Thomas Friedman’s recent New York Times Magazine essay, The Power of Green, demands a New Green Deal in America. He makes a compelling argument for the need to transcend red and blue divisions and unite in a new green nation that will set an example for the world. Buoyed by the fact that green has “gone Main Street” in recent years, he puts out a call for green innovation, a philosophy of stewardship, and policy work that incentivizes the forward thinking companies ready to step up and go green.

We also recognize from Friedman’s piece the need for a reworking of the “green” movement brand. What started from the left, the Green brand was born as a political movement that stood for the goals of, and values inherent in, environmentalism and social justice. Wrapped up in these two powerful themes are a number of issues and ideas that include sustainability, ecology, and conservation, with a leaning towards the important environmental, feminist, and peace social movements.

While in Europe, the Green movement is more deeply rooted in the political framework as “political ecology”, in this country, the Green political movement never really breached the mainstream (sorry, Ralph). Instead, it has lately become more of a market movement, driven by a demand from enlightened consumers for more responsibility and accountability. And from the supply side, we are seeing a sudden rapid acceleration in corporate social responsibility and the greening of corporate America to meet primarily the demand of the market, and to a lesser degree, the demand of the conscience.

But Friedman posts a strong argument for a new view on green: a combined political and market driven vision that could strategically position the country for decades to come, and if you can imagine it, serve humanity while serving self-interest.

Friedman states “I want to rename ‘green,’…I want to rename it geostrategic, geoeconomic, capitalistic and patriotic. I want to do that because I think that living, working, designing, manufacturing and projecting America in a green way can be the basis of a new unifying political movement for the 21st century. A redefined, broader and more muscular green ideology is not meant to trump the traditional Republican and Democratic agendas but rather to bridge them when it comes to addressing the three major issues facing every American today: jobs, temperature and terrorism.”

Freidman’s tone is one of cautious optimism — he provides solutions and direction, but is also quite realistic about the huge gap between a surface-level green allegiance and the sort of innovation that leads to deep change.

At egg, we understand this gap all too well, and we also understand the need for companies that are truly committed to sustainability to develop brands that reflect this commitment in a way that resonates with the right audience. It was telling and sad to see how few ads there were in this issue that acknowledge the green pull that is happening all around us. In the entire magazine, there are exactly two “green” ads — a green-clad baby sitting on a white Crate and Barrel sofa (thankfully with a protective water-based finish), and a LEED-certified luxury high-rise on the Upper East Side whose headline encourages us to, um, “Live Grandly.” Turn the page, and we’re back to the usual messages and imagery, with nary a nod to the greening of America. You might think that the NYTimes ad sales department isn’t doing their job well, but more likely, green just hasn’t penetrated this elite psycho/demographic–on the supply side, as well as demand.

So let’s take green to the global marketplace and redefine the green brand in a way that unites, rather than divides, the country. Let’s make it a competitive advantage, while respecting all the stakeholders. Let’s find returns in innovative strategies that respect the flat world Freidman speaks of, and indeed paves the way for a brighter green future. The world is ready, the country is ready, and the people are ready. Companies, are you listening? Let the New Green Branding begin.