Andy wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
>
> >> I've been curious for a while about the difference between boycotts
> >> (good) and socially conscious consumerism (bad).
> >>]
> >
> > "Good" vs "bad" is seldom if ever a useful comtrast.
> >
> > Organized boycotts: Sometimes useful
> >
> > Socially conscious consumerism: Yawn.
> >
> > Demand for socially conscious consumerism: Go fuck yourself.
>
> I there was, refraining from the impulse to end with "And something
> unhelpfully vituperative from Carrol in 3, 2, 1..."
How would you respond to someone commanding you to change your perwsonalhabits?
The _demand_ that individuals order their personal consumption habits (privately) to conform to some abstract social goal is an attack on working people. It also is a serious deflection from activity that at least in principle can make a difference in the world. Hence it makes life difficult for ordinary workers (i.e. for something like 90% of the population), it attacks individuals for not being moral, and all that for nothing.
Such personal attacks, and they are personal attacks, are intrinsically vituperative, no matter how polite the language, and thesre is no correct polite response to them.
Carrool