2021 Apr 18, 6:35pm
341 views 23 comments
The question, then, is what conservatives do now. One proposed solution is to dust off America’s antitrust machinery, to start breaking up these corporate behemoths. And certainly there’s a case to be made that, say, Google has grown so massive as to be anticompetitive. But antitrust action won’t solve the problem at hand. Break up Google and you’ve got…two Googles, both as woke as the first one was. The issue isn’t that these companies aren’t competitive and innovative — Silicon Valley does nothing if not creatively destroy — but that they’re acting as agents of bad cultural change. ...Still, the operative idea is a good one. If woke capitalism is to be stopped, businesses need to be disincentivized against it. To that end, the most effective tool in the conservative arsenal is probably the good old-fashioned boycott: turn the left’s tactics around on it. Isolate and pressure these businesses. There is precedent here. When France declined to support the war in Iraq back in 2003, conservatives launched a boycott of French wines, and French businessmen later admitted that their sales had taken a dent. And while research suggests boycotts tend to damage a company’s reputation more than its revenue, in today’s flashbulb online world, nothing is more important than public image.The trick to any pressure campaign will be to sustain it in the long run, to make sure companies can’t wait it out until the news cycle dashes on to its next shiny object. Fortunately there is precedent here too. When Hasbro announced it was going to make Mr and Mrs Potato Head gender-neutral, it kicked up a wave of fury, and not long afterwards, it sent a tweet clarifying that the spuds would remain sexed after all. It was a small win, but those matter in a culture war. We shall fight in the toy-store aisles and the Mulberry Streets and the midscale Florida grocery stores. And so forth. The point is that conservative public pressure can make a difference, even against a corporate giant.
Boycott etc. and shopping based on politics is a "lefty stuff".Do we really want to go that route?
Boycott etc. and shopping based on politics is a "lefty stuff".Do we really want to go that route?It is going to further the agenda of people who wants to divide society along communist and fascist lines and finish off centrists.
farmer2021 saysBoycott etc. and shopping based on politics is a "lefty stuff".Do we really want to go that route?Voting with dollars is perhaps even more effective that voting at the ballot box.Especially now that Democrats have cheated at the ballot box.
Boycott etc. and shopping based on politics is a "lefty stuff".
I still buy Goya. To be honest, I have wayyyyy too many cans of beans now, but oh well, it's good to have a cache of food.
They have Walmart listed as "no longer conservative".
I think Walmart took advantage of the 1980 “normalization of trade” with China just like so many other companies that sell and make goods did. Even Trump brand neckties are made overseas, because he is a chi com shill too?
1990s. What happened to those millions of high paying jobs of the future exporting to ONE BILLION CUSTOMERS?
They sure don't try that bullshit line anymore.
Neil deGrasse Tyson@neiltysonApr 11The good thing about Science is that it’s true, whether or not you believe in it.2:40 AM · Apr 13, 20214732,16355916,674Steak-umm@steak_ummApr 13log off broSteak-umm@steak_ummApr 13the irony of neil’s tweet is that by framing science itself as “true” he’s influencing people to be more skeptical of it in a time of unprecedented misinformation. science is an ever refining process to find truth, not a dogma. no matter his intent, this message isn’t helpful
Software company Basecamp ends politics in the workplaceAs politics has consumed offices, virtual offices, and entertainment, Basecamp is following Coinbase's lead. ...CTO David Hansson penned another blog post further expanding on the reasoning behind the company’s decision not to promote an activist but ultimately contentious workplace. Something that Hansson says he at one point saw as a “healthy debate” he now considers to be counterproductive and a source of stress.The goal, Hansson said, is to come to work and be able to collaborate with others regardless of their political and other persuasions, unburdened by difficult and highly controversial discussions that have to do with society at large rather than their work.According to him, by allowing these sensitive topics to be brought inside the company, “we’re setting ourselves up for strife, with little chance of actually changing anyone’s mind.”