Boycott Everything

Posted on
Page
of 9
  • As I purpose-built it, I can tell you you're full of shit, but you're probably aware of that by now, you get told often enough. It was purpose-built for people to share info about firms, traders etc who may do things other people may not support, which could be animal testing, poor service, contributing to particular political/social causes, looking at you funny when you go into their shop, not paying taxes, serving bad food/drinks, unethical business practices, treating employees like shit, over-exploit finite resources, whatever. People can debate whatever aspects they like, but most of this (so far) has been debate, rather than argument.

    Of course, you will attract the odd individual who will use it as a chance to point and laugh at anyone who's weak and cissy enough to have ethics. If you're that guy, maybe accept that you're just a cunt.

  • Although he does raise a point, that it is hard to live a life devoid of products, medicines, surgical procedures that have been tested or developed on animals.

    I don’t think people are kidding themselves when they try to live such a life, its about minimising where possible and acceptance that sometimes its not always achievable. People who educate themselves enough to try will already understand and accept this without having to be told in a dismissive way.

  • Consumer concerns do drive change in supply chains and business practice - it's obviously a minefield (sustainability, ethics, labour, etc.) and easier to just call people woke for trying to give a shit.

  • double confirmed.

  • said nobody, ever.

    Agree, why would anybody say that?!

  • hard to live a life

    ramsaye and M_V have hit the nail on the head here. Death is the only moral consumer choice.

  • "Cool ethics man!"

    said nobody, ever.

    Google says otherwise


    1 Attachment

    • 4F65D40B-6365-453C-9CFB-578F5D1CF48F.jpeg
  • To some extent. And of course different people have different moral views.

    I think people often get frustrated because others are holding up a mirror to their lack of conviction/laziness. Equally people also get frustrated by others virtue signalling based on whatever phase or hobby horse they/their peers are currently riding.

    The beer discussion on the previous page is a perfect example of a groups awareness (or lack of) and focus on certain issues. Alcohol is a blight on society. Period. The idea of then singling out one company, especially one the size of BD, based on some second hand bandwagon jumping is clearly ridiculous.

  • Morale and moral are rather different.

    Some find alcohol good for morale, others become morose.

  • Ok maybe "purpose built" was wrong. Infact it definitely was, so I apologise.

    I didn't mean to imply you started it with this purpose, more that it's inevitable that it descends into arguments.

    I don't want to point and laugh at anyone's ethics (and I don't think I have done so), I just think that an awful lot of people only have 'ethics' when its handy and/or trendy to do so and that a thread like this just provides a platform for people to jump on and give it a bit of "...yeah me too..." and to try and make themselves feel - or worse, appear - superior to anyone that doesn't agree with their 'ethics' and boycottings when its quite possible that those people who are being belittled are doing just as much or more in their own way.

  • Cheers. I always struggle with those two.

  • yet dismissing people's righteous fucked-offery as "virtue signalling" can get in the bin along with that terrible fucking phrase.

  • Agree and +1 to @Howard on the reasoned BD response.

    Full disclosure, I work for an organisation helping producers/supply chains and retailers deliver on some of these areas. It's part driven by business doing the right thing but also consumer sentiment - you need both. It's a minefield and those issues vary and change, especially on a global level.

    Typically UK consumers mostly care about the cheapest price, where as German consumers are very up on the latest issues - the markets react accordingly. People caring about the impact of what they consume is important in driving change - calling everyone who does woke is lazy and that phrase can go in the 'get in the sea' thread.

  • Maybe it's time to boycott the boycott thread.

  • People caring about the impact of what they consume is important in driving change - calling everyone who does woke is lazy and that phrase can go in the 'get in the sea' thread.

    I’ll probably get called a cunt again or full of shit or whatever it was for this but, you won’t get called ‘woke’ if you don’t shout about how ‘woke’ you are.

    Ie not everyone that makes decisions based on impact shouts about it on social media.

  • While I agree it's overused, it does encapsulate the action and motive very neatly - much like humble brag.

  • it really doesn't.

    all it says is "i am going to disregard your opinion because i'm happy to condescendingly assume the only reason you hold it is because you are incapable of forming any opinions of your own i am very smart".

    It says more about the person using the phrase rather than whoever it's directed towards.

  • Agree that it presumes some sort of disingenuousness on the part of the original statement, which often isn't constructive. But lots of words and phrases in online discussion probably aren't always helpful to debate but fit quite nicely into short posts - see shy-Tory or disaster capitalist.

  • all it says is "i am going to disregard your opinion because i'm happy to condescendingly assume the only reason you hold it is because you are incapable of forming any opinions of your own i am very smart".

    No, some people use it like that, but in some cases it does actually describe a particular type of competitive virtuousness very neatly.

    It's a bit like "SJW". Of course that has become a buzzword used for signalling to others, but there is a grain of truth there i.e., that it's just a bit fucking annoying being lectured at by someone who has made being loudly progressive the mainstay of their public persona, rather than just a core principle by which they direct their own actions.

  • and yet no one has provided any evidence that that description applies to them in this thread. These phrases are being used to shut people down and as such, it can get to fuckery.

  • Diesel. Fuck diesel. The sooner it's banned the better.

    15 mile journey this morning and I got caught behind five vehicles filling the road with shitty fumes and smoke. Why is that still acceptable in 2019?

  • If it wasn’t for the carcinogens and particulate it would be cleaner than petrol.

    IIRC anyway.

  • and yet no one has provided any evidence that that description applies to them in this thread. These phrases are being used to shut people down and as such, it can get to fuckery.

    True, people were asked for their opinion in this thread and, as such, they can hardly be called out for uninvited broadcasting of their views.

    On the other hand, everyone is entitled to judge whether others' fucked-offery is righteous or not. If they don't have this right then you end up with the ridiculous situation of everyone having to unquestioningly oppose anything that anyone else thinks is "problematic" (and you can see this competitive virtuousness in some spaces). For instance, in this thread I think boycotting companies that exploit workers is completely reasonable, because you can, for example, buy clothes whose creation doesn't result in human suffering. On the other hand I think it's not reasonable to boycott a health charity for using some of its money to fund animal testing, because its not yet possible to develop some treatments without it.

  • I apologise

    Christ I hate it when people get all reasonable and nice and defuse my scathing righteous anger - wac etc...

    tbh, I was more using your response to have a crack at the new guy, because new guy.

  • Come on, really?

    Do you genuinely think your current vocabulary isn't designed to shut people down? "get in the bin", "go to fuckery", etc. FWIW I agree with a lot of your animosity toward use of the phrase, but personally I don't think it's lazy use by some invalidates it as a useful term.

    My original use was in reference to what I read as spinnnout's claim that any criticism of conscious consumerism is just a lazy deflection by the critic. He used woke, I used virtue signalling. In terms of this thread, I'm not about to single people out and second guess each ones motivations, but I thought Howard's detailed BD response was a pretty effective mirror.

    edit; Alf0nse's response below probably sums up my posts here and the general derailing theme, so I'm going to put the thread on ignore.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

Boycott Everything

Posted by Avatar for kl @kl

Actions