A rhetorical point: I think it's best to avoid "resist" language.
1. It's antiquated and arouses imagery and iconography that IMO many have negative associations with. (I'm leaving this a bit vague intentionally.)
2. Framing oneself or a movement as "resisting" is to frame one self or a movement in a weaker, defensive position. It's better to use to language that indicates actions and offense as opposed to defense.
3. Because of 1 this opens up typical lines of attack and characterization that make one's "resistance" an easy rhetorical target. No unforced errors.
I don't have a sense of what would be a better alternative, but probably throwing things against the wall until something sticks/galvanizes people makes more sense. Something like "assert yourself", "push back"/"fight back", "take it to 'em" etc.
I could get behind "exercise", as in your rights (while you have them), and your power (to stop relying on specific conveniences, businesses). Combines with imagery of gaining strength, independence.
It's too quick to reflect the fundamentals, but the market is priced on vibes. They move at the speed of rumor. But even with normal volatility, the boycott will have to be wildly effective to produce an unambiguous market signal.
Wouldn't be more effective for Galloway and his billionaire friends to dump these company's stock, maybe sell $900M each, use whatever money they get from that for good and still be left with $100M+ at the end?
I don't like how he is parading himself everywhere like he's part of the solution, when he is actually part of the problem.
Apparently a return to the policies of 14 years ago when people like Bill Clinton, Hillary, and Obama used to call for enforcing laws against illegal immigration.
1. It's antiquated and arouses imagery and iconography that IMO many have negative associations with. (I'm leaving this a bit vague intentionally.)
2. Framing oneself or a movement as "resisting" is to frame one self or a movement in a weaker, defensive position. It's better to use to language that indicates actions and offense as opposed to defense.
3. Because of 1 this opens up typical lines of attack and characterization that make one's "resistance" an easy rhetorical target. No unforced errors.
I don't have a sense of what would be a better alternative, but probably throwing things against the wall until something sticks/galvanizes people makes more sense. Something like "assert yourself", "push back"/"fight back", "take it to 'em" etc.
And effects of this, resist and unsubscribe, wouldn't be a factor so quickly. AFAIK this only launched less than a week or two ago.
>the most radical action in capitalist society is not participating
So that’s why they are after NEETs now?
I’m keeping my chatgpt subscription though.