Consumer Boycotts

[Desertrose2023]

I posted the BDS list in the supporting Palestinian businesses thread and recent discussion on another thread re the backlash against Zara got me wondering how many others are participating in consumer boycotts linked to the conflict in Gaza (and the occupation in Palestine) or for different reasons.

there are a number of brands I’m boycotting usually for a mix of reasons, political, environmental and social. Interested to hear views from others.

Disclaimer: to avoid any misinterpretation or twisting of my words - I do not support any acts of violence or vandalism or boycotting based on religion/ethnicity.

all the ones on the BDS committee list

https://bdsmovement.net/

in addition to a few others (sample below)

Starbucks: overpriced shit coffee and they recently sued their union for tweeting in support/solidarity with Palestine.

Zara: I stopped buying stuff following the controversy of their head womenswear designer making disgusting anti-Palestinian comments. The reports of slave labour (Uyghurs and in Brazil) plus the recent tone deaf ad campaign was the final straw. Plus trying to be more conscious re reducing how much ‘fast fashion’ I buy anyway.

Nestle: a history of unethical corporate practices plus including ownership of an Israeli food company with production in OPT.

You think the bulldozer could be "open to interpretation"

FFS

So if I don’t post on threads talking about something else that I condemn Israel’s actions then the assumption is that I support Israel? Do you not see how batshit an expectation that is? Performative denouncement before being allowed to speak?

I have denounced their actions actually. Repeatedly. The demands to do so are getting really fucking tedious.

Yes a bull dozer breaking down an illegal wall yes could be subject to interpretation, a bulldozer running over civilians as we have seen by IDF less so.

It was at least two days after the terrorist attack that they retweeted it. You can see this from the photo.

You genuinely think that cheering on the “Gaza resistance” tearing down the fence on October 7th is open to interpretation or that people didn’t know that it was an awful attack 2 days after the event?

It’s interesting that you are still trying to defend the post even though you clearly didn’t know the details. It’s like the defence isn’t actually to do with what was said, but with a side already having been taken.

Humans shouldn’t be trapped behind a wall. I think you can celebrate a wall coming down but not celebrate the violence that followed.

That would be a really stupid thing to do though, because the tearing down of the wall was followed by a horrendous rape and murder spree. The two are inextricably linked and to suggest cheering one is totally unrelated to the other would be wholly unconvincing.

Good for you. I just said I hadn't read it.

I'm deciding that life is too short to be engaging in this nonsense with you. Surely you have better things to do with your time than harrass me. Good day.

@Toothyfruity well said.

Tbh I’ve never heard noblegiraffe say anything particularly negative about the IDF either but perhaps I missed it. Starbucks didn’t handle the situation well and there actions were seen by many in the Middle East as supporting the occupation hence the boycott.

For those trying to distract from the discussion about the stupidity of the Starbucks boycott, here’s a couple of posts from a quick search. There are plenty more if you look. Which of course you didn’t bother doing.

I have to say, @noblegiraffe , I missed that top post of yours in that screenshot and reading it now, that should be printed on t-shirts and worn at protests. Catchy and to the point. Love it.

I don't get why there's so much focus on the Starbucks when there's plenty of other BDS boycotts going on. Some posters seem obsessed with it.

Starbucks isn’t a BDS boycott.

Boycotts of Starbucks have long preceded the current conflict. To argue it’s misguided and all about one tweet is simply reductive and untrue.
Personally I’m boycotting them for a number of reasons:

1. Their former Chairman and CEO Howard Schultz is a neoliberal Zionist. He still owns a significant shareholding. Given that Zionism has led to the creation of a state that has for decades brutalized Palestinians and has now culminated in genocide, to the extent I can reasonably avoid it (acknowledging some businesses/products/ technologies are systemic), I will not financially support any business whose leadership subscribes to this ideology.
2. they have a history of anti-union activity and treating workers poorly.
3. like another poster mentioned, it sends a message to other corporations (big and small) that the ethical positions they take increasingly matter to consumers. It’s time corporations started to consider the potential costs of their relationships with Israel, particularly in light of its most recent actions.
4. fairly or not, they have become a symbol of American imperialism and hegemony. I’d rather support local brands and independent retailers.
5. their coffee isn’t very good and it’s overpriced.

it’s amazing to see how some people get more worked up/offended about the profits of billion dollar corporates and how people choose to spend their own money, than they do about children being forcibly starved to death.

Lots of this sort of thing floating around social media.

Although I just had another look at twitter and there are lots of confused posts about whether people should boycott Starbucks or not and wondering why, if it's 'funding genocide' as they had been led to believe, it's not on the BDS list.

(you need to open the full photo to see the bit about Starbucks which is top of the list).

Also talk about boycotting Dune 2 because 'Timothee Chalomet was spotted drinking a Starbucks drink'.

Can we not just boycott Dune 2 because the first one wasn't very good?

I'm boycotting it at least till it comes out on Netflix and then I might reconsider if there's nothing else on.

I think you will just have to accept that people like to feel like they are doing something to help Palestinians when they feel so powerless to stop the Israeli war machine. Some may be misguided however all those food places on the list are also very unhealthy anyway.

people don't understand how franchises work. Same with Macdonalds. The boycott was started due to the posting of pro Hamas propaganda and the companies reaction to it

Boycotting a branch does have an impact overall, because franchises have to pay duties to the 'mother' company (how else would they make money?). Royalties are generally 5-7% of revenue, advertising a further 5-10%, then there is mandatory product purchase, just to name a few standard things. A bog standard % of revenue that any franchise owner should expect to pay is 10%, but most pay more than that.
As was said previously, the boycott of Starbucks is not a reaction to the company's reaction to pro Hamas propaganda, it is much older and deeper than that.

Boycotting a branch does have an impact overall, because franchises have to pay duties to the 'mother' company (how else would they make money?). @Nopoppinginplease True but if you go for the franchise option when starting your business you are buying into that brand and for the most part reap the benefits of what that brand name brings such as customers, reputation etc. It can also bring negativities such as boycotts but you take the risk, you take the rough with the smooth.
I personally opt out of most corporate chains and support my local independent coffee shops and restaurants. Far more sustainable longterm and invests back into the area through local produce and so on. Corporates have zero loyalty to the location they're in. Apologies off topic rant over!

@noblegiraffe regardless of whether it's an official BDS boycott, some posters seem strangely over-obsessed with going on and on about it.

When there are plenty of other ongoing boycotts that could be discussed.

Well said @Desertrose2023 . I honestly couldn't get too worked up about Starbucks being boycotted, to the level of anger some people on this thread seem to have. It's strange to me. Especially given the other reasons to boycott them (all this aside).