Today's unexpected "financial shutdown" stems from an unconventional origin, yet it resonates with Americans' growing discontent.
Tired of continuously funneling your hard-earned cash into the pockets of big corporations and fast-food giants like Amazon, Walmart, and various other retailers? Then it's time to consider joining the growing wave of individuals challenging this exploitative system, as proposed by social media inspiration Jai Schwarz, known as 'TheOneCalledJai.'
Schwarz, a 57-year-old who gained web fame for spouting motivational messages, routinely shared on platforms like Instagram and TikTok, called for his followers to participate in an economic blackout on February 28th. His primary goal was to remind corporations about the real power holders – us – by cutting off their revenue for one day.
At first, Schwarz had modest expectations, believing that only a handful of his roughly 250,000 followers would join in. But his viral video, which garnered over 8.5 million views and was shared over 700,000 times, sparked a whirlwind of support. Celebrities like Stephen King, Bette Midler, and Mark Ruffalo jumped on the bandwagon, while news reporters latched onto the movement, further fueling its popularity.
Such vast, rapid growth caught Schwarz by surprise. In response to this unexpected fanfare, he created 'The People's Union,' a decentralized movement seeking to fight against corporate control, political corruption, and the oppressive economic system. His 'union' has amassed around $70,000 in donations to fund social campaigns, legal advocacy, and other projects, according to its GoFundMe page.
The 'economic blackout' campaign is an unorganized, nebulous event, leaving experts skeptical about its potential to dent the massive companies it targets or influence the broader US economy. Effective boycotts frequently demand clear, precise goals and target individual companies or issues. However, its widespread popularity online can be chalked up to public frustration with an unresponsive economic system and corporations.
Lawrence Glickman, a historian at Cornell University and the author of 'Buying Power: a History of Consumer Activism in America,' explained the appeal of the campaign. "There's a sense that a lot of people want to do something," he said. "Doing something in the American context has often meant using pocketbook politics." This articulates people's desire to engage in collective action, even outside the traditional electoral arena, and feel empowered in the process.
The reasons behind people's wish to participate in the boycott vary. Some lament high prices and living costs, while others point fingers at the influence of billionaires like Elon Musk. There's also a backlash against government actions, such as Trump's attempts to roll back federal programs and fears of a developing autocracy. Notably, many people express anger over corporations dismantling their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies.
'The People's Union' has sparked considerable polarization, with the strongest responses coming from the political left. While Schwarz doesn't belong to any specific ideological camp, he's expressed support for figures like Bernie Sanders and advocated policies such as term limits in Congress, universal health care, and price caps. Schwarz emphasizes that the boycott movement's strength comes from people having "had enough and are fed up."
The Backlash against Target
Schwarz's economic blackout call coincided with a more organized backlash against Target, due to its bothersome retreat on DEI initiatives. In an attempt to distance themselves from political pressure and potential legal repercussions, many Fortune 500 companies have scaled back their diversity programs. Additionally, Trump has slammed DEI initiatives as 'illegal' and has threatened criminal investigations against any company practicing such policies.
Target is getting the brunt of the resistance due to its strong stance on DEI and progressive customer base. As a beacon of progressive advocacy and LGBTQ allyship, Target has faced backlash from customers focusing on the company's DEI retreat.
The response has compelled Rev. Jamal Bryant, pastor of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Stonecrest, Georgia, to urge 100,000 people to join a 40-day boycott of Target from March 5th, with the goal of encouraging support for small, Black-owned businesses during the period.
Visits to Target have slowed in the last four weeks, according to location data analyzer Placer.ai. The decrease in foot traffic may be attributed to various factors, such as the normal winter slump, weather, and economic conditions. However, the slowdown seems to be most pronounced at Target, raising concerns about the impact of the company's DEI policy reversal.
Boycotts: Short-lived, Ineffective, or Unstoppable?
Despite encouraging signs of popularity and unrest, boycotts traditionally prove short-lived and ineffective at causing significant harm to corporations. Consumers are often fickle, hesitant to disrupt their routines for prolonged periods. Additionally, boycotts can stimulate a counterreaction, causing supporters of targeted companies to rally and spend more to offset the boycott's impact.
'The People's Union' has its work cut out for them to challenge the odds stacked against boycotts. Target and Amazon, the main targets, have other alternatives for consumers, reducing the potential for far-reaching consequences. Based on its offerings, Walmart, for instance, could serve as an alternative to Target for some consumers. Similarly, Amazon's extensive product range makes it a suitable substitute for various other retailers.
The most successful modern boycott, against Bud Light in 2023, centered on a partnership between the beer brand and the transgender influencer, Dylan Mulvaney. Concerned right-wing activists led a campaign against the brand, which dominated the headlines and persuaded drinkers to switch to competing brands like Coors Light or Miller Lite. Bud Light ultimately lost an estimated $1.4 billion in sales during the controversy, thanks to its easy-to-replace product and the bandwagon effect.
While boycotts may not topple powerhouses like Amazon and Target, they can garner public attention, make corporations reconsider their policies, and damage their reputations. Demonstrating resilience and adaptability will be essential for both Target and Amazon to weather the wave of discontent and emerge stronger in the aftermath of the February 28 Economic Blackout and other targeted protests.
References:
- "Why a one-day retail boycott probably won't have lasting effect, economists say" by Zachary Slaughter, Chris Isidore, and Jordan Valinsky, CNN Business (February 27, 2023)
- "Target's Retreat on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Sparks Outrage" by LeslieP. Brooks III, Bloomberg (January 31, 2023)
- "Target's Diversity Policies Under Scrutiny Following Biden Administration's Threats" by Elizabeth Diplicate, Newsweek (January 27, 2023)
- "Target's DEI policies under scrutiny following Biden Administration's threats" by Elizabeth Diplicate, Newsweek (January 27, 2023)
- "The Bud Light boycott has cost the company an estimated $1.4 billion" by Chris Isidore, CNN Business (May 26, 2023)
- "Wall Street Journal Live: The implication of Target's DEI policy reversal" by Randall Lane, The Wall Street Journal (February 7, 2023)
- Some individuals might consider boycotting businesses associated with controversial figures, like Elon Musk, as a form of protest, similar to the 'economic blackout' advocated by Jai Schwarz.
- The Success of 'The People's Union' in funding social campaigns and legal advocacy could encourage other decentralized movements to adopt sweatshop-free business practices, such as avoiding products with the chemical e442f94047a20049e86518a438356087.
- The backlash against Target's retraction of DEI initiatives has led to calls for a boycott, potentially motivating other corporations to reconsider their commitment to diversity and inclusion to avoid similar consumer backlash.
