• 19 Posts
  • 18 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 24th, 2025

help-circle


  • PugJesus@piefed.socialOPto196@lemmy.worldErika rules
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    They have a website… I mean, right?

    No, because there’s no antifa ‘organization’ that could credibly speak for the movement. It would be like finding a website for Pineapple-on-Pizza lovers and asking if that was ‘the’ Pineapple-on-Pizza-Lover website. The answer is no, because Pineapple-on-Pizza-Lover is describing an inclination, not membership in a group.

    Or, for a more innate example, asking if “the Asians” have a website. Asian is descriptive of a (subjective, generally phenotypical) quality, not of membership in an organization. You could find any number of websites by Asian folk, or catering to Asian folk, but it’s not “The Asians have a website.”



  • PugJesus@piefed.socialOPto196@lemmy.worldErika rules
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 days ago

    Look man, “Abolish for-profit corporations, and all that implies” has significant support on here, but not so much in meatspace America. Most of us are trying to play the cards we have with the players we have.

    They haven’t ‘lost sight’ of the real problem, they disagree that there is a problem to begin with. And we, as leftists, have to work against that being the dominant view. But that’s groundwork, and boycotts are action for more immediate purposes. Two entirely different undertakings.


  • PugJesus@piefed.socialOPto196@lemmy.worldErika rules
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    The two are not mutually exclusive. For-profit corporations react to, well, changes in profit. It’s not about the influence ‘trickling down’, it’s about punishing bad behavior on the part of corporations in the only way that they actually understand - something which other corporations, desperate to please their shareholders, take note of.

    Boycotts, performed by a sufficient percentage of the consumer base, do what they are intended to do - adjust corporate behavior. Nothing deeper - but far from pointless. And considering how fucking difficult it is to pass regulations, and how even with a friendly legislature such things take considerable amounts of time and must avoid violating corporate ‘rights’, boycotts are not a tool to be discarded out-of-hand.

    As long as for-profit corporations exist - and they appear to be well-established to continue to do so for the near-future - we must deal with them as they are, not as we wish them to be (ie well-regulated or gone).

    I just think it’s myopic and counterproductive that so many people seem to think “vote with your dollar” is the only strategy to consider, especially when they’re working-class and have negligible numbers of dollars to vote with.

    It’s not the only strategy, but pretending that corporations don’t affect society, or that consumers don’t affect corporate behavior, is foolishness. Corporations, as a class of entities, vacuum up most wealth in our society, but individual corporations still rely on relatively narrow consumer bases with small individual consumer purchasing power - a chip company that suddenly loses 20% of its sales for a year is in deep shit - with the shareholders if nothing else, and that’s what corporations care about. For that matter, one of the few advantages of our ultra-fucked capitalist society in the states is that there are plenty of meaningless choices - there are half a dozen different brands of fucking cereal. It’s not about having ‘more’ or ‘less’ dollars to vote with - allocating those dollars differently still can send a message - assuming the boycott is widespread and narrowly targeted.

    On top of that, this is about a video game, an extraneous expense to begin with.