Permanently Deleted
"Voting with your wallet" just gives people who have more money, more votes, going against the entire point of "one person, one vote."
"So the average consumer is totally dwarfed in political power by the rich and their interests then right?"
Chick-fil-A is still going strong even though we know they actively fund anti-abortion shit
Hobby Lobby is doing a-ok even though they literally funded ISIS
It's almost as if the shitheads have lots of money to spend too
I can't even get libs to acknowledge that gerrymandering makes voting pointless for many people.
When the Irish were doing the original Boycotts against the actual man named Boycott there was a lot of violence and hitting people with sticks and stuff.
if you're not a rich straight white dude then every right you have was won with violence. and if you are a straight white dude, only most of them were.
Imagine you vote with your wallet.
Now imagine someone has more votes than you.
Pretend to be interested and ask for recent successful examples of where it's worked.
Shouldn't one person only get one vote? If you "vote with your wallet", those that have more money get more votes. Therefore, it is not a democratic system.
We shouldn't have to in a just society.
Everything is owned by like three companies.
That's great if there aren't monopolies.
"So some people get more votes?"
What if ethical alternative is unavailable in my area? Am I voting for Amazon because I live in a certain area?
Why not actively boycott? It's cool on its own, but it's not enough to make individual choices.
At least they're thinking about it. They might get deeper into it with just a subtle nudge.
