821
Chick-Fil-A staff in the rain.
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
821 points (95.1% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
9756 readers
1547 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
can't speak for the bigots, but as a non-bigot who buys it for my kids a couple times a year -
there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. i say this as someone who doesn't shop at amazon or wally world, but it's really difficult to avoid every single brand/company with an asshole owner/ceo. additionally, my impression is they are one of the better employers in the area for people who just need a job and lack skills/ability to do something else.
the only valid critique in the thread.
Although I am a bit tired of it amounting to an excuse of not trying to do positive things at all.
This is exactly what people love using this argument for... It's a toxic concept that if we can't make a big enough impact, we shouldn't even try.
I think one could correctly argue that this is one of the major things wrong with the world today. If we aren't willing to fight injustice, how can we expect anything less from the world around us going forward?
In this case "fighting injustice" just means buying greasy chicken from the place next door. It's such a pathetically easy thing to do. Better yet, go buy some discount raw chicken and make something cheaper, healthier, and better tasting at home.
It's kind of proportional to the amount of impact people are making. Not only is the whole "ethical consumption" thing kind of like, oh, yeah, you're fucked buying anything from anywhere, and working anywhere, because it's a tangled web, but more than that, I think that most people are going to look at their individual contribution to chick-fil-a of like, ten bucks for a chicken sandwich meal, and think, hey, who gives a shit. And they're not really wrong, successful boycotts tend to need to be spurned on by some sort of external action. If chick-fil-a was unionizing, and the union said to stop shopping there in the intervening time, you'd see that eat into profit margins a lot, something to that effect.
Everyone collectively kind of understands that individual agents are too weak to do anything on their own, spontaneously. Worse than that, they've internalized it, so it's kind of turned everyone into stones that can only be shifted by larger, tectonic forces. It's like voting, everyone (or most people) are conscious of voting strategies, to not "waste their vote", and it is precisely this which takes away their power to vote. I can't really fault them for this, though. You just kind of have to face the reality, bide time in your organization in the wings, and then kind of choose your moments, when you're going to really push back at something.
Ethics are what you make of them. If it doesn't bother you that this organization directly gives profits to organizations that dehumanize lgbtq+ people, then keep offering them your business.
In our society our purchasing decisions can absolutely have moral ramifications, and it's not about the impact we may or may not have. Dan Cathy stood up 11 years ago and said the following on behalf of his restaurant in direct defense of giving money to anti-lgbtq+ groups, including those practicing conversion therapy:
"we're inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage. And I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude that thinks we have the audacity to redefine what marriage is all about."
To clarify further, Dan Cathy himself turned his chain into a symbolic beacon of religious zealotry and biggotry. It's a symbol to many conservatives and bigots all across this nation. It doesn't have to be that symbol to you, but to those of us paying attention, we may use a measure of contempt and caution when measuring up those who eat there.
I find the entire concept of being unable to try to be moral with our purchases positively dripping with intellectual dishonesty. Life isn't about being 100% moral, it's about doing our best with what we have. If we can't avoid a greasy fast food chain for being a symbol of hate, then how will we ever foster true change in this broken world?
This applies more for corporations that own unavoidable infrastructure than restaurants with ample alternatives. The former would cost you a lot to forego and interfere with more effective praxis, while the latter costs nothing to support gay rights.
I get this and understand to the point that I dont judge people too hard for just getting it out of convenience.
That said I feel like it's an easy mark to boycott. At it's best it's just fast food chicken and the creators have an active hand in anti lgbt and weird religious fundamentalist stuff.
You don't have to eat fast food AT ALL. You would be more healthy and you would avoid funding awful people.
We, like you, avoid what companies we can, CFA included, but this is often overlooked. The individual locations (franchises) are not equal to the anti-lgbtq+ corporate leaders and many of the ones here (Midwest) seem at the local level to better align with the community they serve.
And yet, their profits still go towards anti-lgbtq+ programs and organizations. And they still stand for biggotry, which was Dan Cathy's intention 11 years ago when he made his dish on behalf of the company.
Yeah, and we don’t go there. I’m still able to recognize the nuance. You seem like you have good intentions but are kind of a dick.