Nationwide Lowe's Boycott Planned for August 1: What to Know
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A nationwide boycott of Lowe's, organized by the People's Union USA, is scheduled to begin August 1 and run throughout the month, as the group calls for Americans to halt spending at the home improvement retail chain.
Newsweek has reached out to Lowe's and the People's Union USA's founder, John Schwartz, via email for comment.
Why It Matters
The Lowe's boycott is the latest in a series of consumer-led economic boycotts. Boycotts of large American companies have been repeatedly organized following President Donald Trump's return to office back in January.
A Lowe's store in Brooklyn on February 27, 2024 in New York City.
A Lowe's store in Brooklyn on February 27, 2024 in New York City.Progressive groups have spearheaded the action and expressed concerns over a number of issues, including company tax avoidance and workers' rights, as well as the scaling-back of diversity hiring commitments.
What To Know
The planned boycott of Lowe's in August was announced by John Schwarz, founder of The People's Union USA, via Instagram.
The movement has previously organized boycotts against companies including Amazon, Target and Walmart, as well as leading 24-hour nationwide "economic blackouts." Schwartz has more than 500,000 followers on Instagram and more than 360,000 on TikTok.
In August, the group will aim to withhold consumer spending at Lowe's for the entire month, alongside similar actions that target Walmart and McDonald's.
The mission statement from The People's Union USA reads: "We are not a political party. We are not a protest. We are a movement of people, organizing to take back control of our economy, government and future of our country."
Lowe's rolled back its DEI initiatives amid online backlash from conservatives in the summer of 2024. The changes, which were confirmed by Lowe's to Bloomberg at the time, included the retail chain ending its participation in surveys conducted by the LGBTQ advocacy group Human Rights Campaign and plans to stop sponsoring community events that are not focused on safe and affordable housing, disaster relief and skilled trades education.
What People Are Saying
John Schwarz, founder of The People's Union USA, in a video posted to Instagram in late May: "Economic resistance is working. Target, Walmart and Amazon are all feeling it, talking about it. They are talking about the boycotts. They are talking about The People's Union USA. My friends, we are fighting for these corporations to finally pay their fair share of federal income taxes to alleviate that from the American worker. We are also fighting for these companies to hold manufacturers and themselves to a reasonable profit margin cap and equality across the board."
What's Next
The People's Union USA's boycott of Lowe's is scheduled to begin on August 1 and last through the end of the month.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
6 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump is undermining his own law that prevents mass atrocities
The Elie Wiesel Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act of 2018, which overwhelmingly passed across party lines in the House and Senate, institutionalizes atrocity prevention in the U.S. government. This includes legally mandating an interagency atrocity prevention coordination body, requiring training for foreign service officers on the prevention of atrocities, requiring an atrocity prevention strategy and, critically, annual reporting to Congress on the government's efforts. But this law is being ignored, to America's detriment. Democratic and Republican administrations have agreed for almost two decades that preventing mass atrocities around the world is a central foreign policy interest of the United States. In 2011, President Obama declared mass atrocities prevention a core national security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States. In 2019, the Trump administration stated that it 'has made a steadfast commitment to prevent, mitigate and respond to mass atrocities, and has set up a whole-of-government interagency structure to support this commitment.' In 2021, President Biden said, 'I recommit to the simple truth that preventing future genocides remains both our moral duty and a matter of national and global importance.' Preventing genocides, crimes against humanity, war crimes and ethnic cleansing is so central to America's own values, interests and security that in 2018, Trump signed the Elie Wiesel Act with strong bipartisan support. This law was groundbreaking, making the U.S. the first country in the world to enshrine the objective of presenting mass atrocities globally into national law. Yet today, this law and the work it advanced are under dire threat. What will Congress do about it? Mass atrocities are an anathema to American interests. Large scale, deliberate attacks on civilians shock the conscience. They undermine U.S moral, diplomatic, development and security interests. Preventing mass atrocities not only advances American interests, but it also strengthens our international cooperation and global leadership while advancing a peaceful and more just world. Most importantly, America should help prevent mass atrocities because it can. It has the tools and capabilities to help protect civilians and prevent the worst forms of human rights violations. It cannot do this alone, as there are many reasons why atrocities take place, but it can have an impact. And in today's world, this work is more important than ever. While the nation's atrocity prevention systems aren't perfect and there are certainly failures to point to, there has also been important progress and successes that risk being erased, making it even less likely that the U.S. will succeed at its commitment to protect civilians and prevent atrocities. The Trump administration should have submitted its Elie Wiesel Act annual report to Congress by July 15 — this didn't happen. The report is a critical tool for communicating to Congress and the American people what the U.S. is doing to advance this work. It is a mile marker for what has been done and what the needs are. It creates an opportunity for experts outside of government to weigh in. And it allows Congress to conduct oversight over the implementation of its law. But not only was the report not submitted by the normal deadline, nearly all of the U.S. government's atrocity experts have been subjected to reductions in force, forced to accept reassignment or retirement or placed on administrative leave. Key offices in USAID, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, the Intelligence Community and more have been eliminated or hollowed out. Without these experts and the offices that employed them, the U.S. lacks the expertise and systems to, at a minimum, fulfill its legal mandate under the law, let alone to effectively prevent, respond to and help countries recover from mass atrocities. In response to this glaring violation of U.S. law, a group of former civil servants who served as the experts on atrocity prevention in the U.S. interagency wrote a shadow Elie Wiesel Act report, which was presented to congressional staff in a briefing last month. These are the people who served in the Atrocity Prevention Task Force and who, under normal circumstances, would have written the annual Elie Wiesel Act Report. Civil society also would have made key contributions, both during the writing and roll-out of the report. None of that is possible now. But the work and imperative to prevent atrocities is still critical. When it enacted the Elie Wiesel Act, Congress knew that 'never again' doesn't happen simply because good people serve in government. True atrocity prevention requires institutionalization and incentivization in our governance system in order to compete with other, very legitimate foreign policy objectives. So why isn't Congress acting when this administration has completely destroyed the ability to address these core national security issues? We hope lawmakers will read this shadow report and critically engage with the questions that it raises. Why has the U.S. government's ability to prevent mass atrocities been attacked? How does this breakdown affect U.S. interests? What does this mean for countries around the world? What can be done to protect what's left and rebuild? And what is Congress willing to do about it, in defense of the law it passed and in line with its oversight duties? To do any less is to abdicate the promise of 'never again.' The world deserves better. And so do the American people. Kim Hart was the global Human Rights team lead at USAID and part of USAID's Atrocity Prevention Core Team. D. Wes Rist was an Atrocity Prevention policy advisor in the Department of State's Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations. Both were government employees until April and served in both the Trump and Biden administrations.
Newsweek
7 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Former Treasury Secretary Says Trump Is Trying to 'Scapegoat' Jerome Powell
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers warned that President Donald Trump may be trying to "scapegoat" Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell in the event the economy slows down enough to hit a recession. "He's looking to set up a scapegoat if the economy performs badly," Summers said during an appearance on ABC News' This Week. "That's what this attacking chairman Powell is really about. It's not really about trying to change policy." Newsweek reached out to the White House by email outside of normal business hours on Sunday morning for comment. Why It Matters Trump has made tariffs the centerpiece of his economic and foreign policy plans, using trade negotiations to try and end conflicts and completely reshape the international trade landscape to more heavily favor the United States. However, many economists and business leaders have warned that Trump's plan will cause a recession as the tariffs raise prices for Americans, which could deter buying and prompt more Americans to hold onto their money. Trump has therefore urged Powell to cut the interest rate in order to spur the economy and get people to spend more money, but Powell has resisted—much to Trump's frustration. What To Know The stock market took a hit on Friday after Trump signed a series of executive orders to impose tariffs on over 90 countries, ranging from 10 to 41 percent. The July Jobs report showed that growth had slowed, showing just 73,000 new jobs—well under the projected 100,000 that the Dow Jones had estimated. Additionally, the jobs reports for May and June were hit with significant revisions that showed very weak growth across those months. Trump fired Dr. Erika McEntarfer, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), and accused her of manipulating the reports for "political purposes." Summers, who served in former presidents Bill Clinton's and Barack Obama's administrations, suggested on Sunday that Trump is likely also trying to line up Powell as a scapegoat should the economy continue to struggle, even though Trump appointed Powell during his first term in office. "I think that this kind of political Fed bashing is a fool's game," Summers said. "The Fed doesn't listen, so short-term interest rates aren't going to be different because of it." He continued: "The market does listen, and so longer-term rates are going to go higher, which is going to make it more expensive to buy a house. This is hurting the economy, not helping. I think the president understands that and what the president is doing is recognizing that, for all kinds of reasons, of which his policies are very important ones, the economy is at a lot of risk." Summers also expressed surprise that more people hadn't responded within the administration to McEntarfer's firing, saying that the decision to remove her "is way beyond anything that Richard Nixon ever did." When Nixon dismissed special prosecutor Archibald Cox during the Watergate Scandal, it prompted several officials to resign rather than fire Cox, causing what was known as the "Saturday Night Massacre." Trump faced a similar issue in February, which has been likened to Nixon as the "Thursday Night Massacre," when Department of Justice (DOJ) officials resigned rather than execute an order to dismiss federal corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. No one has yet resigned in response to McEntarfer's firing, but Summers indicated that he sees the firing as a scapegoating as well, saying: "These numbers are put together by teams of literally hundreds of people following detailed procedures that are in manuals." "There's no conceivable way that the head of the BLS could have manipulated this number," he added. "The numbers are in line with what we're seeing from all kinds of private sector sources." Summers remains cautious about suggesting the economy is headed for a recession. Instead, he said the economy is at "stall speed," which "could tip into recession," but that "wouldn't be my prediction right now." Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers speaks during the World Economic Summit in Washington, D.C., on April 17, 2024. Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers speaks during the World Economic Summit in Washington, D.C., on April 17, 2024. Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images What People Are Saying President Donald Trump in a post on Truth Social on Saturday wrote: "'Too Late' Powell should resign, just like Adriana Kugler, a Biden Appointee, resigned. She knew he was doing the wrong thing on Interest Rates. He should resign, also!" In a post from Friday, Trump wrote: "Jerome 'Too Late' Powell, a stubborn MORON, must substantially lower interest rates, NOW. IF HE CONTINUES TO REFUSE, THE BOARD SHOULD ASSUME CONTROL, AND DO WHAT EVERYONE KNOWS HAS TO BE DONE!" Ernie Tedeschi, the former head of Yale University's Budget Lab, wrote on X on Friday about McEntarfer's firing: "I've worked closely with Erika. I know of no economist who is more data-focused & devoted to truth in statistics. She never shied from speaking truth to power when the data were disappointing. Nothing would be worse for US credibility than political meddling in our economic data."
New York Post
36 minutes ago
- New York Post
After blacks in Cincinnati beat white adults, why was there no nationwide, racial outrage?
Recently, a large group of black youths began pummeling white adults in downtown Cincinnati. The original altercation apparently broke out between a black and white male in he-said/he-said fashion. But that dispute soon turned into a virtual free-for-all. Numerous male and female black youths sucker-punched a middle-aged woman. Others continued to kick or body slam the victims. There were many disturbing aspects to the beat-downs. One, the violence broke out along racial and age fault lines. After the initial dispute, groups of black youths swarmed solitary older white bystanders to pound them. Two, the surrounding assembled group of black youths not only failed to intervene to restrain the bullies. They also recorded the beatings for social media and were heard cheering on the one-sided violence. Three, there was neither a police presence nor any timely Good Samaritan interventions. Four, oddly few of the usual black spokespeople who habitually comment on interracial violence were to be seen. During the fake Jussie Smollett attack, self-appointed leaders from Al Sharpton to Kamala Harris immediately issued warnings about so-called systemic white racism that had reared its ugly head to victimize Smollett. Yet when it was revealed Smollett had concocted the entire charade — and even hired his own assaulters — there were few if any retractions from those once so eager to shout 'racist!' Such demagoguery is a well-known pattern dating back to the days of the Tawana Brawley rape hoax, the Duke Lacrosse charade, the Covington kids ruse, the Michael Ford 'Hands-up-Don't Shoot' fabrication or the NASCAR noose fable. Racialists too often concoct white racist attackers and go silent when the evidence proves fabricated — only to be primed to manipulate the next hoax. Five, the media and authorities did their best to either hide or play down the violence. City leaders, the chief of police and the media variously blamed the mass black-on-white violence on 1) social media, 2) the original dispute, 3) alcohol, 4) the lack of civilian intervention to stop the violence and 5) a festival atmosphere — anything except endemic racial hatred shown toward whites from the crowd of black youths. Six, had a gang of white toughs beat middle-aged African-Americans senseless, recorded it and cheered on the violence, there would have been immediate national outrage. Nor did anyone wish to raise the taboo topic of inordinate black crime rates, disproportionate to respective demographic realities. In rare interracial violent crimes, the asymmetrical ratio of black-on-white versus white-on-black assaults ranges from three to five times greater. Seven, the quiet of the left-wing media to the reprehensible violence stands in marked contrast with their usual rush-to-judgment racialism in two near-simultaneous incidents. When a shooter entered a New York City corporate headquarters last week and executed four innocents, CNN falsely raised the speculation that a 'white male' was perhaps responsible — despite the photograph of the suspect, who was as clearly male as he was not white. Media and municipal officials jumped to explain the violence as due to the killer's alleged past traumatic brain injury or because of his access to a semi-automatic weapon — or anything other than his hate-filled plan to murder an NFL executive. Actress and model Sydney Sweeney just cut a jeans commercial in front of a poster that said, 'Sydney Sweeney has great genes' — with 'genes' crossed out and replaced with 'jeans.' Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! The left then exploded, alleging the ad was a supposed Hitlerian reference to white eugenics. Yet the eugenics movement in America was mostly a product of left-wing progressives, from Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger to Democratic President Woodrow Wilson. And the ad's sponsor, American Eagle, had previously used all sorts of models from all racial backgrounds. All might agree that the ad simply shows both tight, sexy jeans and a naturally attractive wearer — period. The country is descending into a tribal morass of double standards and racial fixations. The diversity/equity/inclusion industry, the defund-the-police madness and the perpetual left-wing hunt for 'white racism/white privilege/white rage' — from the prior Pentagon hierarchy to the lunatic fringe of Jasmine Crockett, Joy Reid and Zohran Mamdani — have all legitimized double standards while lowering the bar of the once unacceptable. When our careerist left-wing elites seek to divide us by race and make it essential, not incidental, to our identities, that tribalist message filters throughout communities. The ensuing signal is that 'payback' violence is OK — on the expectation that there are no consequences for interracial violence — as long as the victim is white and the assaulter is not. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.
