• FluffyPotato
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    You can’t buy chocolate and a ton of other common ingredients without supporting slavery. There’s no ethical consumption under capitalism, the HP franchise is a small drop in the ocean of suffering. Expecting peole to be aware of all those things and also boycott every single one is not feasible and should be solved top down.

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      “No ethical consumption under capitalism” isnt supposed to be used as justification to support shitty people. Lots of decent people write fantasy books. Buy their shit instead of a bigot’s.

      • FluffyPotato
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        No, it just means it’s pretty much impossible to buy stuff and not support something shitty, Rowling is just more visible than like a forest somewhere that was cut down for paper to print books or some child slaves operating printing presses. Like yea, Rowling is a massive asshole but compared to something like Neste she’d be an angel and you can’t have the expectation for every individual to boycott everything harmful, it’s just not doable.

    • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      I can’t argue with that for sure, but here it’s specifically against Rowling. You can’t pretend to be boycotting her and keep giving her money through her licenses.

      • FluffyPotato
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Oh yea true, if anyone is claiming they are boycotting Rowling then they can’t really buy any media associated with her while still boycotting her, that’s just a contradiction.