5 ms·

What if the people didn't purchase products or services from these said corporations who do these awful things? Ultimately it always comes back to us and our co

What if the people didn't purchase products or services from these said corporations who do these awful things? Ultimately it always comes back to us and our complacency. We would like for things to be different, but we like our conveniences more.

theobon 9y ago
The "vote with your dollars" narrative is becoming a common way of dismissing peoples concerns without consideration. It reinforces the plutocracy. I voted by voting! Purchasing from companies whose ethics you agree with makes sense but that isn't going to stop lobbying or change how laws are passed. That battle will only be won through politics and politicians. Get involved politically and/or hold your politicians accountable.
- Frondo 9y ago
  Yeah, exactly that. "Vote with your dollars" moves your political power to the capitalist consumerist realm, and strips it of so much of its power. Using food safety as a simple example: vote for food safety regulations (vote with your vote) or don't buy from companies that poison people through negligence (vote with your dollars). Which world would you rather take your elderly grandparents out to dinner in? Voting with your dollars is a pale shadow of your actual voice in a democratic society.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - treehau5 9y ago
    > Voting with your dollars is a pale shadow of your actual voice in a democratic society. Reality speaks otherwise. Money gives you a voice. That's why lobbying exists.
sharkweek 9y ago
My favorite quote from The Wire: "You want it to be one way. But it's the other way." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=409Pjtq7jzY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=409Pjtq7jzY
- treehau5 9y ago
  Need to watch this show. Didn't get it until I watched a clip with more context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwuckTkE7T4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwuckTkE7T4 Just can't get pass all the language. It doesn't bug me too much, but when your TV is in the living room with lots of people around, it's not exactly something you can turn up loud.
GavinMcG 9y ago
"What if a large, diverse group of people who are busy living their lives could act collectively in a way that's as effective as a well-funded group of professional lobbyists?" You're right in the most technical sense, in that all of human social reality comes back to "us". But blaming complacency, rather than the exponentially more difficult problem "we" have to solve, is completely bizarre.
bluGill 9y ago
You are in the industry, and thus affected by the issue: the most overly broad, worst case, one sided, law of this type is in your favor. Thus it is unfair to even ask that question at this time. First we need to ask if the law was fair. What are the real concerns of the other side. Did the law address them fairly? Just because you are biased doesn't excuse you from understanding the other side and ensuring that you are fair to them. Next, you need to ensure that you knowledgeable and involved with other issues. You boycotting alone is meaningless as you ultimately are small compared to people who are not in the industry. Everybody has concerns about their domain that nobody else knows about. Are you informed and helping in the local nurse/hospital depute? What about the retails workers issues (the types of people who enjoy working at wal-mart overall)...
TYPE_FASTER 9y ago
I could drop Prime membership. It would be somewhat more difficult to stop buying products from any company who used AWS. In another case where I knew people who moved from one org to another, which then was sued for similar reasons as in the article, both companies were enterprise organizations that would not be impacted by consumer shopping patterns.
vkou 9y ago
What if people stopped buying cotton that was grown and picked by slaves? I mean, they could have, but they didn't. You can't pin the blame (Or even dilute it a bit) for American slavery on a Frenchman wearing a cotton shirt.

theobon 9y ago

The "vote with your dollars" narrative is becoming a common way of dismissing peoples concerns without consideration. It reinforces the plutocracy. I voted by voting! Purchasing from companies whose ethics you agree with makes sense but that isn't going to stop lobbying or change how laws are passed. That battle will only be won through politics and politicians. Get involved politically and/or hold your politicians accountable.

Frondo 9y ago
Yeah, exactly that. "Vote with your dollars" moves your political power to the capitalist consumerist realm, and strips it of so much of its power. Using food safety as a simple example: vote for food safety regulations (vote with your vote) or don't buy from companies that poison people through negligence (vote with your dollars). Which world would you rather take your elderly grandparents out to dinner in? Voting with your dollars is a pale shadow of your actual voice in a democratic society.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- treehau5 9y ago
  > Voting with your dollars is a pale shadow of your actual voice in a democratic society. Reality speaks otherwise. Money gives you a voice. That's why lobbying exists.

sharkweek 9y ago

My favorite quote from The Wire: "You want it to be one way. But it's the other way." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=409Pjtq7jzY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=409Pjtq7jzY

treehau5 9y ago
Need to watch this show. Didn't get it until I watched a clip with more context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwuckTkE7T4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwuckTkE7T4 Just can't get pass all the language. It doesn't bug me too much, but when your TV is in the living room with lots of people around, it's not exactly something you can turn up loud.

GavinMcG 9y ago

"What if a large, diverse group of people who are busy living their lives could act collectively in a way that's as effective as a well-funded group of professional lobbyists?" You're right in the most technical sense, in that all of human social reality comes back to "us". But blaming complacency, rather than the exponentially more difficult problem "we" have to solve, is completely bizarre.

bluGill 9y ago

You are in the industry, and thus affected by the issue: the most overly broad, worst case, one sided, law of this type is in your favor. Thus it is unfair to even ask that question at this time. First we need to ask if the law was fair. What are the real concerns of the other side. Did the law address them fairly? Just because you are biased doesn't excuse you from understanding the other side and ensuring that you are fair to them. Next, you need to ensure that you knowledgeable and involved with other issues. You boycotting alone is meaningless as you ultimately are small compared to people who are not in the industry. Everybody has concerns about their domain that nobody else knows about. Are you informed and helping in the local nurse/hospital depute? What about the retails workers issues (the types of people who enjoy working at wal-mart overall)...

TYPE_FASTER 9y ago

I could drop Prime membership. It would be somewhat more difficult to stop buying products from any company who used AWS. In another case where I knew people who moved from one org to another, which then was sued for similar reasons as in the article, both companies were enterprise organizations that would not be impacted by consumer shopping patterns.

vkou 9y ago

What if people stopped buying cotton that was grown and picked by slaves? I mean, they could have, but they didn't. You can't pin the blame (Or even dilute it a bit) for American slavery on a Frenchman wearing a cotton shirt.