Fighting Back

[Valka D'Ur]

It is unlikely that such boycotts will bring down Amazon, but the company is share price driven and declines in sales do have an impact on stock prices. In addition, boycotting can make the boycotter feel better. Eating at Wendy's rather than McDs is not a boycott, but deciding to not eat a McDs and then eating at Wendy's would be. Bezos will remain rich, but we can only do what we can do.

Sears used to be the a huge national retailer and mail order company. It started in 1889 selling watches by mail. It reached it's peak in the 1970s and built the Sears Tower in Chicago (tallest in the city at the time) and had customers throughout the Americas. It's catalog had hundreds of pages and sold just about anything one could want. By 2021 after ~130 years it was gone. In our faster paced world now, Amazon could fade (be broken up?) at a much faster pace. All that would take is for some big investment company to buy a controlling share and dictate significant changes. That is what is happening right to Southwest Airlines. I expect them to fade or be gone within a few years.

Fond memories of the Sears Christmas catalog... I'd be handed one and told I could circle half a dozen things I wanted. I might get one or two of the things on the list plus something else they thought I might like (my dad would usually go to my grandmother for ideas on that, which is why I have some of the vintage '70s Barbies that were out then).

Years later I had a paper route, which included delivering the Sears catalogs. Those things were damn heavy, when you had a dozen or so to deliver around a 3-storey apartment building with no elevator.

More to the point, the sort of anger Trump and Musk inspire people can do significant damage if channeled into economic action. It's only a question of getting the millions of non-terminally online people who are angry about the administration to connect the dots to Amazon.

Canadians have boycotted Amazon for a variety of reasons. There's a serial rapist/murderer named Paul Bernardo, who raped and killed some teenage girls in the 1990s. He's been in prison for many years now and will never be released (we don't have the death penalty in Canada, but I'd make an exception for him since he's unquestionably guilty).

Anyway, some years ago he decided to write a book and it was being sold on Amazon. Canadians were livid that this waste of oxygen was attempting to profit from his crimes, so a 'boycott Amazon' movement started. Amazon was clueless about why there were suddenly thousands of 1-star reviews and that we wanted the book removed or we'd boycott, and shrugged - until the Christmas orders started getting canceled and they realized that they really shouldn't piss off Canadians during the Christmas shopping season.

The book was pulled. Yes, it was probably available from other sources, but some were responsible and removed it when they found out just how heinous his crimes were.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

So because people weren't doing anything before, they should never do it ever?

I'm strugging to understand how you see this as a reply to my question.

 

[danjuno]

I'm strugging to understand how you see this as a reply to my question.

By all means, explain what you actually meant.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

By all means, explain what you actually meant.

You need to me to explain a single 13 word question?

"Why Amazon suddenly more bad now?"

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

I would guess the anger there is because Bezos has basically taken full control of the Washington Post and made significant editorial decisions in recent months that have broadly been friendly to Trump and unfriendly to Dems and antitrust.

 

[danjuno]

You need to me to explain a single 13 word question?

"Why Amazon suddenly more bad now?"

You insisted my previous response did not address your question.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Okay I vaguely remember the Washington Post thing now, but wasn't that months and months ago during the election campaigning? Well anyway, Amazon badder I guess.

You insisted my previous response did not address your question.

Well, I stated that notion once. Not sure that counts as "insisting". But also, it clearly didn't answer the question. I don't think that's a matter of opinion.

 

[danjuno]

Okay I vaguely remember the Washington Post thing now, but wasn't that months and months ago during the election campaigning?

Bezos announced he taking direct control of the opinion section at the end of last month.

Well anyway, Amazon badder I guess.

Good to see you're still approaching this topic in good faith.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

If people stop buying a product or service for social reasons and not because they can get a better deal elsewhere, then yes, that is a boycott.

Whatever you say. I'm not going to argue definitions; I just think you're wrong.

The first news article says in-part that Amazon mistreats its workers, so that's what I'm going off of. And I've no doubt that just about any warehouse work is quite grueling. (Not going to comment on that.) But I fail to see how not buying their products will really correct that.

Admittedly that's part of my disdain for a lot of boycotts in general...You are trying to isolate someone, but who still has a profit motive that cannot be quashed. They'll just pursue their same habits, their same business, through other means.

I would guess the anger there is because Bezos has basically taken full control of the Washington Post and made significant editorial decisions in recent months that have broadly been friendly to Trump and unfriendly to Dems and antitrust.

well that's because Bezos had the money to buy it! I guess one could decry that simple fact. But it's another idea that the writers somehow owe it to the US public to not obey what its owner expects of them, which is odd to me.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Good to see you're still approaching this topic in good faith.

Ah I see... one of the "good faith" crowd. Ironically one of the strongest indicators of coming at discussions in bad faith.

I really don't see what the confusion or controversy is here. This new thread appeared a mere ten days ago wherein multiple people are discussing whether or not they should cancel their Amazon accounts, how cancelling their Prime accounts works, etc. The OP doesn't really specify why, other than mentioning a one day (or one week or whatever it was) boycott of Amazon as part of some larger "blackout movement". It's not weird to suspect that there must have been some instigating factor, and to wonder what it was, is it? I'm aware that a general dislike of Amazon isn't a new thing, the thread from a few years ago that was linked earlier in this thread is evidence of that, but still there must have been some new impetus judging by this thread.

I'm not American. I have never read the Washington Post and likely never will. I don't know anything about it or its political leanings, and didn't know Jeff Bezos had anything to do with it (although, as I said, I now vaguely remember something from months ago since it was brought up).

I know there's this sort of "just asking questions" meme that you're no doubt trying to project onto this, but it's not like I'm asking some sly leading question, I'm literally just asking "WTH is this about?". I see no reason for your rampant cynicism and suspicion. But then it does seem a cornerstone of "good faith" advocates to assume hidden motives and secret meanings in everything. Maybe I just don't get this "good faith" thing.

 

[danjuno]

I see no reason for your rampant cynicism and suspicion.

In this day and age? I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Ah I see... one of the "good faith" crowd. Ironically one of the strongest indicators of coming at discussions in bad faith.

I really don't see what the confusion or controversy is here. This new thread appeared a mere ten days ago wherein multiple people are discussing whether or not they should cancel their Amazon accounts, how cancelling their Prime accounts works, etc. The OP doesn't really specify why, other than mentioning a one day (or one week or whatever it was) boycott of Amazon as part of some larger "blackout movement". It's not weird to suspect that there must have been some instigating factor, and to wonder what it was, is it? I'm aware that a general dislike of Amazon isn't a new thing, the thread from a few years ago that was linked earlier in this thread is evidence of that, but still there must have been some new impetus judging by this thread.

I'm not American. I have never read the Washington Post and likely never will. I don't know anything about it or its political leanings, and didn't know Jeff Bezos had anything to do with it (although, as I said, I now vaguely remember something from months ago since it was brought up).

I know there's this sort of "just asking questions" meme that you're no doubt trying to project onto this, but it's not like I'm asking some sly leading question, I'm literally just asking "WTH is this about?". I see no reason for your rampant cynicism and suspicion. But then it does seem a cornerstone of "good faith" advocates to assume hidden motives and secret meanings in everything. Maybe I just don't get this "good faith" thing.

74 million USians elected a man whose goal has been to destroy the US government and now that he has been elected, he is doing so. He has empowered many to help. In short the US is crewed, royally.

 

[H4run]

That boycotts don't do anything? Well you could look at the US embargo against Cuba, for one.

It does mean something, even if it's not effective, that's not even the point. Boycott in the end is an act of a person against the cause that's much larger and bigger than them, it may translate into a collective movement or it may not, but again that's not even the point, and let me tell you the point:

The point is to materialize your stance and principle in your consumption, putting your money where your mouth is.

In the Palestinian cause, boycott helps a lot. Seeing kids shredded to pieces daily, the fact that you do a boycott helps you recover some of your sanity that you are about to lose and you feel that you actually do something instead of nothing.

If you don't get that then perhaps you will never get it, and that's okay.

So do I boycott Mcdonalds whenever I go to Wendy's?

Yes, that's boycott. Are you expecting if you boycott amazon, we should stop using the whole ecommerce platform and stick to conventional retail shopping? I think you're just confuse.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

74 million USians elected a man whose goal has been to destroy the US government and now that he has been elected, he is doing so. He has empowered many to help. In short the US is crewed, royally.

I mean that's cool and everything, I just had no idea what that had to do with Amazon. So since I asked I see Bezosman apparently officially backed Trump so I guess that answers that. Amazon is now slightly worse than its already previously awful incarnation, enough to convince a few extra people to finally go without free shipping. Consider my curiosity sated.

 

[Samson]

I mean that's cool and everything, I just had no idea what that had to do with Amazon. So since I asked I see Bezosman apparently officially backed Trump so I guess that answers that. Amazon is now slightly worse than it's already previously awful incarnation, enough to convince a few extra people to finally go without free shipping. Consider my curiosity sated.

I suspect there may be a more general aspect to it than that. In Canada the boycott certainly extends to US booze, and I do not think there is any direct link from that to their new Glorious Leader. Just as I am sure many stopped buying Stolichnaya after Russia invaded Ukraine, just because it was the most recognised brand associated with the country, I guess many people stopped using Amazon just because it was American.

 

[GenMarshall]

I mean that's cool and everything, I just had no idea what that had to do with Amazon. So since I asked I see Bezosman apparently officially backed Trump so I guess that answers that. Amazon is now slightly worse than it's already previously awful incarnation, enough to convince a few extra people to finally go without free shipping. Consider my curiosity sated.

You and I are pretty much in the same boat. Since seeing the "boycott Amazon" spark up, my immediate thought was "what did Amazon do now this time?" given a huge list already compiled over the years (Well, since the start of the wiki article keeping track of it).

 

[danjuno]

You and I are pretty much in the same boat. Since seeing the "boycott Amazon" spark up, my immediate thought was "what did Amazon do now this time?" given a huge list already compiled over the years (Well, since the start of the wiki article keeping track of it).

I don't buy from Amazon to begin with, but if other folks are just starting now, better late than never.

 

[Birdjaguar]

You and I are pretty much in the same boat. Since seeing the "boycott Amazon" spark up, my immediate thought was "what did Amazon do now this time?" given a huge list already compiled over the years (Well, since the start of the wiki article keeping track of it).

Jeff Bezos has come out to support Trump publicly through campaign contributions of millions, through the WaPo and now re-running Trump's apprentice shows.

 

[Birdjaguar]

What’s Your Workplace ICE Policy? More Workers (And Bosses) Are Looking For Answers.​

There’s no greater evidence that "know-your-rights" training is working than from what Trump officials themselves have said.

There's 1 Way To Combat Trump's Immigration Crackdown — And It's Getting More Popular

There’s no greater evidence that "know-your-rights" training is working than from what Trump officials themselves have said.

www.huffpost.com

 

[danjuno]

AOC has been big on this. Spekaing of which:

Ocasio-Cortez leads poll of Democrats on which leader ‘best reflects’ party’s ‘core values’ ​

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) narrowly leads in a poll of Democrats on which political leader “best reflects” the “core values” of the party.


In a CNN survey released Sunday, Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents were asked to name one person when “thinking about Democratic leaders today” who “best reflects the core values of the Democratic Party.”


The open-ended question yielded a range of responses: 10 percent pointed to Ocasio-Cortez, 9 percent said former Vice President Kamala Harris, 8 percent said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and 6 percent said House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.).


Former President Obama and Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) each were named by 4 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independent respondents, while Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.), California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) were named by 2 percent of respondents.


At least fifteen other Democrats — many of whom have name recognition from previous presidential campaigns or rumors of possible ones — were named by 1 percent of respondents.


Meanwhile, a plurality of respondents, 26 percent, said they have no opinion, while 5 percent gave non-name responses and 5 percent said no one. All other names accounted for a total of 5 percent of responses.




The survey reflects the lack of clarity among Democrats over who should lead the party, as Republicans control of the White House and both chambers of Congress.


Ocasio-Cortez has been a leading voice criticizing Schumer for agreeing to a Republican spending bill that almost all Democrats opposed, due to provisions that cut programs and expanded President Trump’s power to control government funding.


“There is a deep sense of outrage and betrayal,” Ocasio-Cortez told reporters late Thursday, referring to Schumer’s decision. “And this is not just about progressive Democrats. This is across the board — the entire party.”


Schumer said a government shutdown would have been worse, effectively accelerating Trump’s efforts to close down government agencies he doesn’t like, but he has faced intense backlash within the party for not putting up a fight.


The last time Democrats were grappling with a Trump presidency, in 2017, the list of party leaders looked very different — with only Sanders near the top of both lists.


Obama led responses at 18 percent, followed by Sanders with 14 percent, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with 10 percent, and Joe Biden with 7 percent.


The latest survey, conducted March 6-9, included 1,206 respondents and has a margin of error of 3.3 percentage points.

The contrast to Schumer's "triangulation" couldn't be clearer.