tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post9221716740737934519..comments2024-03-14T11:50:14.761-04:00Comments on DarwinCatholic: Should We Boycott People We Disagree With?Darwinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-51468781848258046382013-10-20T14:20:33.850-04:002013-10-20T14:20:33.850-04:00I would be on the other side of the spectrum on op...I would be on the other side of the spectrum on opinion concerning this, in some regards. As a man who is romantically drawn to other men, I do sometimes boycott what I would consider bigoted companies. That said, as a writer, I find that the word "bigot" gets thrown around to easily. Much like the word "epic" actually. We live in a culture that waters down it's language to such an extant as to leave us no verbal or written way to express the scope and scale of the truly fantastic and truly awful. To me, I don't really use the word "bigot" to describe anyone or any company unless it takes steps or holds and shares views that could lead to my harm, directly or indirectly.<br /><br />I will not be boycotting Bertoli (or, at least, not because of their ads). I did boycott Chik Fil A. Not for it's owners opinions of me, but because of their donation history. Specifically, donating to the people who help push places like Uganda into putting heinous laws into place that directly harm people like me. Why wouldn't I deny them more funding for such things? It would be like asking why a black man doesn't take his car to get it maintenanced at an auto shop run by skin heads. The owner of that establishment has made himself my enemy and, thus, I will take actions to make life difficult for he and his endeavors the way he would surely make life difficult for me and people like me.<br /><br />It's just survival. Nothing personal. Timidis Vocemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07838488167184244408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-17124934784379911492013-10-18T12:24:26.038-04:002013-10-18T12:24:26.038-04:00I'd probably have to develop a clearer set of ...I'd probably have to develop a clearer set of thinking on this if pressed, but to the extent that I could describe it in principled terms I'd say the main factors I look at are to what extent the thing I object to is the purpose of the organization, and how important the other things are to me.<br /><br />So, for instance, the Komen relationship with Planned Parenthood is honestly not worth much money to either -- however I think Komen itself has very little value and buying products branded with the pink ribbon has virtually none, so I make a point of never buying Komen branded products or donating to them.<br /><br />With Starbucks, I think their primary purpose is coffee, and that the amount of support they give to gay marriage is pretty negligible compared to the scale of the company. (To the extent that I suspect that it makes no difference to the gay marriage movement whether Starbucks or Green Mountain or Illy gains more market share.) I do place a fair amount of value on coffee (I don't think Starbucks is great, but it's of a predictable level of quality, so I buy it when I'm on the road and don't know local venues, but I never buy it at home or in the store.)Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-90854048240574756252013-10-16T17:13:21.197-04:002013-10-16T17:13:21.197-04:00This is interesting to me, as one no longer drinki...This is interesting to me, as one no longer drinking Starbucks. I think some of the concern comes from a feeling that if I/we purchase something, we give more money, and therefor more clout, to a company pushing ideals in direct opposition to ours. I would distinguish between a company run by someone who champions ideals contrary to mine, and a company run by someone who not only champions those ideals but ALSO uses the company and its funds to push them. In the first instance, we may be able to live side-by-side without much friction. In the second, at some point it's partly my contribution that's going to these causes I don't want to support. And if there are other options, even if slightly less tasty, maybe I can make a bit of a difference by not giving my money to the company which will use its profits to fight against me and mine.<br /><br />I guess if your "company" is your person, and the ideas in your head and the product of your pen, then it might be a similar situation, but generally I'd see a difference between Starbucks and Orson Scott Card. With my available info, that's the difference I see between Starbucks (where the company is aggressively pushing an agenda) and Bezos/Amazon (where Bezos gave the largest single donation in support of marriage redefinition in WA, but Amazon as a company didn't - to my knowledge - get involved).<br /><br />I'd love to hear more of your thoughts on this.<br /><br />Maybe being willing to go "scorched earth" on things like Komen and Ender's Game is why those who would suppress ideas contrary to their own tend to get their way?mandamumnoreply@blogger.com