It doesn’t matter, because boycotts are generally futile since they at best only address skin level symptoms (at worst, and almost always - you’re just giving your money to a different scummy capitalist), they can’t cure the cancer, which is precisely why they’re touted as a wonderful solution (by capitalists trying to ensure the public don’t take any meaningful action against them).
I partly agree but I do think you have cause and effect (or disease and symptom if you will) swapped around. You‘re saying people don‘t do boycotts because they are futile. I would say it‘s the other way around and to answer OPs question, I think it largely comes down to commodity and mindlessness. But either way I think you are definitely right to suggest there must be systemic change and that all of this co2 compensation bullshit is just corporations guilt-tripping us into thinking we can consume our way out of this mess.
However, the problem is that both approaches, the personal boycotts and the systemic change share a common factor, which is the requirement of mass action. If people aren‘t mindful enough to stop buying a particular kind of yoghurt, how are you ever going to get them to vote, much less stage a revolution? I think we need to get out of our passivity and boycotting things is a step in the right direction to establish a feel for personal agency.
If people aren‘t mindful enough to stop buying a particular kind of yoghurt, how are you ever going to get them to vote, much less stage a revolution? I think we need to get out of our passivity
How about people who aren’t mindful enough of those who can’t stop buying one brand or another, but especially of the reasons why??? (like - they only have one local store that only carries the one brand, or they carry two brand made by the same parent company, or they have three brands, two by the same company and the third by another one with just-as-bad practices. Or they’re too poor to buy the more “ethical” brand, or they simply don’t have the time in their day to even be aware of a boycott over exploitative practices, because they themselves are being exploited at 3 different jobs just to survive) I guarantee that a lack of that kind of mindfulness hurts the working class significantly more than the kind you’re angry about.
If you want people to stop being “passive” - you destroy the system designed to keep them that way (not actually passive at all, they’re probably more active than you’ll ever be, just deliberately kept undereducated and too busy trying to survive), insisting on them continuing to play by the rules said system has made available to them (precisely because they have no real impact) only serves those in power to maintain the status quo.
It doesn’t matter, because boycotts are generally futile since they at best only address skin level symptoms (at worst, and almost always - you’re just giving your money to a different scummy capitalist), they can’t cure the cancer, which is precisely why they’re touted as a wonderful solution (by capitalists trying to ensure the public don’t take any meaningful action against them).
I partly agree but I do think you have cause and effect (or disease and symptom if you will) swapped around. You‘re saying people don‘t do boycotts because they are futile. I would say it‘s the other way around and to answer OPs question, I think it largely comes down to commodity and mindlessness. But either way I think you are definitely right to suggest there must be systemic change and that all of this co2 compensation bullshit is just corporations guilt-tripping us into thinking we can consume our way out of this mess. However, the problem is that both approaches, the personal boycotts and the systemic change share a common factor, which is the requirement of mass action. If people aren‘t mindful enough to stop buying a particular kind of yoghurt, how are you ever going to get them to vote, much less stage a revolution? I think we need to get out of our passivity and boycotting things is a step in the right direction to establish a feel for personal agency.
How about people who aren’t mindful enough of those who can’t stop buying one brand or another, but especially of the reasons why??? (like - they only have one local store that only carries the one brand, or they carry two brand made by the same parent company, or they have three brands, two by the same company and the third by another one with just-as-bad practices. Or they’re too poor to buy the more “ethical” brand, or they simply don’t have the time in their day to even be aware of a boycott over exploitative practices, because they themselves are being exploited at 3 different jobs just to survive) I guarantee that a lack of that kind of mindfulness hurts the working class significantly more than the kind you’re angry about.
If you want people to stop being “passive” - you destroy the system designed to keep them that way (not actually passive at all, they’re probably more active than you’ll ever be, just deliberately kept undereducated and too busy trying to survive), insisting on them continuing to play by the rules said system has made available to them (precisely because they have no real impact) only serves those in power to maintain the status quo.
That article needs to be its own post
George Monbiot is a fantastic writer.