Do you think everybody just has to go out and buy stuff everyday? I certainly don’t, and there are probably days in every one of my weeks where I buy nothing.
Economic protests are effective, so we should all encourage participation instead of making wet blanket comments to discourage participation.
I think you’re missing the point of this criticism.
People buy stuff, and then they use it. If they don’t use less, they won’t buy less, even if there’s a specific day where they choose not to buy anything. That day’s avoided purchases just get moved to another day, and the seller doesn’t feel any effect.
A real boycott takes money that would’ve been spent on a specific seller and takes it away forever. It’s a shift in purchase behavior to a competitor, or a shift in consumption behavior to not need to purchase that thing anymore.
As an extreme example, someone who boycotts Tesla every day for 5 years but still buys a Tesla once every 5 years is not effectively boycotting Tesla, even if that boycott covers 1825 days in a row.
Same with people who normally grocery shop on Friday, who shift their purchases to Saturday.
I would advocate for boycotting specific companies instead, and steering that money you would’ve spent to someone else (even a charity, so as to reduce one’s own consumption). The boycotts need to shift recipients of the money, not dates of when that money changes hands.
This isn’t an economic protest. This is slacktivism. One day or a handful of days will have exactly zero effect. Every one of you advocating for it and defending it is actively hurting the effort. You are the fascists best friend.
It won’t work because people are just going to stock up the day before and binge the day after. No one is going to feel anything.
^^ Lame comment.
Do you think everybody just has to go out and buy stuff everyday? I certainly don’t, and there are probably days in every one of my weeks where I buy nothing.
Economic protests are effective, so we should all encourage participation instead of making wet blanket comments to discourage participation.
I think you’re missing the point of this criticism.
People buy stuff, and then they use it. If they don’t use less, they won’t buy less, even if there’s a specific day where they choose not to buy anything. That day’s avoided purchases just get moved to another day, and the seller doesn’t feel any effect.
A real boycott takes money that would’ve been spent on a specific seller and takes it away forever. It’s a shift in purchase behavior to a competitor, or a shift in consumption behavior to not need to purchase that thing anymore.
As an extreme example, someone who boycotts Tesla every day for 5 years but still buys a Tesla once every 5 years is not effectively boycotting Tesla, even if that boycott covers 1825 days in a row.
Same with people who normally grocery shop on Friday, who shift their purchases to Saturday.
I would advocate for boycotting specific companies instead, and steering that money you would’ve spent to someone else (even a charity, so as to reduce one’s own consumption). The boycotts need to shift recipients of the money, not dates of when that money changes hands.
This isn’t an economic protest. This is slacktivism. One day or a handful of days will have exactly zero effect. Every one of you advocating for it and defending it is actively hurting the effort. You are the fascists best friend.
I don’t think this makes people the facist’s BFF but it is ineffective if you don’t just stop buying from these companies
Right but shifting purchases one day forward or backward isn’t going to affect anything when business operates on the financial quarter.
It does send a message but it won’t hit then economically.