Fueling the Political Fire

Occupy Wall St. or other major activist movements are well known and typically occur due to a need for political change or to protest some new law, decision, company, installation, what have you.  Movements like that seem normal to me in today's society because they're usually opposing something that directly affects one group of people, but typically not society as whole, similar to the political battle currently underway.  Our right to the city, however, I think affects everyone and is protested in a not so obvious way.  For example, when the tiny house movement began I don't know if those involved were intentionally opposing the mc-mansions that have become the American norm to housing but in a quieter way shed light on the idea of living in much less. In a similar way Santiago Cirugeda was not necessarily protesting on the stairs of the capital with his rebel architecture work but instead was proposing a lifestyle that, in teaching others about it, shed light on certain issues he and others are currently facing as architects in Spain.  

I think as future architects it is important for us to understand the power we hold to help or hurt situations that may begin as political controversy but end with something being built that helps fuel the fire for one side of the other.  I think one simple example of that is architects choosing to not work for developers when they don't believe in the financial driven motives of developer work.  How else can we as architects help or avoid fueling the fire?