Tag: threats

By Posted on Posted in Activism, censorship, Democracy, Diversity, Ethics in Government, Mindset, People Helping People, Politics, Protests and Crackdowns, Psychology, Talking to the Other Side Tagged with , , , , , , , , , ,

Heather Cox Richardson reported today that Elon Musk publicly called Alexander Vindman a traitor and accused him of being on Ukraine’s payroll. If Vindman’s name sounds familiar, is because of his earlier heroism, disclosing Donald Trump’s attempt to blackmail Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Vindman struck right back:

“Elon, here you go again making false and completely unfounded accusations without providing any specifics,” Vindman posted back. “That’s the kind of response one would expect from a conspiracy theorist. What oligarch? What treason?

“Let me help you out with the facts: I don’t take/have never taken money from any money from oligarchs Ukrainian or…otherwise.

“I do run a nonprofit foundation. The HereRightMattersFoundation.org to help Ukraine defend itself from Russia’s unprovoked attack on Feb 24, 2022. I served in the military for nearly 22 years and my loyalty is to supporting the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. That’s why I reported presidential corruption when I witnessed an effort to steal an election. That report was in classified channels and when called by Congress to testify about presidential corruption I did so, as required by law.

“You, Elon, appear to believe you can act with impunity and are attempting to silence your critics. I’m not intimidated.”

Let’s make it perfectly clear: Vindman is taking enormous personal risks. Trump is an admirer of Vladimir Putin, and an awful lot of Putin’s enemies “wake up dead.”

I’m not accusing Trump of killing his adversaries. But he has made it abundantly clear that he will use the entire power and might of the US government to go after his perceived enemies. And he has shown repeatedly that he has no loyalty to anyone other than himself, that everything is transactional with him, and that he doesn’t place a value on things like truth, functional government, or policies that benefit ordinary working- and middle-class people. So at the very least, Vindman faces risks of imprisonment, financial losses, tax audits, and more.

But Vindman understands something Trump’s and Musk’s apologists either don’t realize or don’t care about. When you give in to threats, you enable bullies and thugs to push for even more power and status. When you grovel at their feet, you empower them. And when you stand up to them, especially if you are putting yourself at risk, they shrink. They withdraw. They lose status.

Vindman is denying Musk, and by extension Trump, the power to make him voluntarily capitulate.

And meanwhile, when we see someone bullying someone, especially if the victim is showing fear, we are not powerless. We can intervene. If we know of people caught in immigration roundups or arrested as dissidents, we can bring visibility, tell the media, organize support. There are many resources and trainings to help with this. The important thing is to show the bullies that we do not approve and will not cooperate, that we will nonviolently defend the defenseless and withdraw support from the power structure.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Branding, Corporate Social Responsibility, Innovation, language, Marketing Techniques and Philosophies, Social and Economic Justice, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , ,

Do corporations treat innovation as a “virus”–a threat?Even a virus can look beautiful. Chanvge the perception of yur inovationn form a virus to a beautiful opportunity.

That’s the intriguing question Stowe Boyd asks in today’s newsletter. Along with Seth Godin, Stowe often helps me start my day.

Never Under-Estimate the Immune System | John Hagel warns us of the almost reflex rejection of new ideas by the innately conservative culture of organizations, and which may be the central weakness of organizations to the world of today:
Every large and successful institution has an immune system– a collection of individuals who are prepared to mobilize at the slightest sign of any “outside” ideas or people in order to ensure that these foreign bodies are neutralized and that the existing institution survives intact and can continue on course. Just like the immune system all organisms have, this institutional immune system is adept at recognizing foreign bodies as soon as they appear and very effective at protecting the institution from infection. It is in fact what has helped large institutions to survive – they are in fact “built to last.”
But here’s the paradox: the immune system that has given large institutions extraordinary resilience in the past may be the very thing that makes these institutions so vulnerable today.

I clicked through to the original article. Hagel continues:

In more stable times, institutional immune systems are very effective at keeping institutions focused and on course, resistant to the distractions that might lead to their downfall. In more rapidly changing and volatile signs, this same immune system can become deadly by resisting the very changes that are required for the survival of the institution…

I’ve been involved in large scale transformation efforts for decades now and there’s only one lesson that I really have to share from all that experience: never, ever under-estimate the power of the immune system of a large existing institution…

[W]e need to craft approaches to transformation that have the ability to respect the power of the immune system and find ways to minimize the risk that the immune system will mobilize to crush the transformation effort. [emphasis in original]

Pointing out that threat-based change increases resistance, Hagel lays out a detailed transformational change action map that positions change as an opportunity. It’s worth reading.

Progressives and environmentalists often try to motivate negatively: through guilt, shame, and fear. And as I think about it, I realize the Right also uses negative motivations, notably fear and greed. Both sides are Chicken Littles, screaming that the world will end. So the far-Left gets people sunk and worried that the world will end, while the far-Right gets people on a treadmill of hatred, xenophobia, etc.

Neither of these approaches create positive social change. But Hagel’s focus on showing the opportunities does.

Boyd focuses on workforce issues, Hagel apparently on organizational transformation. My own focus is on opportunities for transformational social/environmental change to intersect and overlap with business profitability. In my own work, I often talk about the need to motivate positively. I’ve spent the last five years demonstrating those opportunities. I show business how to identify/create/market profitable offerings that turn hunger and poverty into abundance, war into peace, and catastrophic climate change into planetary balance–not through guilt, shame, and fear, but through enlightened organizational and personal self-interest. Thus, my speaking and writing focuses on building profitability through those social and environmental change products and services. A successful initiative:

  • Finds money in making the world better
  • Creates brand loyalty leading to repeat and ever-larger purchases
  • Encourages customers to spread the word about your good work, inspiring an army of unpaid brand ambassadors
  • Reduces operating costs and internal resource consumption (in keeping with Hagel’s challenge to avoid igniting the corporate immune system by minimizing new initiative’s need for resources )
  • And of course, actually does improve things for those suffering the consequences of crises like hunger, poverty, war, and catastrophic climate change

Want to know more? Please visit https://goingbeyondsustainability.com

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail