Category Archives: My New Favorite Thing

Social by Social, for social workers

Everyone likes free stuff, right?

And when it’s free stuff that

  • Inspires you with awesome examples of how people are using emerging technologies to do amazing things in the world
  • Gives you a glossary of all the terms you need to know to live, and advocate, in the high-tech world (would be great to share with a confused or skeptical CEO!)
  • Provides social organizations, working on social problems, from a foundation of social conscience, with a guide to shape their work with social technologies
  • Shares expert advice for those currently engaged in social change campaigns, on how to integrate technology into your work
  • And lives the transparency credo that “social” is all about

    Well, that’s my very most favorite kind of free stuff!

    Social by Social is a free ebook that believes, as I do, that we should use technology to do the things that matter–who wants to read on Twitter that ants are taking over my kitchen? But what about using text messages to remind people to vote in the primary election? They call for fewer ‘cool new tools’ and more thinking about what we need in order to improve our world. They see technology the way that our organizations should–as a trigger, something that equips us to do what we should, and want, to do anyway (get our clients engaged in politics, connect our donors to advocacy, mobilize grassroots action on legislation) but found harder to do without these applications.

    This is the most fun “book” on social media for social good that you’ll ever see–it has a ton of hyperlinks embedded right into it, and quotes from super-smart, super-savvy people who write whole books on this stuff themselves, and enough how-to suggestions (how to: get buy-in from your organization to experiment with social technologies, avoid gadget-chasing, set goals for your experiments, monitor conversations about your work, use video, events, and photos in your campaigns, give up the search for ‘control’ in order to let the relationships you’ll need for action flourish, measuring return on investment) to make it a real resource to keep by your computer. It’s also British, and you know how i feel about the UK.

    But, by far, the best part is the inspirations. I’ll have posts on a couple of these individually over the next few weeks (okay, maybe months!), but check them out–you’ll find not only inspiration for your own online advocacy, but probably some campaigns that you want to participate in, too.

    And then it has a section on what these new technologies will mean for different people, trying to improve the world from a different sector’s vantage point. My favorite section is on campaigners: how can you not love someone who advises activists for social justice to “be promiscuous”–go where people are, don’t assume that anyone is closed to your message, and connect with people so that they become part of your movement.

    And, finally, I love that this project used the very technologies, and the very same ideology, or approach to the work, that it advocates for others. By living what they recommend, the Social by Social team provides a model for what this new engagement might look like for organisations (um, I mean, organizations).

    Happy social-izing!

  • Your very own MoveOn

    CitizenSpeak is a free email advocacy service for grassroots organizations (or, really, judging from current campaigns, also for individuals with a passion for a particular cause) that allows you to create a unique web address for your campaign, which you can then email as a link to your list of supporters. Obviously, you might have the ability to do some of these functions through your own agency website. But, if you’re a very small organization without much independent website capacity (like a neighborhood organization or a group of parents or a youth group) or, conversely, a very large, bureaucratic organization where getting approval to make a change to the agency’s website is an advocacy campaign in itself, then CitizenSpeak could be very helpful to you. Some of the features that I particularly like:

  • You can create sites in English o en español. Nice.
  • It comes with reports, so that you can collect personal statements from your supporters (to figure out their own connections to the issue and/or further refine your appeal) and track participation rates, both as an internal evaluation tool and to motivate additional action.
  • CitizenSpeak also has a blog, that includes highlights of successful campaigns using the technology and some tips. It’s awesome to see connectors connecting themselves. There’s a whole list of case studies, too, many of which are really, super inspiring.
  • There’s a list of active campaigns on the site, so you can make sure that no one has a campaign exactly like yours underway (or connect with them if they do!)
  • Did I mention that it’s free?

    I’d love to hear from anyone who has used CitizenSpeak for advocacy, to get your take on it. And I’ll be expecting some emails from some of you, too!

  • They’re on our team–Nonprofit(s) Vote!

    I love it when I find awesome like-minded people doing great things that I think will be super-helpful and interesting to you all. This definitely falls into that category: Nonprofit Vote.

    It’s a blog with information for people in the nonprofit sector interested in nonpartisan voter engagement. Right now, they have a lot of information about the Census and why it matters for future elections, upcoming primaries, and continuing fallout from the Supreme Court decision on money and politics.

    They also just launched their 2010 election cycle resources, with state-by-state resources, an awesome voter engagement toolkit, and a FREE webinar series on how to do civic engagement through your nonprofit (can you tell why I love these people?)! They’re very broad-based, in terms of their view of the nonprofit sector–the issues that scroll in the background include hunger, arts, immigration, environment, housing, literacy, disabilities, human services, youth, families, job training…I think we can all find something there that speaks to our work.

    In addition to this commentary and encouragement (friend them on Facebook; I did!), they have some concrete tools for nonprofits to do voter registration, Get-Out-the-Vote, and electoral reform work as a part of their overall operations. All of their information is very relevant for social work advocates committed to civic engagement with those we serve.

    Check it out; I’d love to hear what you think, and please, if you know of other resources to help nonprofits this election year, share them in the comments. And someone, please, send a thank-you note to the Nonprofit Vote folks–this has to be my record shortest post ever!

    An idea that needs to be revived–Votercall.org

    photo credit, moonjazz, via Flickr

    This is officially my most favoritest thing in the whole world right now. I am so totally bummed out that it doesn’t seem to be activated for the 2010 election, and trying to figure out how/who can bring it back!

    It brings all of my favorite things: technology, crowdsourcing, progressive politics, and those civic-minded Millennials–together in a totally awesome idea: together, let’s get out the vote in November (and August, I’d add)!

    In the 2004 elections, Votercall created a database of newly-registered voters compiled from organizations like True Majority, Rock the Vote, and Res Publica, and to allow anyone anywhere to access names of these newly-registered voters (this is public information, folks) and call them to encourage them to vote in the upcoming election. Even better, many of these new voters are themselves Millennials, totally comfortable with the idea of building relationships with unknown, like-minded peers and of sharing information through an open-source public platform like this. You sign in, access names, and make a call. The site has frequently asked questions to guide callers through the process and resources towards which to direct voters with questions.

    In 2004, on the Monday before elections, VoterCall reports that 50,000 volunteers all over the country, working on their own, were making 1000 calls/minute. Awesome.

    So, here’s my question: why no VoterCall in 2010? Does anyone know of a similar, broad-based, crowdsourced get-out-the-vote campaign underway? Or how I can help to start one? Or how you’re going to help to start one? Even once we achieve universal, same-day registration, we still have to get people to the polls, and this is the most innovative and cost-efficient model I’ve seen.

    I wish I was a Millennial: the generation that could turn it around

    So, now that you’ve watched fireworks explode, enjoyed time with family and friends, and celebrated the democratic traditions that make this country great, it’s time to turn our attention to the reality that it is time, again this year, to make it great again: It’s an election year!

    This week and next, Classroom to Capitol will focus on electoral trends, issues, and strategies that, together, can set the foundation for successful enactment and implementation of the progressive policies about which social workers so deeply care. We know that it does matter who is elected, that our clients’ voices will be heard differently by different elected officials, and that participation in electoral processes, in itself, holds potential to change clients’ lives. Primaries are less than a month away in many states, and it will be November before we know it. Ya es hora!

    Image credit, futuremajority.com

    When I read Millennial Makeover, I couldn’t stop thinking about my cousin Caleb. He’s a junior in high school and chair of “Coalition”, which is an organization started by some peers a couple of years ago to…combat child slavery and human trafficking around the world. Seriously. They mainly hold fundraisers: selling concessions at football games, organizing concerts, hosting a 5K…and now they’re getting into advocacy, too. They use social media prolifically (I know, because I’m friends with him on Facebook!) And they make sure that all of their members register to vote when they’re 18. I mean, I was pretty hard-core social justice as a teenager, and I wasn’t involved in anything like this. It’s awesome. And, according to generational experts, it’s a movement.

    Millennial Makeover has to be the most optimistic book I’ve read in a long time. It’s like being with Caleb and his friends for an afternoon–they use some acronyms that I don’t immediately understand, but their enthusiasm for justice and fervent belief that they can help to achieve it is infectious. Here, the authors assert that the Millennials are a ‘civic’ generation, characterized by an orientation to societal challenges, problem solving, and institution building. They point to the 2008 Presidential election as a highpoint in this generational cycle (actually begun a few years earlier)–rising voter participation, unprecedented involvement by young voters, and positivism about the role of government in improving people’s lives. And they claim that, historically, most generational shifts like this last about 40 years.

    Not yet convinced that’s there’s reason to be excited? The authors point to the New Deal and the presidency of FDR as the last civic realignment, and we know what that period did for social workers and the causes we care about.

    I won’t try to restate all of the considerable (and really fascinating) evidence the authors include to draw comparisons between the GI Generation (the last civic generation) and the Millennials (relative diversity, adoption of new technologies, group orientation). Perhaps the most important parallel, for electoral purposes, is the most obvious one: both generations are larger than the ones immediately preceding them. That means that, quite soon, the Millennials will be big enough to make their preferences dominant, which is why it’s important for social work advocates and organizers to understand what those preferences are and how to mobilize them. We know that demographics are not destiny, though, and that social movements are built and sustained, not magically derivative of vital statistic patterns.

    So, what we need to “get” about Millennials to build electoral and broad-based movements that will make their power felt:

  • The old divisions don’t work–we need new coalitions.
    Identity politics will have to evolve to resonate with Millennials, whose social lives don’t break down along the same lines. While, importantly, Millennials’ neighborhoods and schools are highly segregated, their own attitudes about race, sexual orientation, and gender roles are much more egalitarian than current generations in power, which opens up considerable opportunity for progressive policy, but only if we can find new ‘hooks’ to bring people into politics (around ideas, not identity).

  • They’re not just shiny new gadgets–they’re whole new ways of connecting.
    We know that nonprofits, campaigns, and social movements will fail to authentically engage Millennials (and, quite possibly, anyone) if we view social media and other emerging technologies as just new platforms on which to broadcast our same messages. Millennials just don’t relate to technology that way; Caleb hardly ever buys CDs and rarely even subscribes to e-newsletters, but he shares weblinks and photos and other content through social media all the time, and creates his own content, too, around the justice issues he’s passionate about.

  • They’re not kids, and their ways of doing things are just as valid.
    There has been some good debate in the nonprofit world about how organizations (including the Generation X and Baby Boomers who currently control them) need to adjust some of their practices and behaviors to be more open to Millennial participation and influence. Candidates and campaigns will have to learn this, too. Some might dismiss this as pandering, but I think it’s essential that we ask ourselves two questions: first, aren’t there some significant ways in which the “Millennial way” of doing things is actually superior to current practice (um, transparent, relational?) and, second, what do we possibly have to gain from alienating a large group of enthusiastic advocates/voters for many of our causes? Exactly. For me, the biggest challenge of this will be getting decentralization rightyou know how I feel about devolution for its own sake, but Millennials will want to see nimble and responsive organizations (and government), and they’ll have good evidence on their side from all of their experiments with collaborative decision-making.

  • This is not a phase; it’s a shift.
    There’s considerable data that the political orientations of a generation are much less pliable than some would think; in other words, today’s 20-year-olds are likely to have many of the same core values when they’re 40. And 70. For many Millennials, for example, their belief in the importance of a strong government was cemented by the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the current economic recession, both of which occurred during their formative years. Our challenge, then, is to connect our policy issues to these core values in a way that will resonate–as usual, framing is key.

    So, Millennials, I know you’ll have something to say about all of this! How do you view your world? And these 2010 elections? How are the organizations where you’re working, volunteering (in record numbers!), and advocating including you and your peers (or not)? How can we ‘get it right’, to turn it around?

  • Everyone likes pretty pictures

    Map of Ex-Offender Employment Options, from www.spatialinformationdesignlab.org

    So it’s been established that I am very spatially challenged. Still true. My oldest son spends practically the entire time that we’re at our local petting zoo just looking at the map that shows the place, and he calls from his carseat in the back of our van, “Mommy, why are we turning around again?” whenever Mommy is trying to go to a new place.

    And he’s only three. Sigh.

    But, I can certainly appreciate a great map, and how this kind of visual presentation can help people to connect with data in new ways, and, most importantly, expose new patterns and new insights that can transform what we do with data, too.

    That’s why I’m so excited about NonprofitMapping. It’s a project that is collecting data about the impact of the current recession on the nonprofit landscape across the country, and, interestingly, actually rating states based on the quality of their information about the nonprofit sector. When states can see themselves on a map as being deficient in what they collect and disseminate about the existence (and, hopefully, soon, the effectiveness) of nonprofits in their state, it should lead to a more systematic examination of the sector, that can only serve our interests of better defining our value and articulating our impact. I don’t totally agree with the premise that the loss of nonprofits in a given area is necessarily a bad thing, and I even have hope that some of the reduction in numbers of nonprofits during this recession is a sign that less-effective ones are fading away and that good programs are finding ways to consolidate and grow to scale, but I am completely on board with their open-source strategy and ambitious goal of changing how we think about and look at nonprofit organizations nationwide. For social work advocates, who have such compelling stories to tell and, increasingly, even good data at our fingertips, the next challenge is to figure out how to tell those stories in powerful and visual ways, in order to resonate with today’s audience.

    One of my favorite parts about NonprofitMapping, then, is not even their own work but their “blog roll”, of sorts, where they list other awesome mapping projects, like the Justice Mapping Center (criminal justice and policy information), and the completely awesome Map4Change (‘discover’ injustice by looking at maps like this one, and then click on their site to take action and find groups of others concerned about the same issues!!!).

    The folks at MapTogether will definitely be hearing from me–they provide free map-related training and tools for nonprofit and community groups. They have a free guide to GIS and online mapping tools that even I can understand. They’re also working to make maps more accessible, including braille and audio features.

    In today’s crowded information environment, social justice advocates need every advantage to help our appeals receive the attention they deserve. This is especially true in the context of the transparency movement, which will (assuming it succeeds) increase the amount of information available and increase, therefore, the importance of finding ways to make sense of the data. We may never be into orienteering like my husband and son, but we can rely on these outstanding partners to help us better use the rapidly-evolving tools at our disposable to, pardon the pun, put our issues on the map.

    And, while you’re at it, there’s this neighborhood where my son’s friend lives that I ALWAYS get lost in…

    When you’re #@! angry, use Twitter petitions to get results!

    Nonprofit Tech 2.0 had a post highlighting the act.ly Twitter-based petitions and how different causes are using them to create significant impact.

    This stuff is seriously cool.

    Basically, the idea is that, since so many elected officials and corporations and government agencies are using Twitter to get their messages across, there is a whole new avenue for influencing them, too, via their Twitter accounts.

    So, advocates are starting these Twitter petition campaigns to send tweets to folks like President Obama, Senators Harry Reid and Chuck Grassley, CitiBank, and the Prime Minister of England, directly to their official Twitter accounts, to communicate a specific (obviously brief) message: end Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell, advance the National Labor Relations Board nominees, stop blocking health care reform, support efforts to stop climate change, etc…

    To use the service, you can either create your own petition or “sign” someone else’s petition by sending one of the tweets directly to a target.

    I like that it’s free, it should (at least initially) grab some attention from the target because it’s a new media (and, in many cases, there’s someone relatively high-up within the organization monitoring the stream, unlike the person who usually answers the phone), it’s integrated into a technology that delivers it (rather than, say, using Twitter to ask people to make a phone call or send an email), there’s feedback regarding if/how the target has responded (and when), and it has the potential to not just mobilize this specific ‘ask’ from your known supporters but also bring in new supporters and attract their interest in your overall work (because they can see who started the petition, and make the decision to follow you–it’s a button right next to the “sign and tweet” button).

    I took action on a couple of petitions; it only took a few minutes, and, of course, those tweets go out to all of my followers, too, which builds my connection to those issues and potentially brings new folks on board, too.

    Who will you put in “the hot seat”?

    Community Organizers & Big Money

    photo credit: dgilder, via Flickr

    In my work with national coalitions on immigrant rights, I had the opportunity to work closely with several individuals from the Center for Community Change, a kind of capacity-building organization for community organizing efforts that convenes regional/national efforts, provides training, coordinates the efforts of affiliated organizers, and, through the Linchpin campaign, attempts to convince a larger swath of large donors to invest in community organizing.

    I really love the major premise of this guide, designed to help community organizers connect with (and fundraise from) major donors: that, since fundraising is really about building relationships to work together towards common goals, community organizers have tremendous potential to be really, really good at it. This is a critical assertion, because, all too often, nonprofit organizations that include community organizers have them segregated in an organizing department, away from fundraising, away from Board operations, even sometimes away from everything else that the organization does. Not only is this bad for morale and the reputation of the organizing profession, as well as bad for how organizations come to see organizing as somehow apart from direct service or other work, but it’s also bad for fundraising, because the organization can’t paint the fullest or most compelling picture for donors about what their work means (and they’re losing the participation of their often most effective communicators).

    On the whole, it’s a tremendously hopeful document, full of quotes from real, live, major donors who support community organizing as well as sample scenarios about how community organizers can go after that money. It also includes some good explanations of what community organizing is–kind of the ‘elevator speech’ that all of us need to be able to deliver to make our work make sense to those unfamiliar with it.

    I have only limited experience in approaching major donors for advocacy and organizing support, but, even through the lens of those memories, much of this resonated. The most significant learnings I took from the guide:

  • There is money to be found for community organizing among major donors: 94% of those surveyed give to community organizing, but 42% give fewer than 25% of their donations to organizing. Of particular interest are social venture donors, those entrepreneurial types who may be more willing to risk than others, naturally curious, and understanding about organizations’ needs for capacity building.
  • Community organizers are often our own worst enemies when it comes to cultivating major donors. We’re used to thinking about members and their financial capacity, so we often don’t ask major donors for enough. We’re often uncomfortable with wealthy people, but if we get over that and learn to see donors, too, as complex people with passions and fears, we can 1:1 organize them just as we would any prospect.
  • There are some real advantages to major donors as compared to foundations: no proposal to write (usually), quicker decisions, easier to build relationships and influence, can also contribute time/relationships with others, and give unrestricted funds! There is some evidence that they are less vulnerable to economic downturns, too, with many even planning to increase their giving in 2009-2010 to compensate for losses elsewhere.
  • We need to get over our hang ups about asking people for money. They make a great point: we have no problem asking poor people to give up their time, drive hours to the state capital, sit in for an action, but then we hesitate to ask rich people to give to our worthy cause? We need to stop apologizing for the ask and, instead, prepare as we would for any encounter with a target.
  • While it’s important to involve leaders in the cultivation meetings and, where appropriate, in the ‘ask’, organizers need to learn that cultivating major donors may not be a time when our backseat approach works. Donors want to build relationships with organizers, too, and we need to find ways to do that.
  • Major donors can be a positive force in the field of community organizing. They are pushing for better evaluation of the cost/benefit of organizing investments, funding projects that can assess short and long-term outcomes, and raising the importance of connecting organizing efforts into a broader progressive movement. They believe in organizing, connect it with hope, and articulate how it supports cooperative solutions to our society’s greatest problems. Combined with what the report cites as increasing awareness of community organizing and civic engagement (in part because of Obama’s election as a former community organizer), that all bodes very well for community organizers and, more importantly, those with whom they work.

    It’s an easy read. Please, read it, start a list of 5-10 people who could move into ‘major donor’ category for your organization, chart out a strategy for beginning and relationship with them, and practice your asks with a friend/colleague (I’d be happy to practice with you!). We can’t afford to leave any money on the table! And if you have successfully raised money from major donors to support your organizing, please share some of your experiences!

  • Advocacy within Deep Online Relationships: Strategy for Discussion Boards

    One of my favorite blogs, Community Organizer 2.0 (which I like not just for the content but because the author is totally genuine and generous and fun) had a feature a few months ago on free monitoring tools that nonprofit organizations can use to keep track of online conversations. One of those she mentioned was BoardTracker, a tool for monitoring conversations in a variety of discussion forum threads. She and I “talked” back and forth a bit about advocacy in discussion boards, and how a tool like this could help, and then I spent some time playing around with BoardTracker and thinking about organizing and advocacy within the discussion board context.

    So, here are some thoughts on how you might get started in using these powerful relationships to mobilize for advocacy, and a story that might give you some inspiration. I’d love to hear from you: are you currently participating in a discussion board/forum? If so, do advocacy issues ever come up there? Do your clients use discussion boards as part of their support network? How might you incorporate advocacy into those formats?

    My first thought, which I think will resonate with you if you’ve participated in discussion boards before, is that you need to understand the ‘culture’ of the board before thinking about how you’d interject an advocacy or organizing ‘ask’ into it. In some cases, using BoardTracker to monitor conversations and then jumping on to guide participants to advocacy opportunities, would be appropriate, and it’s certainly an easier way to keep track of what’s happening on those multiple channels. BoardTracker allows you to choose specific threads to monitor, or to choose those within certain categories, so you could start by “lurking”/listening to these threads, not just for content (what’s being said), but also for some of the norms around posts and some of the parameters of the relationships among participants. In some forums, particularly those dealing with certain diagnoses, or with family/relationship issues, someone dropping in out of ‘nowhere’ to link people to an advocacy initiative would be not just ineffective (because people tend to disregard posts from those they don’t know) but, worse, intrusive and even kind of creepy (people often forget that discussion boards are public and become quite intimate in their disclosures and, indeed, some discussion boards, while nominally open to the public, do require registration to view or post).

    This means that, depending on your issue and how you want to connect advocacy to discussion boards, you may want to invest in really becoming a participant in a couple of boards where the content or orientation of the participants is closely linked to your message. Be transparent in who you are and why you’re there, but also (just as in face-to-face organizing) be willing to provide some of the support that brings people to discussion boards in the first place. Online, we sometimes forget that coming out of the blue with a request for action is off-putting; we need to build relationships here, first, too.

    For many social work organizers/advocates, it makes sense for you to figure out where your clients/constituents/leaders are already engaged in discussion boards, and how you might build on those relationships as part of your advocacy strategy. Even better, cultivate the leadership of one of those participants to handle the discussion board work him/herself, so that, then, the advocacy piece is coming directly from someone who is already a bonafide member of that tightly-knit community.

    And, finally, I think discussion boards have some features that make them particularly well-suited to advocacy work online. They often have people at different points of their ‘process’ (be it related to addictions, parenting, mental illness, physical illness, unemployment…), which provides a sort of built-in mentoring and ensures that at least some participants are no longer in such dire crisis that they can’t see beyond today. They provide fairly intense support, in many cases, which can help people to take steps with which they might not otherwise be comfortable, and facilitates reflection after taking action. And, while relationships are deep, they’re also fluid. On most boards, anyone whose circumstances meet those of the other members and is open and honest about his/her participation is welcome, making discussion boards not only a place to start but also a place to send and groom new and emerging leaders, too.

    So, now, a story: For several years, as my husband and I struggled with infertility, I spent A LOT of time on infertility-related discussion boards. I got to know many of the women (they’re almost all women) on those boards, and there were certainly days whenthey understood me better than anyone else. It was a dark and very difficult time of my life, and their experiences and support were crucial to my survival. Still, I was still an organizer, and an advocate, and so I often thought about how to harness some of the power of those women, their knowledge, their passion, and their relationships, but in a way that would help them to heal and grow, not exploit what they had worked so hard to create–a safe space. That’s critical, I believe, to advocacy within discussion boards: we have to honor the participants and their community.

    I’ll never forget the day when I sat down to the forum and found that one of the members had delivered, after several years of struggle with infertility, a stillborn child. Even today, it makes me cry to write about it. We were all devastated for her and scared for ourselves: after coming so close to bringing home her baby, she had suffered a horrible tragedy. And the same thing could happen to us. A week or so after her first post, she began to express her anger at a system that denied her the regular ultrasounds that would have detected the umbilical cord wrapped around her child’s neck and that didn’t tell her about counting kicks until it was too late. She wanted to do something so that the death didn’t seem so unbearably senseless; she wanted to come together with this community to make some good out of tragedy.

    And, so, gently, I asked if she wanted some help putting together an advocacy campaign to push for state legislation that would require health care professionals to provide patients with information about fetal death and to create standards for insurance reimbursement for additional ultrasounds. She had found a lot of information, in frantic late-night Internet searches, and she pulled it together. I helped her plot a strategy, and other participants came forward to express willingness to take up the cause where they lived, too. She connected with experts in the field who gave us guidance on model legislation and clinical best practices. And many of us also reached out offline to our friends and colleagues who, while not a part of this infertility community, cared about this issue, too.

    I can’t say that we experienced across-the-board success, honestly; one of the challenges with legislative advocacy in this venue is that, while the legislative changes require considerable work within each state (and a fairly long time trajectory), the participants in this group moved in and out as their own situations changed (I, myself, didn’t stay active with the boards after I had my oldest son), and we didn’t have a critical mass in any one state. But we did see some bills introduced, some additional provider education, and, perhaps most importantly, a new tool for our collective healing, and a new sense of our common capacity, alongside people with whom our relationships were as ‘real’ as could be, even though they were always virtual.

    April Fool’s! But not really!

    So I had the thought that I’d put something totally awesome on here for April Fool’s Day, like some really exciting announcement about the end of global poverty or something…and then I realized that it would just be depressing, really, to read something that jazzed you up that much, and then be told, “just kidding!” I mean, we’re activists for social justice. We’ve had enough disappointment already, right?

    So my next idea was to write something totally horrible, like the criminalization of hunger, or something, and then I realized that, as bad as things are today, probably no one would be that surprised by anything I could think up, and so the “just kidding” would be only mildly relieving, and yet still depressing, because it would serve as a reminder of just how hard we are to shock these days.

    And, THEN, I heard this!

    It’s from all the way back last November, but it was stuck on my iPod somehow, and I was listening to old podcasts the other day while doing one of my marathon cooking sessions for the kids. And I hit “play” again just to hear it again. It’s totally brilliant stuff.

    Basically, if you don’t want to listen, the deal is that there is a group of wealthy Germans who are agitating to get the German government to increase taxes for rich people, voluntarily, with the only caveat that (drumroll, please) the money raised by the tax increase go to social services and ‘human infrastructure’. Seriously. Contrast this to my reflections last winter on pathological wealth.

    And, in what has to be my new favorite thing, the podcast also led me to Responsible Wealth, an organization of rich people dedicated to working for fair (read: progressive) taxation in the U.S. They count among their biggest public policy victories the efforts to sustain the inheritance tax, and their major agenda for the next congressional session is the repeal of the Bush-era tax cuts.

    Now, truth be told, we need an economic structure (tax policy included) such that no one accummulates an excessive amount of wealth (and wealth-related power) in the first place, but, in all fairness, a lot of these folks articulate that vision, too. Imagine what our world would look like if we all espoused the “I have enough. I don’t need more than enough. And we have real social needs,” mantra that I heard from one of the leaders of the German group exhort.

    April Fool’s Day. Not really. Let today’s message be, instead, that we’re all “fools,” so to speak, if we limit ourselves to thinking within the current constraints instead of envisioning how we could totally reshape our society if we played by different rules, engaged with totally new partners, and imagined totally different limits.

    Indeed.