3 ms·
The idea is to avoid normalizing the actions of ICE. Public perception is one of the largest drivers of change in government. Look at things like marriage equal
by tylermac1 7y ago
The idea is to avoid normalizing the actions of ICE. Public perception is one of the largest drivers of change in government. Look at things like marriage equality and marijuana usage have driven legislation over time.
Whether or not Chef dropping ICE as a customer directly saves one kid isn't the only marker of success. The combination of hamstringing operations along with increased public awareness are steps along the path to shutting them down for good.
I also agree there is a moral obligation in advertising unhealthy foods, but equating the damages of that to ICE just undermines the efforts of both avenues.
- ng12 7y agoFair, although I don't exactly think it would surprise the feds that a bunch of people living in San Francisco disagree with their goals.
- thesuperbigfrog 7y ago>> The combination of hamstringing operations along with increased public awareness are steps along the path to shutting them down for good. On the contrary--hamstringing their operations just raise their costs. They are funded by US taxpayers, so if costs go up US taxpayers will pay more. If you want to shutdown ICE or change how they operate, the US Congress must change the law. If you are a US citizen, write / call / email your representatives and demand that they act accordingly. Also, VOTE! If you don't like what your representatives are doing, vote them out! Petty protests like this do little to change the operations of a federally-funded, legally-mandated entity that is enforcing federal law. If you want change to occur, federal law must be changed. Congress changes federal laws, so you must start with them.