How many of you actually have the Five Calls app? When was the last time you used it? Not enough of us, and that’s why I teach these classes. A lot of people say they want to use it, but then no one shows them how to make those phone calls. Get app at your app store.
How many of you actually have the Five Calls app? When was the last time you used it? Not enough of us, and that’s why I teach these classes. A lot of people say they want to use it, but then no one shows them how to make those phone calls. Get app at your app store.
How many of you actually have the Five Calls app? When was the last time you used it? Not enough of us, and that’s why I teach these classes. A lot of people say they want to use it, but then no one shows them how to make those phone calls.
We all know that those phone calls are some of the most efficient and effective tools we have as constituents to influence decisions about budgets that could significantly impact our country. So we need to get on board with this now because they’re getting ready to vote on important issues.
If you know how to use it, are you teaching others? The usual call volume in D.C. is only about 40 calls per minute for 435 Congress members—that’s just one call for every ten Congress critters! With Five Calls, we once got that number up to 3,000 calls per minute; however, it’s fallen off recently at a time when it’s crucial for us to be making these calls.
When I was in Chewelah, WA, I showed everyone how easy it is to use Five Calls—65 people were making calls at once! It was awesome! When I asked them if they thought it was easy many raised their hands affirmatively while others seemed unsure or hadn’t used it yet.
So here’s what you need: download the Five Calls app from your Play Store or Apple Store right now—this is your most effective tool for reaching out to your Congress members! Changing my language has been key in my success when communicating with officials; it’s essential that we speak their language if we want our voices heard.
Now, have you downloaded the app onto your phone? Great! Are you looking at the issues? Is it helpful? Can I get an amen?! Remember that each phone call represents approximately 10,000 voters because people often feel too intimidated or unqualified to confront someone directly about their concerns.
Five Calls provides information about current issues being voted on—it cuts through unnecessary topics and helps focus on what truly matters right now. Once you’ve made a call through this tool, remember you’re representing thousands of other voters!
If you’re nervous about talking directly with someone call after hours—call after 2 PM PST (5 pm EST) when they’ve likely gone home and leave a message instead!
When using Five Calls again today or tomorrow—or whenever—you’ll see your representative and senators listed, 3 in Washington state – one Congressman and two Senators; don’t forget those Senators even if they seem aligned with our views—they still need feedback from us!
It’s vital that we communicate our preferences clearly before votes happen so Congress knows where constituents stand—otherwise they might assume there’s no clear majority opinion and vote accordingly based solely on assumptions rather than facts.
Emails hold less weight compared with phone calls since they’re valued at around 1,000 voters each simply because there’s little chance anyone will respond personally—and canned responses don’t help either!
An actual letter carries slightly more value but requires far more effort than simply picking up a phone—it may take days before anyone sees your thoughts by which time decisions may already be made!
So let’s commit today: teach someone else how easy using Five Calls can be within five days.
We cannot remain comfortable anymore—we must start doing things differently starting today—and tomorrow we’ll share knowledge further afield until everyone understands its importance!
To find out more about 5 Calls contact Cynthia Hamilton and I’ll help connect you to class sessions available soon: bugsmind@comcast.net
CORE’s (Congress of Racial Equality) Rules for Direct Action became a model for nonviolent resistance worldwide. Their emphasis on preparation, discipline, and moral clarity ensured that their actions were both effective and ethically grounded. These principles continue to influence modern social movements, from environmental activism to racial justice campaigns. By combining strategic planning with cultural tools, CORE and similar organizations demonstrated the power of nonviolence in achieving systemic change.
CORE’S Rules for Direct Action full article CLICK HERE
History and Influence of CORE article CLICK HERE
Social justice is a complex and multifaceted challenge, but solutions are possible through systemic reforms, grassroots activism, and cultural shifts. By addressing inequality, promoting equity, and fostering inclusivity, we can create a more just and equitable society for all. These solutions require collaboration across sectors, sustained advocacy, and a commitment to the principles of human rights and dignity.
For full article CLICK HERE
Since Trump’s second election I have been hearing talk that “We’re all in this together”.
Ultimately, the true meaning of “all” lies not in its historical usage but in the ongoing efforts to make it **genuinely inclusive**—a call to action for continued progress in the pursuit of justice.
Let’s talk about this word “all”. What is your context? CLICK HERE for follow up.
Addressing social justice issues requires a combination of systemic reforms, grassroots activism, and cultural shifts. Below are potential solutions to key social justice challenges, drawing on principles of equity, participation, and access.
Social justice issues often arise from systemic inequalities and discrimination based on race, gender, class, or other identities. Solutions include:
Education is a cornerstone of social justice, but inequities in access and quality persist.
Economic disparities are a major driver of social injustice, affecting access to housing, healthcare, and basic needs.
Gender-based discrimination, including issues like the wage gap and harassment, remains a significant barrier to social justice.
Environmental issues disproportionately affect marginalized communities, making environmental justice a critical aspect of social justice.
The criminal justice system often perpetuates social injustice through systemic racism, mass incarceration, and police brutality.
Social justice requires fostering communities where everyone feels respected, supported, and included.
Technology can be a powerful tool for advancing social justice, but it must be used responsibly.
Social justice movements must recognize the interconnected nature of oppression, as individuals often face multiple forms of discrimination simultaneously.
Social justice is not confined to national borders; global cooperation is essential to address issues like poverty, climate change, and human rights abuses.
Social justice is a complex and multifaceted challenge, but solutions are possible through systemic reforms, grassroots activism, and cultural shifts. By addressing inequality, promoting equity, and fostering inclusivity, we can create a more just and equitable society for all. These solutions require collaboration across sectors, sustained advocacy, and a commitment to the principles of human rights and dignity.
The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) and its Rules for Direct Action were foundational to the civil rights movement in the United States. These rules were inspired by Mahatma Gandhi’s principles of nonviolence and were instrumental in shaping the strategies of CORE and other civil rights organizations, including Martin Luther King Jr.’s leadership in the broader movement. Below is an overview of CORE’s Rules for Action and how they compare to the principles of other organizations.
CORE’s Rules for Direct Action were designed to guide activists in their efforts to challenge racial segregation and discrimination through nonviolent resistance. These rules emphasized preparation, discipline, and a step-by-step approach to achieving change.
Other civil rights and social justice organizations adopted similar principles, though their approaches varied depending on their goals and leadership structures.
CORE’s leadership structure combined top-down guidance with grassroots participation:
During mass protests, leadership was often structured but flexible, allowing for both coordination and organic participation. For example:
CORE, like other civil rights organizations, used cultural tools to inspire and mobilize people:
CORE’s Rules for Direct Action became a model for nonviolent resistance worldwide. Their emphasis on preparation, discipline, and moral clarity ensured that their actions were both effective and ethically grounded. These principles continue to influence modern social movements, from environmental activism to racial justice campaigns. By combining strategic planning with cultural tools, CORE and similar organizations demonstrated the power of nonviolence in achieving systemic change.
History and Influence of CORE article CLICK HERE
Since Trump’s second election I have been hearing talk that “We’re all in this together”.
Ultimately, the true meaning of “all” lies not in its historical usage but in the ongoing efforts to make it **genuinely inclusive**—a call to action for continued progress in the pursuit of justice.
The phrase “justice for all” and the use of the word “all” in foundational American documents like the Constitution have often been sources of reflection, critique, and debate, especially when viewed through the lenses of **history, sociology, political science, and social justice**. While the language of “all” suggests inclusivity and universality, the reality of its application—particularly at the time of its writing—was far more exclusive.
Let’s unpack the concept of **”all”** in this context by examining its historical roots, implications, and how modern disciplines like sociology and political science have interpreted it.
—
When the United States Constitution was drafted in 1787, and later when the Bill of Rights was ratified, the language of these documents was steeped in **Enlightenment ideals** like liberty, equality, and justice. However, these ideals were **not universally applied**:
– The **Three-Fifths Compromise** (Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution) explicitly treated enslaved Black individuals as **three-fifths of a person** for purposes of representation and taxation. This was a political concession to Southern states that wanted to maximize their influence in Congress while maintaining the institution of slavery.
– The framers of the Constitution, many of whom were **slaveholders** (e.g., George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison), did not intend for “all” to mean **everyone** in society. The rights and freedoms outlined in the Constitution initially applied almost exclusively to **white male property owners**—excluding women, Native Americans, Black people (enslaved or free), and the poor.
– The phrase “justice for all”, while noble in principle, was in practice deeply hypocritical during this era. It excluded large swaths of the population, including those subjected to systemic inequalities like slavery and disenfranchisement.
—
Over time, the meaning of “all” has been challenged, expanded, and redefined through **historical struggles and movements**. Disciplines like history, sociology, and political science provide tools to understand how this concept has evolved.
1. **History and Archaeology**:
– Historical records and archaeological evidence demonstrate that societies often have **hierarchies of inclusion and exclusion**. In the U.S., the founding documents reflect the sociopolitical norms of the 18th century, where racial inequality and systemic oppression were institutionalized.
– The abolitionist movement, Civil War, Reconstruction, and Civil Rights Movement all illustrate moments in history where the **definition of “all” was contested and expanded** to include those previously excluded.
2. **Sociology and Social Sciences**:
– Sociologists examine how language like “all” is used to **construct social hierarchies** and enforce power dynamics. The rhetorical use of “all” creates an illusion of unity while masking structural inequalities.
– For example, the concept of **”colorblindness”** in modern racial discourse can be critiqued as a way to ignore systemic racism while claiming that “all” people are treated equally under the law.
3. **Political Science**:
– Political theorists often critique the **original exclusionary frameworks** of liberal democracies like the U.S. Constitution. Scholars like W.E.B. Du Bois and Angela Davis have argued that the rhetoric of equality in American politics has historically been a tool to **legitimize unequal systems**.
– The expansion of voting rights (e.g., 15th and 19th Amendments) and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are examples of how political movements have worked to make “all” more inclusive in practice.
4. **Social Work and Activism**:
– Social work emphasizes the need for **equity** (fairness) rather than equality (sameness). While “justice for all” implies equality, social workers advocate addressing **systemic barriers** that prevent marginalized groups from accessing justice.
– Activists today often challenge the gap between the **ideal of justice for all** and the realities of systemic racism, economic inequality, and social injustice.
—
The word “all” is both a promise and a paradox in American political and social discourse. Its meaning depends on who is included and excluded in its application. Historically, “all” has been a **selective term**, wielded to uphold existing power structures while denying rights to marginalized groups.
In a broader philosophical sense, “all” should imply **universality**, but achieving true inclusivity requires:
1. **Acknowledging historical exclusions** and their ongoing legacies (e.g., systemic racism, sexism, and classism).
2. **Critically examining language** and how it reinforces power dynamics.
3. **Taking action** to dismantle systems of oppression and expand the circle of inclusion.
—
The U.S. Constitution’s use of “all” in phrases like “justice for all” set an **aspirational standard**—one that the nation has struggled to meet. History, sociology, and other disciplines highlight the ways in which “all” has been used to exclude rather than include. However, they also offer tools for understanding and reshaping this concept to reflect a more equitable and just society.
Spokane, like many cities in the United State has seen its share of protests over the years. And year after year thousands show up at the Martin Luther King Rally and March. Who’s who of Black Spokane will show up. Black organizations and community centers show up. Church groups show up. Local press shows up. Politicians show up. They are ethnically and economically diverse. In 2011 there was a bomb found along the MLK March route. For the following year thousands more turned out for the march.
One of the current cliches is that we are all in it together. But how is this expressed in terms of social justice? In the constitution it says liberty and justice for all, but Blacks were counted as only 3/5ths of a person. The diversity of the nation has increased through immigration but we still all live in our silos and everyone was not and is not considered equal. One of most segregated organizations are our churches. But now when we are on the verge of a tyranny when everyone is losing their rights suddenly we are all in it together. But our protests are still segregated. The only diverse marches and rallies here in Spokane are the Martin Luther King rally and march in January of each year.
Our protests are not diverse. Think of these examples:
Civil Rights Movement (1960s -1970s)
Vietnam War Protests (1960s -1970s)
Environmental Movements (1970s – present)
Indigenous Rights
LGBTQ+ Rights
Black Lives Matter (2010s – present)
Protest Anti-Semitism
Protest Anti-Muslim
Open Housing
Homeless Rights
Economic and Labor Protests
Anti-Trump Protests
Women’s March
How do we all work together? When people leave the meetings and rallies they return to their homogeneous communities. Check out the following links for things that can be done in-between the significant emotional events of major protests.
Pass this out at every march, rally and meeting you attend
Practitioners of nonviolent struggle have an entire arsenal of “nonviolent weapons” at their disposal. Listed below are 198 of them, classified into three broad categories: nonviolent protest and persuasion, noncooperation (social, economic, and political), and nonviolent intervention. A description and historical examples of each can be found in volume two of The Politics of Nonviolent Action, by Gene Sharp
For full article CLICK HERE
# Immediate Action Strategies
The success of these strategies depends on coordinated action across multiple sectors and sustained commitment to democratic principles. The research suggests that combining legal mechanisms, civil society action, and international support provides the most effective approach to protecting and restoring democratic institutions.
