2 ms·
Fair enough. My point is only that this is a consensual system at its root. And when the public votes with there money (the Montgomery bus boycott) and back it
by appleflaxen 10y ago
Fair enough. My point is only that this is a consensual system at its root.
And when the public votes with there money (the Montgomery bus boycott) and back it up at the ballot box, you could actually effect change.
- quadrangle 10y agoThere's actually a super strong case that the system is not really rooted in consensus, that we have a supply-side system in which people do not have effective "vote" with their money (see this article this thread is on), that boycotts basically don't work (even the story of the Montgomery bus boycott generally overplays the effect of the boycott aspect, see http://freakonomics.com/podcast/do-boycotts-work-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/ http://freakonomics.com/podcast/do-boycotts-work-a-new-freak... ), and, in the end, I'm not asserting a conclusion here, but there's more evidence against "you could actually effect change" than for it (disregarding the affect/effect spelling issue).