and when has a left boycott ever been effective? Never.
This also isn't even true.
https://www.ethicalconsumer.org/ethicalcampaigns/boycotts/history-successful-boycotts
this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Conservative
384 readers
3 users here now
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is a cool website. Importantly, the effectiveness many of the boycotts didn't manifest until after several years! So when we hear about a boycott and when it achieves its goal seems to often have considerable lag time.
That's actually really useful to know.
Yet when the right boycotted bud. It was noticeable in less than a month. Their market share and stock dropped like a rock. That’s how you boycott.
Didn't everyone end up boycotting them for a while because they walked back the stuff that the right got mad at pretty quickly?
That detail is irrelevant for OP. Showing the right to be strong is more important than recognizing that bud light ended up getting boycotted by everyone in the end.
Everyone ended up boycotting.
I didn’t because I don’t care about the whole trans ad. Trans people drink beer too.
Also I don’t drink bud light. Can’t boycott something I don’t drink.
That was a marketing lesson learned. They ended up pissing everyone off. They should have either not done the marketing ad or defended the hell out of it after they did it.
When the left does a boycott, it is to fight for people's rights (just as in this case), and it gets labeled by the right as cancel culture, as no action of the left can be without pejorative labeling by the right.
When the right does a boycott, it is for culture war that will never help the average american (such as panicking over a trans person being in an ad).
What rights were you people fighting for with the Hobby Lobby, Waifair, SoullCycle gym, Sinclair Broadcasting, CVS, Olive Garden, ADL, ...?
Pick your strongest one. I don't have time for all of those.
SoullCycle gym
https://www.vox.com/2019/8/9/20791646/soulcycle-trump-fundraiser-backlash
Seems pretty straightforward from a quick skim. They publicly supported a white nationalist/fascist. And a fun fact about white nationalists and fascists, they are hell bent on taking peoples rights away.
I don't see any evidence that soul cycle supported a "white nationalist". Don't know why the race of a nationalists is important to this discussion but we are not discussing your race hangups right now. Your source claims that an owner of a company that invested in soul cycle hosted a Trump fund raiser.
What specific rights were you people fighting for by boycotting soul cycle?
You're 0 for 2 on your claims the company had no connection to the fundraiser and you can't list any rights you were fighting for.
I assume you’re trying to have a discussion with pizza. He has a weird fascination with white nationalist and calls a random people white nationalist. When ask for proof, he just babbles and claims you’re moving the goal post.
He has a weird fascination with white nationalist and calls a random people white nationalist.
Given that neo nazis are publicly and openly marching in the streets, I wouldn't call it a weird fascination. It's a legitimate concern for anybody who cares about their rights, the rights of others, or democracy.
When ask for proof, he just babbles and claims you’re moving the goal post.
When you ask for proof you ignore the proof and move on to the next thing. You always get that treatment because that's always what you do.
Garbage in, garbage out. If you wanted to have honest discussion, you need to be honest. But you're not, so it's what you get.
I might be partially to blame on that one, I used the term moving the goal posts in a discussion with him. He learned a new phrase but not what it ment.
I've been arguing on the internet for years. I know what the term means. But thanks for the insult.
I 100% believe you think you know what it means but as with many things you claim to know they turn out to be wrong.
Yawn
That must have hit the mark, you took the effort to reply that it doesn't bother you.
Nah. It's just that you've straight up been told that your insult isn't true, so you double down. It's boring as shit.
Yup it totally doesn't bother you, it's totally normal to keep responding.
I'm in the ER with my girlfriend. I quite literally have nothing better to do. I don't mind pointing out your bullshit.
It's impressive how much effort you'll put forth to pretend it doesn't bothers you.
He’s convinced there is a white nationalist behind every tree. He wouldn’t actually know one if he saw one.
Biden is more of a white nationalist than Trump.
Biden is more of a white nationalist than Trump.
Nah
invested in soul cycle hosted a Trump fund raiser.
I don’t see any evidence that soul cycle supported a “white nationalist”.
Yeah... think a little harder on this one.
Don’t know why the race of a nationalists is important to this discussion but we are not discussing your race hangups right now.
Thank you for the reminder that white nationalists are supported around here. I needed the reminder to not take this place seriously.
the company had no connection to the fundraiser
They did though.
https://www.vox.com/2019/8/8/20782269/stephen-ross-soulcycle-equinox-trump-donor
I don't see any evidence in your source that soul cycle was involved in the fundraiser.
Thank you for the reminder that white nationalists are supported around here. I needed the reminder to not take this place seriously.
It this your way of saying you support black nationalists, chinese nationalists, Jewish nationalists...?
You somehow forgot to mention which rights you were fighting for by boycotting soul cycle.
I don’t see any evidence in your source that soul cycle was involved in the fundraiser.
Then you don't have the reading comprehension needed. So I'll spell it out for you. Their CEO (the person who runs and represents the company, whom they have ties to) ran a Trump fundraiser, which necessarily connects the two.
It this your way of saying you support black nationalists, chinese nationalists, Jewish nationalists…?
No, of course not. Nationalism, especially racially based nationalism is always bad. But none of those other forms are currently a problem.
This is like having a building on fire, and then complaining that firefighters aren't putting out the fire the homeless started in a barrel. Your concerns are beyond misplaced. You don't care about the truth, all you're doing is finding some bullshit loaded question.
You somehow forgot to mention which rights you were fighting for by boycotting soul cycle.
I already explained this.
If you don't already have a good understanding of what rights neo nazis/white nationalists are seeking to remove, then you're either incapable of understanding, intentionally ignorant, or in support of their removal.
Then you don’t have the reading comprehension needed. So I’ll spell it out for you. Their CEO (the person who runs and represents the company, whom they have ties to) ran a Trump fundraiser, which necessarily connects the two.
Do you think a CEO is always representing their company?
No, of course not. Nationalism, especially racially based nationalism is always bad. But none of those other forms are currently a problem.
Is your obsession with white nationalists because you can't call everyone fascists or you will get banned?
I already explained this.
This is not providing examples of which rights you're fighting for.
They publicly supported a white nationalist/fascist. And a fun fact about white nationalists and fascists, they are hell bent on taking peoples rights away.
Bad people do bad things is the kind of logic I should expect from you.
Do you have evidence that Trump is a white nationalists? Remember try to be specific in your examples.
Do you think a CEO is always representing their company?
Yes.
Is your obsession with white nationalists because you can’t call everyone fascists or you will get banned?
Like I already said, it isn't an obsession.
Bad people do bad things is the kind of logic I should expect from you.
This is a strawman.
Do you have evidence that Trump is a white nationalists? Remember try to be specific in your examples.
I already linked this earlier just for you to ignore. So I'll put in the same level of effort.
Since you believe a CEO is always representing their company, then a person couldn't be a CEO of multiple companies but they are, companies would be legally liable for all actions of their CEO but they are not.
You really need to work on understanding logical fallacies, you lose all credibility when you use them incorrectly.
An opnion piece that doesn't mention white nantionalists in the whole article is not evidence that Trump is a white nantionalists. Do you even read the articles you cite.
You still haven't listed a single right that you people were fighting for with the soul cycle boycott.
Since you believe a CEO is always representing their company, then a person couldn’t be a CEO of multiple companies but they are, companies would be legally liable for all actions of their CEO but they are not.
A person can represent multiple companies. And the law is the law, it is often not a reflection reality.
You really need to work on understanding logical fallacies, you lose all credibility when you use them incorrectly.
You portrayed my argument as "Bad people do bad", an intentionally weak and inaccurate version of my argument. That's by definition a strawman.
"A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion"
The only real difference here is that you portrayed my argument to be so weak that it was implied to be inherently wrong. But at the end of the day you were using a strawman.
If anyone here has lost credibility it is you for using fallacies, and then lying about it.
An opnion piece that doesn’t mention white nantionalists in the whole article is not evidence that Trump is a white nantionalists. Do you even read the articles you cite.
Evidently the concept of synonyms is beyond your understanding. That, and the spelling of "nationalist".
You're also fundamentally missing the point. The article is talking about the -ism, not the specifics which would be the -ists.
A person can represent multiple companies.
I'm glad you finally concede a CEO is not always representing their company.
You portrayed my argument as “Bad people do bad”, an intentionally weak and inaccurate version of my argument. That’s by definition a strawman.
Let's look at your reply
And a fun fact about white nationalists and fascists, they are hell bent on taking peoples rights away.
White nationalists are bad, taking people's rights away is bad. Remember this was in response to being asked which rights you people were fighting for, which you still can't list. Bad people do bad things is a perfect summary of your dodge of the question.
You’re also fundamentally missing the point. The article is talking about the -ism, not the specifics which would be the -ists.
Your article had accusations but no evidence, those accusations were Trump has done some racists things. That's a far leap from Trump is a white nationalists.
Still waiting for what rights your fighting for.
I’m glad you finally concede a CEO is not always representing their company.
That is not what I said. If you want to have honest discussion, this is not the way to do it.
Bad people do bad things is a perfect summary of your dodge of the question.
That is not my argument.
Your article had accusations but no evidence, those accusations were Trump has done some racists things. That’s a far leap from Trump is a white nationalists.
I'm putting in the same level of effort as you. Do you want better sources? Then quit being dishonest about what I am saying, and quit the insults. Until then I'm not going to bother putting in effort to cite the evidence just for you to play childish games.
Still waiting for what rights your fighting for.
I already explained this, just for you to strawman it.
That is not what I said. If you want to have honest discussion, this is not the way to do it.
Here are your exact words.
A person can represent multiple companies.
You can't represent multiple companies simultaneously, you should look up feduciary responsibilities.
I’m putting in the same level of effort as you.
Just admit you're lazy and/or couldn't find a source supporting your insane claims. The 1st step to improving as a person is to take responsibilities for your actions.
I already explained this, just for you to strawman it.
I'm starting to believe you misuse logically fallacies incorrectly as a defense mechanism for your poor arguments.
You still haven't listed a single right you people were fighting for. All you've claimed is white nationalists (bad people) want to take away rights (bad things). You haven't provided any evidence that they want to take away a specific right or even listed which rights they are trying to take away.
You haven’t provided any evidence that they want to take away a specific right or even listed which rights they are trying to take away.
Or that they are white nationals
You can’t represent multiple companies simultaneously, you should look up feduciary responsibilities.
And the law doesn't always reflect reality.
Just admit you’re lazy and/or couldn’t find a source supporting your insane claims. The 1st step to improving as a person is to take responsibilities for your actions.
With you? Nah. It's not worth the effort. Next time try to be honest about what I an saying and maybe I'll put in the effort.
And the law doesn’t always reflect reality.
Nor do many of your comments.
With you? Nah. It’s not worth the effort. Next time try to be honest about what I an saying and maybe I’ll put in the effort.
Admitting you're too lazy/can't find a source is a step forward. You get a gold star.
Still can't list one single right.
An opnion piece that doesn’t mention white nantionalists in the whole article is not evidence that Trump is a white nantionalists. Do you even read the articles you cite
It falls under the great lie. If you keep repeating it, maybe people will believe it.
Either pizza was completely lazy or there are not any nut job articles claiming Trump is a white nantionalist.
Nationalist
How's the saying go? when you can't argue on merits go after spelling and grammar.
Really seem to be putting a lot of effort into defending yourself over this. Must be really bothering you.
I'm fully aware I can't spell, it doesn't bother me at all.
If it didn't bother you, why are you still typing? Don't lie, we all know the truth.
You can't even troll well, there's got to be something you're good at.
Not a troll. It is just plainly obvious that if you didn't care, you wouldn't be responding to this.
If what doesn't bother me again?
There are articles claiming it but it’s circular logic. He’s a white nationalist because they say he is.
That's pizza's wheelhouse I'm surprised he didn't cite one of those articles.