Global Development: Views from the Center
« Can other countries replicate Botswana's past? (Can Botswana?) | Main | María and José Know How to Spend Their Remittances »
October 16, 2006
Stand Up & Vote (RED): Translating Conscious Consumerism and Advocacy into the U.S. Elections
Posted by Sarah Jane Staats at 01:49 PM
In the days preceding the October 17th United Nations International Day for the Eradication of Poverty we have seen the launch of PRODUCT (RED) in America, led by Bono and Bobby Shriver to engage American corporations and consumers in the fight against HIV/AIDS, and “Stand Up Against Poverty,”a worldwide effort to set a Guinness World Record for the most people literally “standing up” against poverty.
Both activities draw our focus again towards global poverty, Americans who care about it, and individuals who continue to find innovative ways to respond. But can we translate conscious consumerism and grassroots advocacy into political action?
The PRODUCT (RED) Manifesto summarizes the ingenious business model:
We believe that when consumers are offered this choice, and the products meet their needs, they will choose (RED). And when they choose (RED) over non-(RED), then more brands will choose to become (RED) because it will make good business sense to do so. And more lives will be saved.
Simple, right? So why don’t we apply this common sense business model to our own model of U.S. democracy. It would go something like this:
We believe that when Americans are offered this choice, and the government meets their needs, they will choose (RED) politicians who care and vote for policies that help reduce global poverty. And when they choose (RED) politicians over non-(RED) politicians, then more politicians will choose to become poverty-focused because it will make good political sense to do so. And more lives will be saved.
Let’s hope the momentum generated by consumers, corporations, and other Americans who care about global poverty and believe that providing assistance to poorer countries reflects American values of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as well as our own national security interests and economic well-being, is infused into the political discourse in the run-up to the U.S. elections on November 7, 2006. (See Why Global Development Matters for the U.S. for more details.)
May we see a wave of people, dressed in (RED), (RED) iPod ear buds in place, marching to the polls to vote (RED).
For more on the launch of PRODUCT (RED), see Bono and Oprah walk into a store to do some shopping...
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
/mt/mt-tb.cgi/660
Comments
Great commentary. This is exactly what I was thinking this morning when I read it in the Washington Post.
Posted by: Elizabeth at October 16, 2006 03:50 PM
Our Stand Up event here in Columbus, OH. for the ONE Campaign was a big success. And the interest shown in (RED) was huge.
We had over 200 people come out on a Sunday afternoon and listen to guest speakers, bands, and our own Mayor Michael Coleman declare Columbus a City of ONE.
We also had 110 people sign the ONE Voter Pledge, stating that they would keep in mind issues regarding extreme poverty and global HIV/AIDS when they go to the polls in November.
There is a movement in America and around the world that grows stronger every day. The tide is turning, and we're going to win this battle.
Posted by: Mike Beaumont at October 16, 2006 04:33 PM
It would be nice if "red" or development and poverty were a voting issue. Unfortunately, in opinion polling they NEVER are. So for now, politicians can do whatever they wish in regards to these issues and not fear a voter backlash (or reward).
We have a long, but very important road ahead - to make global poverty and justice as important to voters as other issues.
In the meantime, we will have to rely on - and focus resources on - cultivating key champions, like Bono and Shriver. Likewise, finding and encouraging a few critical decision-makers in Congress and the Administration are critically important.
Posted by: Gawain Kripke at October 17, 2006 11:06 AM
I give Bono a lot of credit for leading an innovative commercial partnership which creates a win-win for the companies and the global fund. At the same time, I find it sad that charity has to be sold through some kind of a fairy tale-- that you buy a red ipod and that somehow a life is magically saved on the other side of the planet. I was amazed that on Oprah's show virtually no mention was made of the recipient organization-- the Global fund and how successful (or not) they have been. The bulk of Global fund money is still going to disfunctional government's or to NGO's who are approved by CCM's dominated by governments. GF has some tangible achievements, but there are some significant downsides and continued risks. Their programs tend to be short term, overly vertical and highly dependent on leveraging resources and infrastructure which may or may not be there tomorrow. Keeping people on ARV's is anything but a short term activity. Maybe the RED campaign is part of the solution in making the GF less dependent on political whims, but consumers would do well to ask some hard questions about where the money is going, who is using it and to what effect.
Posted by: Jeffrey Barnes at October 17, 2006 12:34 PM