AmonWhat is one moral you have that most people don't agree with?
A free society means other people are entitled to make a living even if I don’t like the way they think. I won’t “vote with my wallet” because that’s like saying a lynch mob is “voting with rope”.
What? You won’t “vote with your wallet” meaning you freely give your money to companies that do evil?
I buy what I need and don’t subscribe to, “Think like me or I’ll hurt you!”. Companies don’t do evil, individuals who work for them do. Boycotting a company might give you a nice warm glow of social justice, but it actually hurts lowest-level employees way more than CEOs. But why think about that when you can just downvote this comment as heresy, right?
That’s a terrible take (no offense).
Continuing to buy Nestlé products as an example, just reinforces their use of slaves. Whoever it hurts not buying their products doesn’t even cross my mind because I don’t want to continue lining the pockets of slave owners with my money.
p.s. idk if nestle use slaves, just used them as an example i think they might tho
If I stop buying from Nestlé then the slaves wouldn’t have a job any more. Duh.
Just kidding, fuck Nestlé. I’ve been boycotting for a couple of years although I do miss some of their cereals…
“I think they might tho” is a perfect example of meme-driven morality. Most people never actually check (I mean,. you didn’t). Nestle is the usual Hitler example (probably valid tho) that people use to justify the whole mentality of boycotts. But most of the time it’s more like they heard a CEO donated to Trump - for example my in-laws refused to shopt at Home Depot for that exact reason. Turned out their info was out of date - the guy they were thinking of hadn’t been involved in the company in like 10 years. Kind of reminiscent of the bogus 10-year-old WMD intel the Dubya administration used to justify invading Iraq. But who has time to look that shit up when we got scrollin’ to do! And as I said, boycotts hurt employees more than CEOs. If a company is actually hurting they relieve their pain by laying people off. IMO it’s a lazy way for people to pretend they’re fighting for justice when they really aren’t. “Shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out” morality.
I just used Nestlé and slaves as an example. Feel free to change the company name and reason to anything else. My point is just that any company doing anything bad enough should stop you from supporting them.
Most people don’t care enough about doing this (me included at times), which is sort of how (one reason) we’ve ended up with these massive companies that can do whatever they want. It sucks to say but if Nestlé went out of business and 10k people lost their jobs, it’s probably a net good for the planet when the next good company takes lead (good as in pays and treats employees fairly, etc). This outcome sounds better than letting them run free as we do now.
In reality if we were able to hurt a companies bottom line enough, like Nestlé, jobs might not be lost, because they may actually change and become better to the point where we can buy their shiz again.
My point is that “companies” don’t do bad things, executive decisionmakers do, and boycotts have little if any effect on those individuals. If anything they hurt the lowest-ranking people in the company who have absolutely no say in business decisions. It’s like beating up kids because you heard their parents were assholes. What works is laws that regulate business practices so the bad decisions can’t be made. Mob tactics do nothing but give people a false sense of accomplishment.
Well I didn’t downvote you, but anyway, keep being the problem then bucko
Im downvoting you because you compared the literal murders of people to not spending 5$ on a chocolate bar. If you actually equate the two then your morals are so shallow as to not even be worth considering.