I’ve been seeing this graphic on various social media platforms over the past few days.
The image is striking (if a little confusing—what is the relationship of the red rabbit to the protests?). The image is by Martha Rich, who describes herself as a sock designer. Obviously I support the goals of this boycott, and I’ll sacrifice a day of personal consumption for the cause. But this kind of protest seems so weak that one wonders, what’s the point? I can’t help be reminded of a quote by Kurt Vonnegut from a 2003 interview in the magazine In These Times.
When it became obvious what a dumb and cruel and spiritually and financially and militarily ruinous mistake our war in Vietnam was, every artist worth a damn in this country, every serious writer, painter, stand-up comedian, musician, actor and actress, you name it, came out against the thing. We formed what might be described as a laser beam of protest, with everybody aimed in the same direction, focused and intense. This weapon proved to have the power of a banana-cream pie three feet in diameter when dropped from a stepladder five-feet high.
This is the kind of protest that seems likely to provoke derisive laughter from those in power, but only if they notice it happening. Which they might not. But at this point, I am happy to admit that I don’t have a better idea.
UPDATE: Apparently this boycott is the work of one guy (as opposed to a grassroots bunch of people) named John Schwartz. Substack newsletter writer Virginia Sole-Smith was also curious and did what I didn’t do—actual reporting. She wrote a somewhat pointed critique of this dumb boycott in a post The Revolution Is Not A Crash Diet. I recommend it.
[Please consider supporting this publication by becoming a patron, and you can also support it by patronizing our online store. And one more way to support this work is to buy books through The Great God Pan is Dead’s bookstore. ]