason to disbelieve the racists on both sides who say such a thing is impossible.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Energy & Sustainability, People Helping People, Protests and Crackdowns, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , ,

Nuclear Information and Resource Service reports in a recent newsletter that Congress received 15,000 letters and countless phone calls opposing the inclusion of $8 billion in bailouts (a/k/a “loan guarantees”) for new nuclear plant construction—and that the final interim funding bill to keep the government running did NOT include this boondoggle. The item is not on the NIRS website but you can find the entire newsletter reprinted here.

In other words, the power of an organized populace resulted in a victory, something that’s getting less frequent all the time but is still very much possible. Let’s hope for many more in the coming year.

Do not let anyone try to tell you that nuclear fission is in any way green. It’s an environmental disaster under the best of circumstances, and at its worst, it could make the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico look like a spilled cup of coffee. Here’s a post I wrote some time back that gives some among many reasons to oppose nuclear power (scroll past the feed from this blog).

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Democracy, Politics, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , , ,

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL), who lost his bid for re-election, has organized a webpage to collect public comments for incoming co-chairs Raul Grijalva of Arizona and Keith Ellison of Minnesota on the direction for the Progressive Caucus for the next two years. Since I could make a career out of giving advice to the government, of course I had to step in. Here’s what I wrote:

The Democrats lost the house because of over-conciliation. People voted for change in 08, and in spite of his brilliant marketing during the campaign, Obama has been a very poor marketer of his accomplishments, and very poor at negotiating—so that what did pass failed to constitute “change.”

So…how to move forward?

1. Fight for the sweeping change that Obama has promised but not delivered–not just on the House floor, but by organizing in your home districts. Rapid and complete withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq (I am not impressed with a “withdrawal” that leaves 50,000 troops plus mercenaries in place)…a jobs program focused on deep energy retrofits of existing buildings, especially low-income housing and any government property…a much tighter leash for Wall Street. And dare I say it–throw away this year’s health care in favor of a single sentence: The eligibility age for Medicare shall be from birth.

2. Look for places where the agendas of progressives merge with the radical right (for instance, privacy issues, free speech issues) and build common cause, but with a wary eye and a willingness to pull away quickly if things go sour.

3. Demand of the deficit hawks that they start with the military, which is absurdly huge compared to even other superpowers.

4. If you compromise, get meaningful concessions. If you don’t get the concessions, don’t compromise.

5. For goodness sake, learn to frame the discourse to generate sympathy and support. Read George Lakoff’s “Don’t Think of an Elephant.” Don’t let the right-wing crazies back you into a wall with crazy sound-bite framing (“death panels,” for instance). Learn to frame the issues in terms that relate to the self-interest of most Americans, the health and future of the planet, and our place among the nations. This is what Obama was so good at during the campaign, and has failed so miserably since his inauguration.

Shel Horowitz, marketing consultant, primary author of Guerrilla Marketing Goes Green, and author of the monthly syndicated column, “Green And Profitable.”

Grayson will definitely missed, and the next two years promise to be frustrating for progressives. Still, let’s not give up hope and keep organizing. Obama could still regain public support—IF he works as hard to pass a progressive agenda as he did to get elected.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Energy & Sustainability, People Helping People, poverty, Social and Economic Justice

Today is another Blog Action Day for social justice, and today’s topic is water. My slant on this, as someone who writes about environmental issues, is that access to clean, safe water is both an environmental and a justice issue. And that the easiest way to promote safe, clean water around the world is for us resource hogs in the developed countries to be much more careful not to squander the good water we are privileged to have.

Here are some facts provided by Blog Action Day (emphasis added):

1.      Unsafe drinking water and lack of sanitation kills more people every year than all forms of violence, including war. Unclean drinking water can incubate some pretty scary diseases, like E. coli, salmonella, cholera and hepatitis A. Given that bouquet of bacteria, it’s no surprise that water, or rather lack thereof, causes 42,000 deaths each week.

2.      More people have access to a cell phone than to a toilet. Today, 2.5 billion people lack access to toilets. This means that sewage spills into rivers and streams, contaminating drinking water and causing disease.

3.      Every day, women and children in Africa walk a combined total of 109 million hours to get water. They do this while carrying cisterns weighing around 40 pounds when filled in order to gather water that, in many cases, is still polluted. Aside from putting a great deal of strain on their bodies, walking such long distances keeps children out of school and women away from other endeavors that can help improve the quality of life in their communities.

4.      It takes 6.3 gallons of water to produce just one hamburger. That 6.3 gallons covers everything from watering the wheat for the bun and providing water for the cow to cooking the patty and baking the bun. And that’s just one meal! It would take over 184 billion gallons of water to make just one hamburger for every person in the United States.

5.      The average American uses 159 gallons of water every day – more than 15 times the average person in the developing world. From showering and washing our hands to watering our lawns and washing our cars, Americans use a lot of water. To put things into perspective, the average five-minute shower will use about 10 gallons of water. Now imagine using that same amount to bathe, wash your clothes, cook your meals and quench your thirst.

So…not to leave you sunk, here are a few easy and cheap/free ways to use less water:

Don’t run the water unnecessarily! Whether washing dishes or brushing your teeth, think about low-water methods. For those dishes,  clean the insides with a
soapy sponge and then only turn on the water (at modest force) to
rinse. For tooth brushing, wet the toothbrush, turn off the faucet, brush, wet again to rinse–you’ll use teaspoons instead of gallons.

Unbottle yourself. Save bottled water for places where tap water is not safe to drink. Bottling water consumes vast amounts of water (several times what’s actually in the bottle), energy, and plastic (much of which ends up in landfills). And lots of bottled water is nothing more than expensive public water supply water anyway. In much of the developed world, filtered tap water tastes as good as many bottled brands and has a far lower environmental and financial footprint.

Eat less (or no) meat–see #4, above. As a 37-year vegetarian, I can tell you that the wonderful cuisines of the world opened up to me when I stopped eating meat. I eat healthy, tasty, nutritious food, and I don’t miss the stuff I used to eat.

Sign the Blog Action Day UN Water Rights Petition:

 

(For more water saving tips, please see my e-book Painless Green: 110 Tips to Help the Environment, Lower Your Carbon Footprint, Cut Your Budget, and Improve Your Quality of Life-With No Negative Impact on Your Lifestyle.)

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Politics, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , , , ,

Now is President Obama’s chance: with the much-scorned Larry Summers stepping away from US financial policy, there’s room to appoint an economist with a deeper understanding of the causes and cures for our economic woes. If I were Obama, my second choice would be former Labor Secretary Robert B. Reich. My second choice would be Nobel Prize winner and New York times columnist Paul Krugman. And my third choice would be someone from completely outside government: the earth-centered economist Hazel Henderson, author of many influential books from the recent Ethical Markets to the long-ago Creating Alternative Futures.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Diversity, Peace and War, propaganda, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , , ,

Stupid idea of the Week award to (drumroll, please)…Terry Jones, pastor of the Dove World Outreach Center, an evangelical church in Gainesville, Florida. Jones and his 50 members want to commemorate 9/11 by burning a Koran.

Here’s what General David Petraeus had to say about this idiotic idea:

It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems, not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community…Images of the burning of a Koran would undoubtedly be used by extremists in Afghanistan – and around the world – to inflame public opinion and incite violence. Such images could, in fact, be used as were the photos from [Abu Ghraib]. And this would, again, put our troopers and civilians in jeopardy and undermine our efforts to accomplish the critical mission here in Afghanistan.

The same Washington Post article quotes a statement from the U.S. Embassy:

Americans from all religious and ethnic backgrounds reject the offensive initiative by this small group in Florida. A great number of American voices are protesting the hurtful statements made by this organization. Numerous interfaith and religious groups in America are actively working to counter this kind of ignorance and misinformation that is offensive to so many people in the U.S. and around the world.

To these 50 extremists who falsely call themselves Christian, I’ve got a few other things to say:

  • Christ’s message was one of tolerance of differences, acceptance of diversity. Consider as one among many examples the story of the Good Samaritan. Samaritans were a despised ethnic group in Christ’s day, as this post on Bible.org makes clear.
  • What makes the US different from (and better than) totalitarian governments with official state religion is that we were founded on the bedrock principles of justice and equality, even for those who are different from us. While it’s true that as a country, we certainly haven’t always lived up to these principles, they are part of our founding heritage and part of why I am proud to be an American. Bigotry is anti-American, and this is an act of bigotry.
  • As General Petraeus points out, your action inflames the passions of the zealot/terrorist faction within Islam–and while they are a tiny minority, they can do tremendous damage, especially with you doing their recruiting for them. You are putting the lives of every American soldier in Iraq (still 50,000 left, in so-called non-combat deployments) and Afghanistan at risk!, not to mention the lives of all of us on the home front. Are you willing to have the blood of these brave soldiers on your hands?

    Advice to the better selves hiding behind that racist front: don’t do it. You want to do something constructive to commemorate 9/11? How about an interfaith Christian/Muslim/Jewish dialog group?

    • Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Abundance and Prosperity, Corporate Social Responsibility, Marketing Techniques and Philosophies, poverty, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , ,

    Editor’s Note: Sometimes I like to post things to stimulate controversy, and thus I’m running this guest post by Alexis Bonari, critiquing one of the sacred cows of the sustainability movement: fair trade certification.

    From my own point of view as a consumer, I look to Fair Trade certification for many products, especially chocolate. I am all-too-aware of the use of child slaves to harvest cacao, particularly in the Ivory Coast, and as a lover of chocolate, I don’t want to be a party to that. Fair Trade labeling is my assurance that the cacao was grown honestly.

    I also disagree with Bonari’s two points:

    First, there’s nothing, to my mind, inherently evil about mechanized farming, as long as it’s done sustainably. Many Fair Trade products are also organic, and that’s a big step in the right direction. Systemically, of course, we should be looking at how we power our tractors and all the rest of it. And we can all look for ways to increase our “locavore” quotient by consuming products (including food) created locally. But I do believe there is a place for imports in the mix, and in fact, in my book, Guerrilla Marketing Goes Green, the section on “Local as Green” is followed immediately by one called “Global as Green.”

    And second, Far Trade (while far from perfect) certainly does provide a wedge against poverty. Farmers in Fair Trade co-ops are demonstrably better off than most who sell through conventional channels and who have no choice but to accept a pathetically low bid. Remember, too, that economic leverage varies a lot from country to country, and differences can be orders of magnitude. There are many parts of the world where an income of $25 or $50 a day puts someone in the upper half of the population, but it may only cost a few cents to cook a meal.

    I’ll turn the floor over to Alexis now—but I’d love to know your thoughts. Please add your comment below.
    —Shel Horowitz

    Marketing Honesty: Is Fair Trade Really a Fair Deal?

    By Alexis Bonari

    The Fair Trade label has become a marketing boon for many companies. Soon, even Nestlé’s Kit Kat bar will be made from Fair Trade sources.

    Essentially, the term Fair Trade refers to the following business model: companies pay craftsmen and farmers in developing countries an increased wage for goods that are traditionally produced in that region. These goods are produced with an eye to minimal environmental impact. Examples of Fair Trade goods are: bananas, honey, cotton, wine, handcrafts, coffee, sugar, and tea. As of 2008, the annual amount of revenue generated by Fair Trade goods amounted to approximately US$4.08 billion worldwide.

    While the popularity of Fair Trade goods is almost certainly a byproduct of good intentions on the part of consumers, is there a downside to the Fair Trade industry?

    The problem is twofold:

    1. Unsustainable Markets
    While incentivizing the production of local crops and handcrafts may temporarily short-circuit the cycle of poverty in certain communities, it does nothing to address the problem of supply and demand. First world countries lead the global economic market by producing technology and mass-produced products. India, and other developing countries experiencing economic growth, are educating their people and encouraging them to adopt mechanized means of production and farming.

    Fair Trade workers are being incentivized to continue producing the very same products that are keeping them in poverty. A comprehensive solution would encourage education and new business ventures.

    2. Perpetuation of a Toxic Cycle
    Simply put, Fair Trade policies perpetuate a system that denies the citizens of developing countries control over their own businesses. Under the banner of Fair Trade, foreign companies are offering them pennies on the dollar that a citizen of the US or a member of the EU would make for the same service.

    Fair Trade is a case of inaccurate marketing. The consumer is convinced that they’re working toward eradicating poverty in the Third World. In reality, Fair Trade could potentially hurt the very people it intends to help.

    Alexis Bonari is a freelance writer and blog junkie. She is a passionate blogger on the topic of education and free college scholarships. In her spare time, she enjoys square-foot gardening, swimming, and avoiding her laptop.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Advertising, Corporate Social Responsibility, Demographics/Psychographics, Marketing Techniques and Philosophies, People Helping People, poverty, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , ,

    Editor’s note: I like to say that my blog “covers the intersections of ethics, politics, media, marketing, and sustainability.” But I think this may be the first post in six years of blogging that touches on all five.

    Levi’s “Go Forth” Ad

    Chris Brogan’s blog brought my attention to a Levi’s ad called “Go Forth”—one of the most thought-provoking ads I’ve ever seen.

    “A long time ago, things got broken here. People got sad, and left. Maybe the world breaks on purpose—so we can have work to do.” The young girl narrator says this, and a bunch of stuff about the pioneer/frontier spirit.

    The ad shows a lot of images of a distressed town, Braddock, Pennsylvania—but also images and especially narration of hope and achievement. The people in the ad are not professional actors, but Braddock residents, apparently.

    How I reacted

    To, me this ad was about a company wanting to make a difference in a town. Yes, I noticed everyone was wearing Levi’s—but I didn’t pick up a message that I should buy its blue jeans. I got the message that it’s my job to make a difference in the world, no matter what I happen to wear.

    Now, I confess—As an entrepreneur motivated more by creating social and environmental change than by making a monetary fortune, I am exactly who this ad is directed at. And I was fascinated. I took the rare step of typing in the link that was displayed on the video to find out more: Levisgoforth.com.

    [Side note: In my book, Guerrilla Marketing Goes Green, I attack the conventional wisdom that you need seven or more touchpoints to create action. I argue instead that if you match message to market exactly, even a single impression may be enough. In this case, I took action immediately, on my first exposure.]

    The Shocking Call to Action

    Fully expecting a corporate rah-rah site about how Levi was helping communities, I was rather shocked to find a third-party site about the project, and one that was fairly critical of the company (click on the Go Forth and Facts pages). The site is anonymous, though there is a contact-the-site-creator link, which brings up an e-mail address for someone named Brett. Obviously, this link was added later, and not by Levi’s.

    Apparently, Levi’s made a one-time million-dollar investment in the community, which is being put to good use creating artist spaces and the like. The effort has the active support of the mayor, but apparently is somewhat controversial in town. But the site attacks Levi’s for treatment of workers, shipping all its manufacturing jobs overseas, and environmental violations, as well as for trying to make the problems go away with a one-time infusion of cash. It says, “We all want to see Braddock Prosper we just have different solutions” (punctuation and capitalization are from the original).

    What’s really odd to me is that this third-party intervention is the only call to action. Why didn’t Levi’s have one of its own? They get me all worked up with a feel-good surge of “I can do something,” and then utterly drop the ball.

    If you’ve followed my work, you’ll know I’m not usually a fan of image-only advertising (though I’ve seen it serve some powerful purposes, even on campaigns I’ve been involved with). I believe strongly in having a call to action. That is particularly true when you use such deep emotional hooks as this ad does. Why leave people with no place to go? Why not harness that energy?

    A Different Reaction

    I asked my wife, novelist Dina Friedman, to view the ad. Although she teaches in a business school, she’s not an entrepreneur. But like me, she is an activist. Her reaction was quite negative: “They’re trying to tell me that their blue jeans are a way out of poverty. If they want to show corporate responsibility, why not run an ad highlighting what they’re doing for this community.”

    How About You?

    View the video. visit the go forth site. And tell me what you think. Please post your comment below.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , ,

    This post is part of today’s worldwide BloggersUnite event, Empowering People With Disabilities.

    As my Boomer generation ages, and as our parents move well into the elder category, I reflect often on something I learned as a young organizer with the Gray Panthers (1979-80): the idea that society had best learn how to incorporate people with disabilities into active daily life, because most of us were going to grow into that category sooner or later. Accidents, injuries, degenerative diseases, and the general aging process mean that most of us can’t physically do some of what we used to do.

    But it certainly doesn’t mean we can’t be useful and productive. Role models are all around us. My Gray Panther chapter leader was a woman in her 70s who could barely see or hear and had some walking disabilities. She could still give fiery speeches once I brought her to the senior center we’d be speaking at that day–and at age 70, she’d taken up yoga and become a vegetarian.

    In fact, long before there was consciousness about disability rights, I was raised reading about some of the intellectual and artistic superstars with disabilities. Helen Keller is the most famous, a widely respected author, speaker, and thinker who could neither see nor hear. Also, the inventor and scientist Charles Steinmetz and President Franklin Roosevelt, among others. Grandma Moses, one of America’s most famous painters, never picked up a brush until age 76–and that left a 25-year career as an artist before her death at 101.In our own era, physicist Stephen Hawking comes to mind.

    Now, with disability activism and a much greater visibility following the 1988 Americans with Disabilities Act, we see over and over again the talent and resources we had lost by shutting people with disabilities away and out of the mainstream. We’re a long way from full equality, but we’ve sure made progress.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Democracy, Politics, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , ,

    The Senate can’t pass a jobs bill or a carbon cap bill, but had no trouble finding $60 billion for war.

    All I can say to the Senate is, shame on you people! You’ve got your priorities all wrong.

    And I can also say to Progressives that we need to reclaim the discourse in this country. If we don’t create pressure for change, we get the same old same old, even from the administration that was elected on a platform of change. Let’s get out there and make some noise.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail