With heartfelt sadness, we reflect on the life of Jimmy Carter, the 39th President of the United States, who passed away on December 29, 2024, at the age of 100. His legacy, intricately woven into the fabric of American history, spans decades, marked not only by his time in the White House but equally by his profound humanitarian efforts thereafter.

The Legacy of Jimmy Carter

Carter’s journey began on October 1, 1924, in Plains, Georgia. Born to a family deeply rooted in farming and community service, he grew up with a unique perspective shaped by both adversity and privilege. His early life instilled in him values of hard work, empathy, and an unwavering commitment to social justice, setting the stage for a future where he would be revered not just as a politician but as a humanitarian.

His presidency, while often overshadowed by challenges such as economic downturns and geopolitical tensions, saw landmark achievements like the Camp David Accords, which established peace between Israel and Egypt, and the formation of essential governmental departments like the Department of Energy and Education. Though his presidency faced criticism and ended after one term, Carter never wavered in his dedication to public service.

Upon leaving the White House, Carter seamlessly transitioned from politics to philanthropy. He approached his post-presidency years with the same vigor and passion as his earlier career, founding the Carter Center, where he championed global health initiatives, human rights awareness, and democratic governance. His work drew international recognition, earning him the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, a testament to his enduring impact on the world stage.

Carter’s charisma and compassion extended beyond boardrooms and political rallies. He was a humble man who continued to embody the values of a true public servant. Through Habitat for Humanity, he swung hammers alongside volunteers to build homes for those in need. He taught Sunday school in his hometown, never forgetting his roots, and remained a stalwart advocate for those less fortunate, often traveling to observe elections in developing nations.

A poignant moment in his later years was the announcement in February 2023, wherein he chose to enter hospice care, a decision that echoed his life’s philosophy—embracing life with dignity and grace. In his final days, surrounded by family, including his beloved wife Rosalynn, who had passed just a few weeks earlier, Carter exemplified what it means to lead a life filled with love and meaning.

Carter was more than a president; he became a giant in American ideals, a figure of resilience and a living reminder that true leadership often shines brightest in service rather than power. His long-standing commitment to humanitarian causes, even amidst personal health challenges, demonstrated his conviction that we all have a role to play in making the world a better place.

He might have described himself with characteristic humility, saying, “I can’t deny that I was a better ex-president than I was a president.” Yet, his contributions resonate deeply within the hearts of many who recognize that his legacy as a humanitarian far outweighs any political measure of success.

As we bid farewell to Jimmy Carter, we honor not just a former president but a compassionate figure whose life reminds us all about the power of service, love, and humility. His spirit will continue to inspire generations, encouraging us to express kindness to others, fight for justice, and strive for peace across the globe. Rest in peace, President Carter. Your light will always shine in the lives you’ve touched.

Advertisement

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter

STM Daily News is a vibrant news blog dedicated to sharing the brighter side of human experiences. Emphasizing positive, uplifting stories, the site focuses on delivering inspiring, informative, and well-researched content. With a commitment to accurate, fair, and responsible journalism, STM Daily News aims to foster a community of readers passionate about positive change and engaged in meaningful conversations. Join the movement and explore stories that celebrate the positive impacts shaping our world.

https://stmdailynews.com/

Ian Afflerbach, University of North Georgia

Over its long history, the American labor movement has displayed a remarkably rich vocabulary for shaming those deemed traitors to its cause.

Some insults, such as “blackleg,” are largely forgotten today. Others, such as “stool pigeon,” now sound more like the dated banter of film noir. A few terms still offer interesting windows into the past: “Fink,” for example, was used to disparage workers who informed for management; it seems to have been derived from “Pinkerton,” the private detective agency notorious for strikebreaking during mass actions like the Great Railroad Strike of 1877.

No word, however, has burned American workers more consistently, or more wickedly, than “scab.”

Any labor action today will inevitably lead to someone getting called a scab, an insult used to smear people who cross picket lines, break up strikes or refuse to join a union. No one is beyond the reach of this accusation: United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain called former president Donald Trump a “scab” in August 2024, after Trump suggested to Elon Musk that striking workers at one of Musk’s companies ought to be illegally fired.

While working on my book “Sellouts! The Story of an American Insult,” I discovered that labor’s scabs were among the first Americans identified as sellouts for betraying their own.

Reinforcing class solidarity

The use of scab as an insult actually dates to Medieval Europe. Back then, scabbed or diseased skin was widely seen as the sign of a corrupt or immoral character. So, English writers started using “scab” as slang for a scoundrel.

In the 19th century, American workers started using the word to attack peers who refused to join a union or worked when others were striking. By the 1880s, periodicals, union pamphlets and books all regularly used the epithet to chastise any workers or labor leaders who cooperated with bosses. Names of scabs were often printed in local papers.

Advertisement

Scab likely caught on because it directed visceral disgust at anyone who put self-interest above class solidarity.

Many of labor’s scabs clearly deserved the label. During a strike of Boston railroad workers in 1887, for instance, the union bombarded its chairman with cries of “traitor” and “scab” and “selling out,” because he gave in to company demands prematurely, just as the union’s funds were also mysteriously depleted.

The most powerful expression of this shame comes from the pen of Jack London. Best remembered today for adventure tales such as “White Fang,” London was also a socialist. His popular 1915 missive “Ode to a Scab” captures the venomous contempt many have felt about those who betray their fellow workers:

“After God had finished the rattlesnake, the toad, and the vampire, He had some awful substance left with which He made a scab… a two-legged animal with a corkscrew soul… Where others have hearts, he carries a tumor of rotten principles… No man has a right to scab as long as there is a pool of water deep enough to drown his body in.”

In 1904, however, London had written a longer and less famous essay, “The Scab.” Instead of shaming scabs, this essay explains the conditions that drive some workers to betray their own.

“The capitalist and labor groups,” London writes, “are locked together in a desperate battle,” with capital trying to ensure profits and labor trying to ensure a basic standard of living. A scab, he explains, “takes from [his peers’] food and shelter” by working when they will not. “He does not scab because he wants to scab,” London insists, but because he “cannot get work on the same terms.”

Rather than treat scabs as vampire-like traitors, London asks his readers to see scabbing as a moral transgression driven by competition. It is tempting to imagine society as “divided into the two classes of the scabs and the non-scabs,” London concludes, but in capitalism’s “social jungle, everybody is preying upon everybody else.”

Driven to scab

London’s words ring with a harsh truth, and we can illustrate his point by looking at the discomforting status of Black strikebreakers in American labor history.

During their heyday from the 1880s through the 1930s, major labor organizations such as the Knights of Labor and American Federation of Labor did include some Black workers and at times preached inclusion. These same groups, however, also tolerated openly racist behavior by local branches.

Advertisement

Historian Philip S. Foner tells the story of Robert Rhodes, a union bricklayer in Indiana whose “white union brothers refused to work with him.” The Bricklayers and Masons International Union of America did have a fine of US$100 for such discriminatory practices, but Rhodes was stymied in efforts to get any money, and his racist co-workers punished him for trying. He ended up being accused of “scabbing” by the union, and, in a brutal irony, fined. Rhodes quit and changed his career.

Civil rights activist W.E.B. Du Bois once noted that among the major working-class trades in America only longshoremen and miners welcomed Black workers. In most fields, they had to try to join unions that were often implicitly – if not explicitly – segregated.

To find work as masons, carpenters, coopers – or any other skilled trades dominated by unions that would often discriminate based on race – Black laborers often had to work under conditions that others would not tolerate: offering their services outside the union, or taking over work the union had done while its members were striking.

In short, they had to scab.

Class and race collide

It shouldn’t be hard to see the competing moral claims here. Black workers who had struggled with racial discrimination claimed an equal right to work, even if this meant disrupting a strike. Unions saw this as a violation of working-class solidarity, even as they overlooked discrimination within their ranks.

Managers and corporations, meanwhile, exploited this racial friction to weaken the labor movement. With tensions high, brawls often broke out between Black strikebreakers and white strikers. An account of the 1904 Chicago miners’ strike noted, “some one in the crowd yelled ‘scab,’ and instantly a rush was made for the negroes,” who fought back the mob with knives and pistols before city police intervened.

As this ugly pattern repeated itself, a stigma began to cling to Black workers. White laborers and their representatives, including American Federation of Labor founder Samuel Gompers, often called Black people a “scab race.”

In reality, Black workers were just a small percentage of strikebreakers. Most often, strikebreakers were white immigrants, who, like their Black counterparts, could face discrimination by unions. Black Americans also had a long history of labor activism, struggling for union membership, improved working conditions and better wages in cities such as New Orleans and Birmingham.

In his 1913 essay “The Negro and the Labor Unions,” educator Booker T. Washington urged unions to end their discriminatory practices, which forced Black Americans into becoming “a race of strike-breakers.” Nonetheless, this racial stigma persisted. Horrendous racial violence in the “Red Summer” of 1919 followed close on the heels of the Great Steel Strike, during which nonunion Black workers had been called in to keep steel production humming along.

Advertisement

Preventing fissures among workers

While terms like “scab” and “sellout” have often been used to reinforce labor unity, these same terms have also worsened divisions within the movement.

It’s too reductive, then, to simply shame scabs as sellouts. It’s important to understand why people might be motivated to weather scorn, rejection and even violence from their peers – and to take steps toward removing that motive.

In 2024, Canada’s Parliament passed landmark “anti-scab” legislation, which prohibits 20,000 employers from bringing in replacement workers during a strike.

This law will not only force companies to listen to their workers’ needs during a time of crisis, it will also create fewer divisions within the labor movement – and fewer opportunities for any worker to become a scab.

Ian Afflerbach, Associate Professor of American Literature, University of North Georgia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Advertisement

The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.

https://stmdailynews.com/the-bridge

Huseyn Abdulla, University of Tennessee

In 2018, L.L. Bean ended its century-old “lifetime” return policy, limiting returns to one year after purchase and requiring receipts. The demise of this popular policy sparked backlash, with several customers filing lawsuits.

It also inspired my team of operations management researchers to study how customers respond when retailers make their return policies more strict. Our key finding: Whether they often or rarely return products they’ve purchased, consumers object – unless those retailers explain why.

I work with a group of researchers examining product return policies and how they affect consumers and retailers.

As we explained in an article published in the Journal of Operations Management, we designed experiments to study whether and why return policy restrictions irk customers. We also wanted to understand what retailers can do to minimize backlash after making it harder for customers to return stuff.

We conducted three experiments in which we presented scenarios to 1,500 U.S. consumers who played the role of loyal customers of a fictional retailer. We examined their reactions to the fictional retailer’s return policy restrictions, such as charging a 15% restocking fee and limiting open-ended return windows to 365, 180 and 30 days.

Participants became less willing to buy anything from the fictional retailer after it restricted its long-standing lenient return policy. They also said they would become less willing to recommend the retailer to others.

This occurred because the customers began to distrust the retailer and its ability to offer a high-quality service. The backlash was stronger when the restriction was more severe. Even those consumers who said they usually don’t return any products often reacted negatively.

Advertisement

When the fictional retailer announced its new, harsher return policy using official communication channels and provided a rationale, there was less backlash. Consumers found the changes more justified if the retailer highlighted increased “return abuse,” in which customers return products they’ve already used, or the high cost of processing returns.

You might presume that making it harder and more costly to return stuff could drive some shoppers away. Our research shows that the concern is valid and explains why. It also shows how communicating return policy changes directly with customers can help prevent or reduce backlash against retailers.

Why it matters

Americans returned products worth an estimated US$890 billion to retailers in 2024. Processing a single item typically costs $21 to $46. Most of this merchandise ends up in landfills.

The rise of e-commerce and other technological changes have contributed to this trend. Another factor is the ease with which consumers may return stuff long after making a purchase and get a full refund.

Many other retailers besides L.L. Bean have done away with their long-standing lenient return policies. Over the past decade, for example, Macy’s, a department store chain, and Kohl’s, a big-box clothing store chain, have shortened the time frames for returns.

Macy’s restricted its open-ended return window to one year in 2016, further winnowed it to 180 days in 2017, then to 90 days in 2019. It then stopped accepting returns after 30 days in 2023. Kohl’s didn’t have any time limit on returns it would accept until 2019. Then it imposed a 180-day limit. Others, such as fast-fashion giants Zara and H&M, now charge their customers fees when they return merchandise.

However, research shows that customers value no-questions-asked return policies and see them as a sign of high-quality service. And when these arrangements become the industry standard, customers can get angry if retailers fail to meet it.

Interestingly, most retailers that restricted their policies didn’t tell customers directly. Instead, they quietly updated the new policies on websites, store displays and receipts. Although not drawing attention to bad news might appear prudent – as most customers wouldn’t notice the changes that way – dozens of threads on Reddit about these changes suggest that this isn’t always true.

Advertisement

What still isn’t known

We focused on restrictions on refunds and how long after a purchase customers could return merchandise. Other restrictions, such as retailers making heavily discounted items ineligible for returns, could also be worth investigating.

The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.

Huseyn Abdulla, Assistant Professor of Supply Chain Management, University of Tennessee

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Welcome to the Consumer Corner section of STM Daily News, your ultimate destination for savvy shopping and informed decision-making! Dive into a treasure trove of insights and reviews covering everything from the hottest toys that spark joy in your little ones to the latest electronic gadgets that simplify your life. Explore our comprehensive guides on stylish home furnishings, discover smart tips for buying a home or enhancing your living space with creative improvement ideas, and get the lowdown on the best cars through our detailed auto reviews. Whether you’re making a major purchase or simply seeking inspiration, the Consumer Corner is here to empower you every step of the way—unlock the keys to becoming a smarter consumer today!

https://stmdailynews.com/category/consumer-corner

Advertisement