why not boycott all major corporations every day? it does require a bit of work, but the more money you spend locally, the better your local communities will be
That’s just not how our economy works. “Local” business is not making toilet paper from trees they cut down in their backyard.
I’m probably getting downvoted for this but I hate hate hate this “consumption is power” bull shit boycotts. Consumption is NOT power. LABOR is power. If you work at these large companies you have a million times more power and influence by organizing.
Boycott today if it makes you feel good. But it’s so incredibly missing of the point that I have to assume it is purposely missing the point of collective power.
Your power is in your ability to withhold labor. Not withholding consumption for one day that you’ll just buy the next day. Hell, if these planned organized single day boycotts, if they actually had an impact, would be a way to maximize profits to reduce labor requirements for those days. It’s so silly.
Organize your workplace. That is where your power is!
100%, but why not both? amazon only got that big because we keep buying from it (that and all the government contracts). buying from local stores that also buy from local stores is the best from a purchasing aspect. and as far as data, that’s massively more important and valuable to them than your $
An example of spending as power being a fallacy is high-quality products that everyone who buys them loves them. Then, to boost profits the company uses a lesser quality metal (like pocket knives, guns, etc.). It is short-sighted, but it may increase profits. If buying exerted power, companies wouldn’t trade out materials that people liked.
The engine of the modern economy is mass consumption just as much as labor, especially since a lot of labor is done overseas these days. Everyone not buying stuff from Amazon is just as much an existential threat to it as the entire work force striking. Either way you deny them there profits and force them to pay there fixed capital costs with no revenue.
You could argue it’s less feasible to organize the mass of consumers then it is to organize a workplace, but the power is still there either way.
Bottom 60% of earners in the US represent less than 25% of total consumption. The power is in labor and labor only, there’s a reason why we have plenty of historical examples of successful labor movements, not so much of consumer movements.
Would it be wrong to view this as economic accelerationism? Even if businesses can adjust to consumption cycles, not all consumption needs on one day translate to the next.
Skipping lunch at the diner might mean you increase demand for pb&j sandwiches, but you’re putting the waitress and cook out of a job. Maybe that’s just freeing up their labor to be put to more… productive endeavors.
Honest question, what’s your stance on hunger strikes or other protests outside the workplace? I’m of the opinion that, in 2025, any disruption is good disruption.
I’m not going to tell people how to organize. But a single day boycott with no demands or goals is not organizing. It’s almost alienating in a way. Now, if you got together with friends and did something else like made sandwiches and went to a park. Awesome! You did something and probably all talked about issues together today. That’s positive.
But if you sat at home and said nothing to anyone and hoped for some news story about a massive drop in sale and economic instability. Well, that didn’t happen. And so people can have different reactions to that. My problem is that I think the net reaction is negative. It makes people feel like collective actions are useless. And they are when it comes to single day consumption.
But collective actions and organization are the fundamental power of working class movements. But the working class has its power in labor.
Now, economic boycotts can have power, but not in the way this is being done. Take South Africa BDS movements for example. These put real economic pressures on companies associated with South African apartheid. But these movements had clear demands and no time limit on the boycotts.
Single day boycotts are essentially useless in my eyes. I don’t think they can ever reach the scale to do so. At least they never have historically.
Hunger strikes are only as useful as the attention that they can bring. I’ll use Gaza as an example. The people of Gaza on March 2018 protested they Apartheid state of Israel in a peaceful march towards the walls around Gaza. Hundreds of men women and children were slaughtered by Israeli snipers. And nothing changed. Acts of peaceful protest like hunger strikes or civil disobedience are only effective if they put public pressure on a population that is inactive. The Gazan people have no one that cared of the injustice being placed upon them.
When these types of peaceful protest are met with violence and silence from the media the only actions that oppressed people have left are in violent revolution.
Labor organizing is the only real alternative to violent revolution that has been proven effective historically. But those movements are often met with violence from the state.
I don’t know if that answered your question. But I think I hit some of it.
I think there’s generally poor discourse around protests. I appreciate the long form opinions that you and others have put together, but a lot of commentary is very reductive.
I get the “net negative” sentiment, but the only thing worse than feeling like you didn’t make an impact is feeling that while being berated as naive. For something as low stakes as a one day boycott, not much is lost if you use it as a case study to teach from. Here’s why it didn’t work and what we can do better. The important part of the discussion should be on building goals and organizing, and detaching those from the endorphins of political action.
I’m of the opinion that the only truly performative and useless protests are digital. If you went somewhere or did something (or changed plans to avoid either) you’re infinitely closer to making a change than putting a hashtag into the digital void.
The truth is we’re in uncharted territory. What does or doesn’t work may be unintuitive. Protests haven’t really happened:
in the 21st century western world
& against the massively expanded tools of surveillance
& the highest wealth disparity in history
& most communication channels and social spaces replaced by digital corporate platforms
& the rapid fascist takeover of a government looking for their Reichstag Fire
The George Floyd protests in 2020 were the closest thing we’ve seen but today is different beast.
As an example, I get the feeling that organizing at your workplace won’t work for long. The administration would smash your legal right to unionize without hesitation. Similarly, signing up with the DSA might have been effective political action 4 years ago but put you on the no-fly list today. Maybe clandestine but highly visible protests (vandalism, sabotage, etc…) will have more impact than marching on Washington DC out of the gate? Time will tell…
Im guessing many folks or at least more than the usual percent on the fediverse do this to some degree. I have seen other comments about it and have done them myself. Its really not to much work to me but its a continuing thing. Regularly thinking about what else you can cut out or if you think you can finally cut out a particular thing. So im not where I would want to be and im past low hanging fruit and it will be slow going forward of where I am not but I will continue.
Not always possible. In rural areas, Walmart in particular is a mom and pop shop killer. Restaurants maybe, groceries and the like, this is not that universally possible.
why not boycott all major corporations every day? it does require a bit of work, but the more money you spend locally, the better your local communities will be
That’s just not how our economy works. “Local” business is not making toilet paper from trees they cut down in their backyard.
I’m probably getting downvoted for this but I hate hate hate this “consumption is power” bull shit boycotts. Consumption is NOT power. LABOR is power. If you work at these large companies you have a million times more power and influence by organizing.
Boycott today if it makes you feel good. But it’s so incredibly missing of the point that I have to assume it is purposely missing the point of collective power.
Your power is in your ability to withhold labor. Not withholding consumption for one day that you’ll just buy the next day. Hell, if these planned organized single day boycotts, if they actually had an impact, would be a way to maximize profits to reduce labor requirements for those days. It’s so silly.
Organize your workplace. That is where your power is!
100%, but why not both? amazon only got that big because we keep buying from it (that and all the government contracts). buying from local stores that also buy from local stores is the best from a purchasing aspect. and as far as data, that’s massively more important and valuable to them than your $
An example of spending as power being a fallacy is high-quality products that everyone who buys them loves them. Then, to boost profits the company uses a lesser quality metal (like pocket knives, guns, etc.). It is short-sighted, but it may increase profits. If buying exerted power, companies wouldn’t trade out materials that people liked.
The engine of the modern economy is mass consumption just as much as labor, especially since a lot of labor is done overseas these days. Everyone not buying stuff from Amazon is just as much an existential threat to it as the entire work force striking. Either way you deny them there profits and force them to pay there fixed capital costs with no revenue.
You could argue it’s less feasible to organize the mass of consumers then it is to organize a workplace, but the power is still there either way.
Bottom 60% of earners in the US represent less than 25% of total consumption. The power is in labor and labor only, there’s a reason why we have plenty of historical examples of successful labor movements, not so much of consumer movements.
Would it be wrong to view this as economic accelerationism? Even if businesses can adjust to consumption cycles, not all consumption needs on one day translate to the next.
Skipping lunch at the diner might mean you increase demand for pb&j sandwiches, but you’re putting the waitress and cook out of a job. Maybe that’s just freeing up their labor to be put to more… productive endeavors.
Honest question, what’s your stance on hunger strikes or other protests outside the workplace? I’m of the opinion that, in 2025, any disruption is good disruption.
I’m not going to tell people how to organize. But a single day boycott with no demands or goals is not organizing. It’s almost alienating in a way. Now, if you got together with friends and did something else like made sandwiches and went to a park. Awesome! You did something and probably all talked about issues together today. That’s positive.
But if you sat at home and said nothing to anyone and hoped for some news story about a massive drop in sale and economic instability. Well, that didn’t happen. And so people can have different reactions to that. My problem is that I think the net reaction is negative. It makes people feel like collective actions are useless. And they are when it comes to single day consumption.
But collective actions and organization are the fundamental power of working class movements. But the working class has its power in labor.
Now, economic boycotts can have power, but not in the way this is being done. Take South Africa BDS movements for example. These put real economic pressures on companies associated with South African apartheid. But these movements had clear demands and no time limit on the boycotts.
Single day boycotts are essentially useless in my eyes. I don’t think they can ever reach the scale to do so. At least they never have historically.
Hunger strikes are only as useful as the attention that they can bring. I’ll use Gaza as an example. The people of Gaza on March 2018 protested they Apartheid state of Israel in a peaceful march towards the walls around Gaza. Hundreds of men women and children were slaughtered by Israeli snipers. And nothing changed. Acts of peaceful protest like hunger strikes or civil disobedience are only effective if they put public pressure on a population that is inactive. The Gazan people have no one that cared of the injustice being placed upon them.
When these types of peaceful protest are met with violence and silence from the media the only actions that oppressed people have left are in violent revolution.
Labor organizing is the only real alternative to violent revolution that has been proven effective historically. But those movements are often met with violence from the state.
I don’t know if that answered your question. But I think I hit some of it.
Very well answered, thanks.
I think there’s generally poor discourse around protests. I appreciate the long form opinions that you and others have put together, but a lot of commentary is very reductive.
I get the “net negative” sentiment, but the only thing worse than feeling like you didn’t make an impact is feeling that while being berated as naive. For something as low stakes as a one day boycott, not much is lost if you use it as a case study to teach from. Here’s why it didn’t work and what we can do better. The important part of the discussion should be on building goals and organizing, and detaching those from the endorphins of political action.
I’m of the opinion that the only truly performative and useless protests are digital. If you went somewhere or did something (or changed plans to avoid either) you’re infinitely closer to making a change than putting a hashtag into the digital void.
The truth is we’re in uncharted territory. What does or doesn’t work may be unintuitive. Protests haven’t really happened:
The George Floyd protests in 2020 were the closest thing we’ve seen but today is different beast.
As an example, I get the feeling that organizing at your workplace won’t work for long. The administration would smash your legal right to unionize without hesitation. Similarly, signing up with the DSA might have been effective political action 4 years ago but put you on the no-fly list today. Maybe clandestine but highly visible protests (vandalism, sabotage, etc…) will have more impact than marching on Washington DC out of the gate? Time will tell…
Im guessing many folks or at least more than the usual percent on the fediverse do this to some degree. I have seen other comments about it and have done them myself. Its really not to much work to me but its a continuing thing. Regularly thinking about what else you can cut out or if you think you can finally cut out a particular thing. So im not where I would want to be and im past low hanging fruit and it will be slow going forward of where I am not but I will continue.
Not always possible. In rural areas, Walmart in particular is a mom and pop shop killer. Restaurants maybe, groceries and the like, this is not that universally possible.