• null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Making it longer doesn’t help.

    You need to boycott specific products (with ready altenratives) and have specific demands.

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      No, making it longer would help if your only goal is to crash the economy thinking that a tantrum will solve the core problem and not just lead to a bunch of bandaid appeasements.

      For the record I’m agreeing with you. We need more directed action and more specific demands. These demands need to be things that have a clear roadmap to being implemented as well, not just “I want X”. Cool. Nifty. How do you expect X to be implemented in today’s world? What will the steps look like?

      • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I am more than happy with wanting America to face a recession. I will avoid American products as much as possble.

      • null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        If you could rely on supporters to actually abstain from buying things for the duration of the protest, and you had enough supporters then ok extending the duration of the protest might “help” crash the economy.

        What I was kind of getting at is that you really can’t rely on supporters to abstain and you don’t have enough supporters.

        The longer the protest (or… the more inconvenient the protest), the less dedication you’re going to have from supporters.

        I whole heartedly agree with the screen cap in the post suggesting that protesters seem to think they can just observe some rite and all of society’s ailments will be resolved. Real actual change is going to involve real actual pain, and unfortunately the plebs always carry that burden.

        My feeling is that presently people are dissatisfied but not really desperate enough to undertake the civil disobedience required to invoke meaningful change. For example, could you organise enough people to boycott starbucks until they allowed employees to unionise? It would take time, organisation, and dedication. This is just one teeny tiny example of a potential first step, a rallying cry, a way to demonstrate a proof of concept. However, I just don’t think it’s achievable.

        • fishos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          My point that even if you had all the supporters you needed right now, the current plan is basically “let’s crash the economy” with no forethought on what happens next. How do you crash the economy AND prevent new monopolies from forming in the wake AND not starve half the population to death in the process? No one ever addresses the second part, which is why this is exactly like the screen cap.

        • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Yeah but then if they had to actually do real work for their protest, we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place would we