The Loblaws boycott has been running for less than a month, but it's spreading like wildfire. Why is it doing so well, and what can the climate community learn from that?
Good article, and it's great to see the Loblaws boycott grow so much. I think the biggest headwind climate organizers have going against us is the issue and impact is not a first order concern for people, and the targets are also widely dispersed. The Loblaws issue directly touches millions of people's lives, weekly, in the form of their grocery bill. Plus it's very clear who the villain is, even if there are many villains we know Galen Weston is a billionaire and the company is too big and greedy.
The same goes for animal rights issues, healthcare charities - the issues are directly in front of (some people's) faces, which makes people more very motivated to do something at higher risk than sign a petition or go to a rally. On climate, the impacts are dispersed, not in your face every day (though that is changing), and the villains are so numerous.
Naomi Klein spoke about this in This Changes Everything, that the climate movement was (at the time) trying mainly to organize white, middle class people, who at the end of the day care about climate, but aren't directly affected on a daily basis enough to take big risks in their lives to do something. That's slowly changing.
But I'm all for the boycott energy companies angle! Electric cars are the best way to do so. Secondly, you would think by now a retail oil and gas brand would try and go carbon neutral and make a promise to wind down operations in the future in order to capture that market share.
I would be worried that a boycott might re-center climate change and fossil fuel production as an individual consumer choice problem.
Whereas there has been virtually no consumer advocacy when it comes to groceries in Canada, the climate movement is already a going concern. Part of the freshness appeal for the Lawblaws boycott is that it’s relatively uncharted territory and we’re still so far away from any solutions-orientation. We have moved beyond this phase in the climate movement.
Mitchell, I vote for a PetroCanada boycott. It has all kinds of good things going for it, at least in my world:
1. It would force me to change. The Loblaw’s one has made all kinds of changes to my buying and has been invigorating.
2. The CEO’s attitude is eminently attackable
3. Suncor seems to becoming the last man standing in the tar sands as the international majors pull out. Making it the face of the tar sands wouldn’t be difficult.
I would love to join a boycott. You're right... everyone is looking for pragmatic action opportunities.
Good article, and it's great to see the Loblaws boycott grow so much. I think the biggest headwind climate organizers have going against us is the issue and impact is not a first order concern for people, and the targets are also widely dispersed. The Loblaws issue directly touches millions of people's lives, weekly, in the form of their grocery bill. Plus it's very clear who the villain is, even if there are many villains we know Galen Weston is a billionaire and the company is too big and greedy.
The same goes for animal rights issues, healthcare charities - the issues are directly in front of (some people's) faces, which makes people more very motivated to do something at higher risk than sign a petition or go to a rally. On climate, the impacts are dispersed, not in your face every day (though that is changing), and the villains are so numerous.
Naomi Klein spoke about this in This Changes Everything, that the climate movement was (at the time) trying mainly to organize white, middle class people, who at the end of the day care about climate, but aren't directly affected on a daily basis enough to take big risks in their lives to do something. That's slowly changing.
But I'm all for the boycott energy companies angle! Electric cars are the best way to do so. Secondly, you would think by now a retail oil and gas brand would try and go carbon neutral and make a promise to wind down operations in the future in order to capture that market share.
Great rundown and linkage of the issues.
I would be worried that a boycott might re-center climate change and fossil fuel production as an individual consumer choice problem.
Whereas there has been virtually no consumer advocacy when it comes to groceries in Canada, the climate movement is already a going concern. Part of the freshness appeal for the Lawblaws boycott is that it’s relatively uncharted territory and we’re still so far away from any solutions-orientation. We have moved beyond this phase in the climate movement.
Mitchell, I vote for a PetroCanada boycott. It has all kinds of good things going for it, at least in my world:
1. It would force me to change. The Loblaw’s one has made all kinds of changes to my buying and has been invigorating.
2. The CEO’s attitude is eminently attackable
3. Suncor seems to becoming the last man standing in the tar sands as the international majors pull out. Making it the face of the tar sands wouldn’t be difficult.