Israel, with US complicity, is committing genocide in Gaza through the mass starvation of the population as well as direct mass murders and the physical destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure. Israel does the dirty work. The US Government funds it and provides diplomatic cover through its UN veto. Palantir, through “Lavendar,” provides the AI for efficient mass murder. Microsoft, through Azure cloud services, and Google and Amazon, through the “Nimbus” initiative, supply core tech infrastructure for the Israeli army.

This marks 21st-century war crimes as an Israel-US public-private partnership. Israel’s mass starvation of the people of Gaza has been confirmed by the United Nations, Amnesty International, The Red Cross, Save the Children, and many others. The Norwegian Refugee Council, along with 100 organizations, has been calling for an end to Israel’s weaponization of food relief. This is the first time that mass starvation has been officially confirmed in the Middle East.

The scale of the starvation is staggering. Israel is systematically depriving food to more than 2 million people. Over half a million Palestinians face catastrophic hunger and at least 132,000 children aged under five are at risk of death from acute malnutrition. The scale of the horror is thoroughly documented by Haaretz in a recent article entitled “Starvation is Everywhere.” Those who are able to somehow access food distribution sites are routinely fired on by the Israeli army.

Israel has crossed the clear line into the darkest crimes—starving civilians to death and shooting them as they line up, emaciated, for food. There is no further line to cross, nor time to lose.

As a former US ambassador to Israel has recently explained, the intention to starve the population has been present from the start. Israel’s Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu recently declared, “there is no nation that feeds its enemies.” Minister Bezalel Smotrich recently stated, “whoever doesn’t evacuate, don’t let them. No water, no electricity; they can die of hunger or surrender. This is what we want.”

Yet despite these glaring declarations of genocide, US representatives at the UN repeatedly deny the facts and cover for Israel’s war crimes. The US alone vetoed Palestine’s admission to the UN in 2024. The US now denies visas to Palestinian leaders to come to the UN in September, yet another violation of international law.

The US has used its power and especially its veto in the UN Security Council to abet Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians and to block even the most basic humanitarian responses. The world is aghast but seems paralyzed before the Israel-US murder machine. Yet the world can act, even in the face of US intransigence. The US will stand naked and alone in its criminal complicity with Israel.

Let’s be clear. The overwhelming voice of humanity is on the side of the people of Palestine. Last December, 172 countries, with more than 90 percent of the world population, voted to support Palestine’s right to self-determination. Israel and the US were essentially isolated in their opposition. Similar overwhelming majorities are repeatedly expressed on behalf of Palestine and against the actions of Israel.

Israel’s thuggish government now counts solely on US support, but even that may not be there for long. Despite Trump’s intransigence and US government attempts to stifle pro-Palestinian voices, 58% of Americanswant the UN to recognize the State of Palestine, compared to only 33% who do not. Moreover, 60% of Americans oppose Israel’s actions in Gaza.

Here are practical steps that the world can take.

First, Türkiye has set the correct course by ending all economic, trade, shipping, and air links with Israel. Israel is currently a rogue state, and Türkiye is right to treat it as such until Israeli-created mass starvation ends, and a State of Palestine is admitted to the UN as the 194th member, with the borders of June 4, 1967. Other states should immediately follow Türkiye’s lead.

Second, all UN member states that have not yet done so should recognize the State of Palestine. So far, 147 countries recognize Palestine. Dozens more should do so at the UN Summit on Palestine on September 22, even over the vociferous objections of the United States government.

Third, the Arab signatories to the Abraham Accords, Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan, and the UAE, should suspend their diplomatic relations with Israel until the Gaza siege ends and the State of Palestine is admitted to the UN.

Fourth, the UN General Assembly, by a vote of two-thirds present and voting, should suspend Israel from the UN General Assembly until it lifts its murderous siege on Gaza, based on the precedent of suspending South Africa during its Apartheid regime. The US has no veto in the UN General Assembly.

Fifth, UN member states should stop the export of all technology services that support the war, until the siege of Gaza ends and Palestine’s membership in the UN is adopted by the UN Security Council. Consumer companies such as Amazon and Microsoft that persist in aiding the Israel Defence Forces in the context of a genocide should face the wrath of consumers worldwide.

Sixth, the UN General Assembly should dispatch a UN Protection Force to Gaza and the West Bank. Typically, it would be the UN Security Council that mandates a protection force, but in this case, the US will block the Security Council with its veto. There is another way.

Under the “Uniting for Peace” mechanism, when the Security Council is deadlocked, the authority to act passes to the General Assembly. After a Security Council session and the almost inevitable US veto, the issue would be brought before the UNGA in a resumed 10th emergency special session on the Israel-Palestine conflict. There, the General Assembly can, by a two-thirds majority not subject to US veto, authorize a protection force in response to an urgent request from the State of Palestine. There is a precedent: in 1956, the General Assembly authorized the UN Emergency Force (UNEF) to enter Egypt and protect it from the ongoing invasion by Israel, France, and the United Kingdom.

At the invitation of Palestine, the protection force would enter Gaza to secure emergency humanitarian aid for the starving population. If Israel were to attack the UN protection force, the force would be authorized to defend itself and the Gazans. Whether Israel and the US would dare to fight a UNGA-mandated force protecting the starving Gazans remains to be seen.

Israel has crossed the clear line into the darkest crimes—starving civilians to death and shooting them as they line up, emaciated, for food. There is no further line to cross, nor time to lose. The family of nations is being tested and summoned to action as it has not been in decades.

Jeffrey D. Sachs is a University Professor and Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he directed The Earth Institute from 2002 until 2016. He is also President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network and a commissioner of the UN Broadband Commission for Development. He has been advisor to three United Nations Secretaries-General, and currently serves as an SDG Advocate under Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. Sachs is the author, most recently, of “A New Foreign Policy: Beyond American Exceptionalism” (2020). Other books include: “Building the New American Economy: Smart, Fair, and Sustainable” (2017) and “The Age of Sustainable Development,” (2015) with Ban Ki-moon.

Sybil Fares is a specialist and advisor in Middle East policy and sustainable development at SDSN.

Licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Original article.

Is your business degenerative? Is it following the well-thumbed playbook of corporate crapitalism?

Here’s an undeniable truth: most businesses are degenerative. They exploit, extract, and destroy – decimating the Common Good. Let’s confront the ugly reality of how most companies operate:

1. You Can’t Kill Your Customer and Call It Value Creation

It’s basic: if your business harms your customers, it’s doomed. Selling junk food, addictive products, or predatory services might work for a while, but it’s a race to the bottom. You can’t build trust—or a future—on exploitation. Long-term value means putting people’s well-being at the core of your business.

2. Business Is Part of Nature, Not Apart from It

A no-brainer. All business depends on the beneficence of Nature, yet most treat Nature like it’s disposable. The truth is, your business can’t thrive if the planet doesn’t. Whether it’s your supply chain, energy consumption, or waste management, ask yourself: are you regenerating or destroying? The future belongs to companies that heal, not harm.

3. Spreadsheets Don’t Lead, People Do

If your CEO runs the business by spreadsheet, you’ve already lost. Decisions made by algorithms and bottom-line thinking strip humanity out of the equation. Customers and employees aren’t data points—they’re people. Businesses that fail to connect on this level will be replaced by, well, algorithms. Real leadership is about purpose, empathy, and vision—not just numbers.

4. Profiting from Suffering Won’t Last

You can only profit from pain for so long. Sweatshops, environmental destruction, wage theft—they all come back to bite. Public outrage and growing awareness will destroy businesses that thrive on suffering. A regenerative business profits by solving problems, not creating them.

5. Hedge Fund Rule Equals Extraction

When hedge funds run the show, businesses stop being businesses. They become extraction machines, sucking out value for short-term profits and leaving employees, communities, and ecosystems in ruin. These companies strip-mine everything they touch. Real businesses build—extractive ones destroy.

6. CEO Pay: How Much Is Too Much?

When it takes over 100 years for your workers to earn what your CEO makes in a year, you have a problem. Inequality within organizations is a ticking time bomb. Pay disparities demoralize workers, erode trust, and fuel resentment. It’s not just about fairness; it’s about survival. Companies that share the wealth will endure. The others? Good riddance.

7. Does Your Business Give Back More Than It Takes?

Communities are the backbone of any business. But how many companies extract from their communities without giving back? If your business takes more than it contributes, it’s not just unsustainable—it’s parasitic. Businesses that reinvest in their communities create loyal customers, happier employees, and long-term resilience.

8. Do Your Employees Fear You?

When employees are afraid to speak up, to organize, or to challenge the status quo, your business is broken. Fear kills creativity, innovation, and loyalty. A thriving business creates a culture of trust, respect, and empowerment. Fear-driven workplaces collapse under their own weight.

9. Do Your Leaders All Think the Same?

When leadership is homogenous, you get groupthink. Homogeneity limits perspective, stifles innovation, and reinforces the status quo. Diversity isn’t just about representation—it’s about better decision-making. If all your leaders vote the same, think the same, and act the same, your business is on autopilot—heading for a crash.

The world doesn’t need more degenerative businesses. It needs regenerative organizations. Regenerative businesses don’t just reduce harm—they create value for people, communities, and the planet. They restore what’s been destroyed. They repair what’s broken. They rethink what’s possible. They regenerate the Common Good.

The path forward is clear. The question is: will your organization make the Big Shift, or will it double down on crapitalism?

Predicting the winner of a U.S. Presidential election is especially hard in this election year. The candidates are running close to 50-50 and voters are highly polarized. The two candidates have extremely different views of what is the Common Good.

So we choose not to make a prediction.

However, we want to vote. If this was an election in Australia, we would have to vote or pay a fee for not voting.  Furthermore, we would have to rank our candidate preferences if there are three or more candidates.

But we are American citizens. Also, we are largely independent voters.  We aren’t one-issue voter although this would make it easy.  For example, what if we cared only about abortion and voted for the candidate who favors abortion rights for women. We really want to consider all the policy differences between the two candidates.  

How can we do that?

Let’s imagine the economic, social and political outcomes that are likely to follow from each candidate being elected.

Our best step is to list the outcomes that we expect to follow with each candidate if elected. We stand ready to revise our views.  In fact, we invite you, the reader, to look at the two lists.  Feel free to add missing outcomes.

You can send your revised list to us >>  info (at) fixcapitalism dot com >>

Here are our initial lists:

What will happen if Trump wins the 2024 Presidency?

1. Economic chaos as higher prices result from Trump’s rising tariffs and irrational trade policies
2. Cutbacks and/or elimination of Social Security, Medicare, and the possible repeal of Obamacare
3. Social chaos with increased violence towards minorities, workers, and union organizers
4. Political arrests targeting opponents (Trump has also said anyone criticizing the Supreme Court should be jailed)
5. Government appointments not based on merit but ideology (existing government employees will be purged unless they are loyal to Trump)
6. Fewer dependable allies from abroad as NATO(and the EU) is abandoned; China becomes stronger as Taiwan is abandoned
7. Russian power increases as Ukraine is left to itself; US pivots to possible war against Iran
8. Climate problems worsen – pollution regulations are eliminated; drilling allowed in National Parks
9. Polarization and hatred worsen as “remigration” and forced deportation is scaled up
10. Leadership focuses on past grievances – including personal vendettas against people who didn’t support Trump
11. Possibility of mental deterioration of Trump after election – leading to the installation of JD Vance as President
12. Women lose their reproductive rights, and other civil rights as well
13. More tax cuts for the rich and corporate interests, leading to further deficits (military programs to increase at the expense of everything else)
14. Increase in Christian Nationalism and intolerance for other faiths
15. Implementation of Project 2025 and abandonment of constitutional boundaries

What will happen if Harris wins the Presidency?

1. Lower prices as Inflation continues to fall; corporate price-gouging is dissuaded
2. Major job creation with new factories and new investments in renewabletechnologies
3. Higher taxes on the super-rich and corporate profits to support better health and education – this funds Social Security and eliminates austerity measures
4. Strong dependable allies abroad – NATO is supported to create a better, secure future
5. More progress in controlling climate problems – investment in renewables and battery technologies
6. Her international experience will further peacemaking to reduce international disputes
7. Union support instead of opposition and more worker benefits including a higher minimum wage
8. Less polarization and more goodwill amongst the general population; opposition to the culture wars
9. Leadership is younger and motivating for younger generations
10. Women’s rights are secured nationally and across states; abortion rights are strengthened
11.  Church and state are kept separate and America avoids a decline into Christian Nationalism by embracing a culture of respect
12.  Increased regional investments in Latin America to encourage residents to remain in their home countries
13. Support for a two-state solution regarding Israel and Palestine
14. Support for  job-creation through small business and start-up incentives
15. Corporates and billionaires pay a fairer share of taxes

Does this comparison of likely outcomes help you choose your candidate?

ASK: Which candidate is working for the Common Good? Which candiadte is working for the future wellbeing of our children?  Which candidate has demonstrated a commitment to justice?

May the best candidate win.

As more campuses join the protests against Israel’s continuing engagement in war crimes in Gaza, one common thread runs through the student demands. It’s this: divest from supplying the Netanyahu government and the IDF with weapons of mass destruction.

What compels many of these youthful demonstrators to occupy the public spaces and offices of their universities is the complicity of college portfolios with investments in U.S. weapon manufacturers. They know that the products of defense contractors, like Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighterjet and General Dynamics’ MK 84—a 2,000-pound bomb—are slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent civilians throughout Gaza.

They also understand that the U.S. government, from President Joe Biden to the Congress, is opposed to legislative efforts to hold Israel accountable to its violation of various on-the-books prohibitions for governments “engaged in gross human rights abuses” (Section 502 B of the U.S. Foreign Assistance Act). Instead, they see the Biden Administration exploiting every loophole in any restrictions to supply Israel with unending transfers of bombs and military equipment. While countries, like Canada and numerous others, have stopped shipping weapons to Israel, the U.S. seems oblivious to the suffering and devastation caused daily by the IDF in Gaza.

They are aware that Israeli state propaganda spreads constant disinformation about its war crimes in Gaza, from rationalizing its attacks on the staff and patients in hospitals to the murder of over 200 aid workers. They know that countless human rights agencies have condemned these kinds of war crimes in Gaza. (These same human rights agencies have also condemned the brutal killing of 1,200 Israeli civilians and the taking of hostages on October 7). In order to justify the murder of so many innocent civilians, the Netanyahu government has insisted that they have actually killed 9,000 Hamas militants. However, if they read one of the recent articles in the Israeli newspaper, Ha’aretz from March 31, they understand this figure is reflective of what the IDF calls “kill zones” (think “free-fire zones” in the U.S. war on Vietnam) where anything in those zones, including women and children, were legitimate targets to then be counted as Hamas militants.

They are surely aware of what Netanyahu cabinet members have said about the Palestinians in Gaza and on the West Bank that they are just “human animals.” The Israeli Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant, has bragged about destroying the “electricity, food, and fuel” in Gaza. One of his advisers, a former IDF General, reflective of the targeting of aid workers, including those murdered seven from World Central Kitchen, acknowledged that “in order to make the siege effective, we have to prevent others from giving assistance to Gaza.” Such mass murder and wanton destruction of property in Gaza is part of a campaign of killing that one UN official has cited as “probably the highest kill ratio of any military killing anybody since the Rwandan genocide of 1994.”

When students see and hear about all of this, they are obviously motivated to express their moral outrage. On one hand, these expressions may not always comport with so-called civility. On the other hand, they are not prepared to remain silent and/or passive in the face of an unfolding genocide. In their adherence to Dr. King’s reference to the “fierce urgency of now,” they are committed, as Dr. King was, to disturbing the peace.

Indeed, we need to be reminded of another quote from Dr. King that was central to his famous Riverside Address (“A Time to Break Silence”) from April 4, 1967. He warned prophetically that “a nation that continues year after year to spend more on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” Beyond the horrors in Gaza and the long tragic history of the oppression of Palestinians, these student protestors are trying to save their own nation from its death-dealing spiral. What their protest ultimately signifies is their commitment to an authentic advocacy for peace and justice abroad and at home.

Fran Shor is a Michigan-based retired teacher, writer, and activist.

Licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Original here.

In our book – REGENERATION: The Future of Community in a Permacrisis World, we point out that in the US today, we see that our politicians can’t even stand up to the NRA, let alone address climate collapse.  Instead, they distract us with culture wars and fake controversy – banning books, and literally canceling democracy via gerrymandering and voter suppression.

Shouldn’t our governments be promoting the Common Good?  Isn’t that the definition of regenerative governance?  Here’s a citizen’s checklist we compiled – does your government check the boxes?

If you were to grade your elected government officials against their support  for the Common Good, you might get a better idea if they really care about you and your children’s children.

Christian Sarkar, Philip Kotler, and Enrico Foglia are the co-founders of The Regenerative Marketing Institute, and the joint authors of REGENERATION: The Future of Community in a Permacrisis World.

What does Ukraine need for the future? We interviewed Dr. Iryna Tykhomyrova, President of MIM Business School in Kyiv, to get her views on rebuilding Ukraine.

Dr. Tykhomyrova is the Head of Management and Economics Department, and supervisor of consulting projects for international and Ukrainian companies. As an expert on evaluation of business education needs for Central and Eastern Europe at European Training Foundation, her vision is a key to winning the future for the next generation of Ukrainians.  

Dr. Tykhomyrova is a member of the academic—methodological commission on management at the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine. Her educational path led through the Catholic University of Leuven (Belgium), the Central European University (Hungary), and the International Management Teachers Academy (Slovenia).

What does Ukraine need to do now? On the war front? On the peace front?

 We need to win. We are fighting many fronts now. To win on the battlefield we need to be strong, brave, and resilient. To win on the economic front, we need to develop the economy and lay the foundation for the future revival of Ukraine. We also need to use all the resources available internally and look for the resources available through our international partners.

How do you view this war? Is it possible to say that this is Ukraine’s revolt against Russian corruption?

It is the war between the past and the future. It is not the war against corruption but rather the war of different mindsets: the past-oriented imperial and colonial and forward-looking and democracy-based. If we compare Russian and Ukrainian leadership, we’ll see that Russians are a generation older. That’s why it is safe to say that they are free of the Soviet legacy. They were brought up in an open world with different values. We are fighting for a lifestyle based on respect and cooperation against the obsolete, and malevolent regime. Besides, it is the fight for our path to the future that is enrooted in European humanistic values.

How does planning for peace create a roadmap for the future? What will end this war?

 All wars end up in peace treaties. We do not know when we will draw up our treaty of peace.

We also do not know yet what price we will pay for our victory, whether we are talking about the war death toll or damage to our cities, industrial sites, energy infrastructure, etc. Because of those unknowns, we cannot start making our business plans. However, it is high time to lay the foundation of our future and start working to make the future happen. I see three main priorities that need to be dealt with now. Firstly, education will be the key to success because we need people with certain skill sets and mindsets. Secondly, the launch of judicial system reform is pending to create a transparent and favorable legal and regulatory framework. And thirdly, as the result, a favorable investment climate and availability of human capital with the right competencies will drive the economic revival. The establishment of a viable financial market is important for economic restoration projects as well. After our victory and signing the peace treaty we will need to move quickly.

What steps should be taken to ensure the rebuilding of Ukraine is regenerative, that is, it builds community wealth in a sustainable way, rather than extractive?

Our war is the war for the future. We see immense environmental damage in our country. The inflicted damage may affect the whole world, especially if we are talking about nuclear power plants. Even if our war is in Central Europe, the environmental damage may be global. That’s why we need to adopt an environment-oriented approach to what we do and will do. Thinking environmentally is critical because we need to recover not only our economy but our habitat from war-inflicted damages.  Much will depend on the new technologies and technological businesses. Investments and investors are critical for developing those new technologies and businesses. Besides, many obsolete manufacturing sites located in the East of Ukraine were ruined. In my opinion, we will need to recover those metallurgy or energy sites with new technologies. I believe that the country’s restoration will mean new, greener businesses.

What role does business have in rebuilding Ukraine? How do the businesses that left Ukraine return?

Businesses will be the driving force of the country’s post-war economic revival. As we mentioned, the economy is our second front. Although relocated abroad, most businesses are sure that they are expanding their activities rather than leaving the Ukrainian market. After the war, they will return to Ukraine because rebuilding the economy means an abundance of opportunities. We believe that not only relocated businesses will return to domestic markets, but new investors will come to Ukraine for more opportunities. The economic revival will become the driving force for those people who fled abroad. To secure the inward businesses movement, we should create a legal and regulatory framework that encourages doing business, a favorable tax regime, and judicial reform that will be instrumental in the protection of investors’ rights. Without investors’ confidence in their protection businesses will struggle.

The western part of Ukraine has become more developed because of the war? What steps can be taken to ensure these developments don’t stop when the war is over?

Many businesses did move there. In the western part, agrarian business, tourism, and high tech have always accounted for a substantial share of the economy. Currently, people have fled their homes in the eastern part of Ukraine and moved westward. Some businesses moved as well. I think that the western part of Ukraine will become a part of the overall recovery strategy. Due to its geography, it will become an important logistic hub.

At a time when democracy is in decline in the world, how does Ukraine plan on building a more democratic society?

We sacrificed a lot for democracy. I think we are laying the foundation for the future of democracy. Our civil society is developing quickly due to the people participating in the war as military service people or members of the territorial defense units, volunteers, and people who are working against all odds. They have already taken the responsibility for the future of the country. After the war, they will return to normal lives and become important actors in business, politics, and in social institutions. They are paying dearly for the future. That’s why I believe that our veterans, volunteers, and civil society will become a driving force and guarantors of the democratic boost and democratic changes.

Thanks for your time and hard work. We look forward to a time soon when the people of Ukraine can live in peace and prosperity, and democracy.

INTERVIEW by Christian Sarkar