Consumerism being the last available political act for everyone is pretty resonant.
Removed by mod
In aggregate yes but individually no. Unless there’s some wider structure organising individuals to withhold their consumption for explicit reasons that the corpo can hear then your unsub won’t have any effect beyond your own sense of self-satisfaction.
That’s not to say that it’s pointless but if you want to hurt a corpo you need to organise.
Removed by mod
Personal responsibility is great but you won’t affect systemic change through personal action. I’m not suggesting you stop being a conscientious consumeror but we have a tendency to keep insisting that the first step is for everyone to individually change.l their behaviour.
E.g. If you want to personally abstain from contribution to climate change then that’s A-OK but if your goal is to actually prevent it then you need to think and work systemically.
I don’t mean organise in a workplace (though we all should) I mean organise in a community sense. The idea that you are responsible in part for a systemic problem because of your own consumption habits was foisted on us by corpos to shift blame for the economic and environmental destruction they chose to cause.
Removed by mod
Right? As an example, when I switched to a plant based diet in 2014, if I wanted a vegan pizza or vegan doughnut, for example, I’d have to make them myself or seek out a specialist shop. Now these things are mainstream, even small supermarkets have them, Lidl even has vegan weeks every couple of months. That was unimaginable 10 years ago!
My actions back then did nothing alone, but it was the slow trickle of others cutting out animal products that added up and created this demand. And one person setting an example can encourage friends and family to give it a go.
The problem with this, is that many use it to justify their own inaction and direct benefit from problematic things. It honestly doesn’t matter if you don’t organise, you should have basic goddamn morals and not enrich your life at the expense of others.
Yes and no. Yes, we’ve been stripped of our ability to protest in any real and meaningful way outside of “voting with our wallet”, but no because even then it’s a futile effort because these sinister people/corporations are so prevalent in our culture that we cannot escape funding them; either directly or indirectly.
Take Nestle, known evil corp that thinks water is a commodity and not a basic life right. Or General Mills, who recently drew the ire of everybody over their proposal to take away worker benefits. And I’m sure there are more that I’m not thinking of; that if you put them all together, would make people very hard pressed to buy the things they love.
Removed by mod
goyslop
My Geiger counter’s screaming with the Hitlerite particles in this one.
I think this helps explain the ridiculous phenomena of video-game-activism that’s so vocal and present on the internet.
Removed by mod
Bitching online while still pre-ordering that shit is not activism lol
Your comment is a perfect example of what OP is talking about. You believe that if gamers changed their purchasing decisions on mass, then companies would have to change. What is that if not activism? You’re treating capitalism as though it were a democracy.
And you’re wrong btw, Game companies make games for investors, not gamers. If you don’t believe me then please explain why so many live service games get made even though gamers have clearly voted against them with their wallets.
Removed by mod
John Waters is fantastic.
Better yet, see a normal movie without giving a shit what anyone involved did in their personal lives.
I saw that one with the gross lobster rape scene
