[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference turris::womannotes-v2

Title:ARCHIVE-- Topics of Interest to Women, Volume 2 --ARCHIVE
Notice:V2 is closed. TURRIS::WOMANNOTES-V5 is open.
Moderator:REGENT::BROOMHEAD
Created:Thu Jan 30 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 30 1995
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:1105
Total number of notes:36379

723.0. "About economic action..." by HYDRA::SCHMIDT (Bush: Triumph of rites over rights) Mon Jul 31 1989 10:09

T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
723.1GERBIL::IRLBACHERnot yesterday's woman, todayMon Jul 31 1989 11:2446
    I saw that notice and was wondering only one thing.  If that is
    allowed *for* the manager, does s/he also allow it for the employees
    and perhaps even for the customers?
    
    I object *only* on the basis that I am sure it is a one-way street
    and that if any employee or customer tried to put up a notice, either
    in line with the manager's politics or in opposition, they would
    be rebuffed.
    
    Going to the manager and stating how one feels, or sending a letter
    might be the only way one can protest with any effectiveness.   
    
    However, there are numerous businesses in this city--Nashua--as
    in all others, where the customers politics and the owners are in
    opposition.  I personally just don't give enough concern to this
    to want to trace them down.  
    
    Off-line I could tell you of several, but so what?  How do you know
    that the silent employees aren't dishing out 1/2 their paychecks to
    support those causes that give you hives just to *think* about?
     
    My husband worked for 17 years for Sanders Assoc.  I gave my word
    of honor that I would not bite the hand that fed me and my family,
    and I never picketed or got near S/A.  And after his death, I continued 
    to honor my word---but I was bail $$ for those who got arrested
    for doing so, and I used the dividends from their stock to do it!
    
    Frankly, I think that boycotts of this type are a losing battle.
    When I am knowledgeable enough about the owner's politics that I
    am not inclined to shop there, I just go elsewhere.  
    
    There was once a fast seafood take-out place in Nashua, and the
    owner's wife was a vocal, vituperative, unpleasant, and totally
    tunnel-visioned conservative who was on the then Governor's panel for
    the Women' Commission.  Well, her public remarks and behavior was
    such, that over time that business was going belly-up before it
    got sold.  That was an easy boycott; one *knew* who the opposition
    really was.  That isn't always so in most cases.
    
    M
    
     
    
    
    
      
723.3Editted by the author...HYDRA::SCHMIDTBush: Triumph of rites over rightsWed Aug 02 1989 10:0750
    <<< Note 723.0 by HYDRA::SCHMIDT "Bush: Triumph of rites over rights" >>>
                         -< About economic action... >-

  Much as [people who are advocates of a certain political position]
  have advocated economic pressure against us, I'm in support of eco-
  nomic pressure against [people who are advocates of a certain polit-
  ical position].  I believe that would play a big part in bringing
  people around to see the real numbers of folks involved in each
  side of the debate.  It also helps to deprive the enemy of funds.
  Towards this end, I'd like to not spend my money anyplace where
  it's likely to go into my enemy's coffers to be used against me.

  But even putting aside the traditional problems of "who does a boycott
  hurt", there are a few other problems as well.  I'd like to hear sug-
  gestions on overcoming these problems.  First, an anecdote...

      Saturday, my wife, son, and I walked into a local fast food
      restaurant.  On the door were two notices *posted by the
      store's owner* promoting vacation bible school at the church
      attended by the store's owner.  Now, this denomination is
      known for its vocal opposition to choice, so it's safe to
      assume that at least some portion of the proceeds from this
      store are going to that cause.  But is that really the intent
      of the owner?  Does the intent of the owner matter if the
      ultimate outcome is negative?  And what if the chain to which
      that store belongs is known for being on "our side"?

      (The owner wasn't around to ask or persuade and I have no idea
      where to find them.)


      Clearly, one person does not have the time to investigate
      every place they spend their money, and the outcome isn't
      binary anyway.  So:

    o How do you identify just who's giving money to the opponents?
      A few nationally famous cases come up, but what about at the
      more local level?  Is this information being spread around?

    o What level of "wrongfulness" deserves what kind of action?

    o When there's no one that you can contact that is empowered
      to actually do anything, is it worthwhile?  (In this partic-
      ular case, I suppose I could write a note and hand it to the
      on-duty manager, requesting that she pass it on to the owner.
      In this case, the store owner is obviously a local human being,
      not Galactic MegaCorp of the Netherlands Antilles.)

                                   Atlant

723.4Further clarification...HYDRA::SCHMIDTBush: Triumph of rites over rightsWed Aug 02 1989 10:106
  Please note that my note does not call on you to boycott anything.

  If you decide to act on any of this information, be sure to
  distinguish the owner(s) from the hired manager(s).

                                   Atlant