I thought they would be all for boycotts because it would attack the capital assets of the bourgeois. But I was told that boycotts hurt the small people “so don’t do them” without suggesting other actions unironically even when they’re complicit in crimes. Why not direct your money to supporting smaller businesses so they can poach the workers with better pay and working conditions when the corporations fire them due to there being less revenue in that quarter. We can break apart corporations such as Loblaws or Nestle if we stopped buying their products even in situations where they’re have the regulatory capture as the source of their moneymaking scheme would be completely cut off. It will become less and less excusable in the public’s eyes that the governments of the world are subsiding and allowing price gauging to go unchecked. They will pay a massive political price and will be quickly on the way out alongside the corporation.
Your initial question was valid but this response is naive and arrogant.
Hate to break it to you, but you don’t have that much power.
By all means boycott Nestle, everything you buy from someone else is a few bucks they won’t get, but they won’t care.
Even if you count ALL the people who hate Nestle AND know what brands they own, it’s not enough to end them.
Yes, every little bit helps and nobody is telling you not to boycott, but in reality, these things are rarely if EVER big and organized enough to amount to any more than a negligible drop in revenue.
There’s that defeatist mindset that won’t achieve anything. Nestle is nothing without the workers, customers and suppliers. We can inform more people about the scandals of nestle and of the alternatives.
And I fully support that. Keep fighting the good fight!
I’m just telling you why you might not get the excitement you’re looking for the next time you suggest a boycott.