As I reintroduce myself this spring — months after my fall op‑ed in support of Kamala Harris — I feel compelled to revisit an election that was never just a numbers game. Though Harris captured 48.4% of the popular vote, the real shock isn’t in the electoral tallies, but rather it’s in the way divisive rhetoric has been weaponized into concrete policy shifts. Politics and business are systems built on frameworks of negotiation, strategy and hierarchy, yet these very systems — steeped in historical biases and power imbalances — are all too easily exploited to reshape our world in ways that threaten our shared future.

For many in our diverse Brandeis community, including Black, Indigenous and People of Color students, queer students, international students and women, these policy shifts aren’t abstract debates; they’re lived experiences that shape our daily lives, our opportunities and our personal safety. I write today as both an anthropologist and a political scientist, determined to expose how executive orders, local policy maneuvers and business-inspired tactics are being used to consolidate power and push a divisive agenda.

The nuanced reality of “purple” politics

At first glance, electoral maps display stark red-versus-blue divisions. However, every state — and even every neighborhood — is a vibrant mosaic of perspectives, making it a true “purple” landscape. This isn’t mere metaphor; it’s a reminder that our democracy is far more intricate than binary labels suggest. Political campaigns are born of years of strategic coalition-building and calculated messaging. They are not pure expressions of ideology but rather negotiated compromises, where tools like executive orders are deployed to signal shifts in governance.

Consider the everyday voter. One person might cling to a pro-life stance until a personal tragedy forces a painful reexamination of their beliefs, while another — perhaps an undocumented immigrant who has long contributed to the tax base — votes not out of ideological purity but sheer economic necessity. These diverse motivations underscore that democracy is dynamic, constantly evolving beyond simplistic red or blue snapshots.

Policies in action: Executive orders and local impact

Trump’s administration wasted no time reshaping the political landscape, issuing over 50 executive orders in its first month, the most in decades. These orders, intended to streamline governance, have instead been weaponized to engineer rapid policy shifts that affect real lives. 

For example, one directive scrubbed all diversity, equity and inclusion language from federal websites. At first glance, this might seem cosmetic. However, in practice it erases the very principles that ensure our institutions remain vibrant and inclusive. Likewise, local school committees — empowered by new administrative guidelines — are increasingly allowing parents to opt out of curricula that include LGBTQIA+ topics. Such policies send a chilling message: certain identities and histories are now deemed too “controversial” for public education.

The consequences are not confined to high‑level bureaucratic maneuvers. In Waltham, following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement activity at the Gardencrest apartments, community organizers have stepped in by distributing “Know Your Rights” flyers — in multiple languages provided by the Massachusetts Immigrants & Refugee Advocacy Coalition — to help immigrant residents navigate an environment where policies increasingly marginalize vulnerable populations. These grassroots efforts serve as an essential counterbalance to top‑down directives intended to silence communities.

Then there’s the appropriation of business terminology for political ends. When Trump’s inner circle names a quasi‑governmental entity “DOGE” — a reference to the well-known cryptocurrency supported by Elon Musk — it isn’t a playful nod but a troubling signal of how these systems are being exploited. This naming choice isn’t merely about business efficiency; it starkly demonstrates how the language and tools of commerce are being repurposed to blur the lines between governance and market tactics, all in service of consolidating power.

When politics and business collide

Politics and business are built on structures meant to promote order and efficiency, yet they are not immune to the biases and power plays of those who control them. Trump’s actions are not an indictment of these systems in their ideal forms. Rather, they reveal how he is manipulating established frameworks to further a divisive agenda.

Take his trade threats with the European Union. Ostensibly aimed at correcting economic imbalances, these moves are strategic maneuvers designed to assert geopolitical influence — prioritizing power over genuine economic reform. Similarly, changes to research funding parameters — such as an executive order from the Office of Management and Budget that limits the size of federally funded surveys — are not inherently flawed policies. Instead, they exemplify how administrative tools can be misused to stifle academic inquiry, particularly research vital to understanding the challenges faced by marginalized communities.

In every instance, these examples show that it’s not business efficiency or executive orders per se that are problematic — it’s that their potential is being hijacked for short‑term, divisive gains at the expense of long‑term public well‑being.

A glimpse on the commuter rail: Politics in everyday life

Sometimes, the full weight of these policy shifts hits you in the most unguarded moments. On a recent commuter rail ride from Waltham to Fitchburg, I noticed a discarded Wall Street Journal alongside a folded copy of Register of Opinion: An Official Publication of Public Advocate. One editorial — saturated with incendiary language about “pro‑family” values and a narrowly defined “nuclear family” that explicitly excluded LGBTQIA+ youth — spoke volumes. It was a stark reminder that these battles over language and policy aren’t confined to Capitol Hill or academic journals; they permeate our neighborhoods, our transit systems and even our local coffee shops.

And here’s the crucial point: whether or not you support a traditional family model, this narrow definition threatens all families. What about those raised by grandparents, aunts, uncles or siblings — family structures that diverge from the conventional model? When policymakers and pundits attempt to confine “family” to a single, exclusionary mold, they risk marginalizing every alternative form that many of us call home. In short, these restrictive definitions imperil the rich diversity and resilience of every family — and, by extension, every person.

International ripples and long‑term consequences

The impact of these policies extend well beyond our borders. Aggressive trade tactics and shifts in funding parameters have international ramifications, subtly reshaping global economic norms and stifling long‑term research that could address deep‑seated inequities. When academic inquiry is hampered by restrictive policies, we don’t just lose valuable knowledge today. We erode the foundation for a more equitable tomorrow.

Every executive order and policy tweak is a thread in a larger tapestry — one that, over time, can redefine the fabric of our society. While these changes might be presented as technical adjustments, their cumulative effect is both profound and perilous.

A call to engage, reflect, and resist

So, what can we do when systems designed for governance are twisted into weapons of division?

1. Engage in meaningful dialogue:

In an era marked by polarization, reaching out to those with opposing views is challenging — but essential. Every neighborhood is, metaphorically, “purple” — a rich blend of perspectives that, when engaged respectfully, can forge common ground.

2. Reflect on your lived experience:

Our votes capture only a moment in an ever‑evolving process. Consider how policies — from sweeping executive orders to local curriculum decisions — affect real people: our families, our neighbors, our friends. Your voice is more than a statistic; it’s a testament to your lived reality.

3. Build resilient communities:

In times of rapid change, community solidarity is our strongest defense. Whether through grassroots initiatives like “Know Your Rights” campaigns or by simply supporting one another, building resilient networks is essential. Practical resources — such as guides on nonviolence and self‑care — remind us that our collective strength can counteract the exploitation of these systems.

Reclaiming our narrative

Trump’s manipulation of executive orders and business‑inspired tactics has reshaped our political landscape in profound and troubling ways. These aren’t immutable laws of nature — they are decisions made by those in power, and they can be challenged. While politics and business are meant to serve society, their use as weapons of division perverts their potential. Our task is to reclaim these systems for the public good.

In this moment of unprecedented transformation, our collective engagement — through dialogue, reflection and community resilience — is the most potent antidote to the abuse of power. Let’s keep talking, keep questioning and keep fighting for a future that honors every facet of our shared humanity.