Trump's second term is fueling the power of boycotts
Advertisement
Many Target customers, especially Black shoppers, responded by spending their dollars elsewhere. According to
Get The Gavel
A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr.
Enter Email
Sign Up
'We're asking people to divest from Target because they have turned their back on our community,' the Rev. Jamal Bryant, the boycott's organizer and senior pastor of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church near Atlanta, told CNN in March.
Corporate America is learning that political cowardice comes with a financial cost.
And that's far from the only boycott in response to Trump, his corporate abettors, or Elon Musk, his unelected billionaire sugar daddy. Other companies bending to Trump's will, including Amazon, Walmart, and Mark Zuckerberg's Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, have also been hit with boycotts.
And then there's Tesla. Since Musk, with Trump's blessing, insinuated himself into the federal government seemingly for the sole purpose of destroying it, Tesla stock has
On any given day, hundreds gather to protest in front of the
Advertisement
Since desperate times for Musk call for dumb measures, the president hawked Teslas on the White House lawn like some late-night infomercial peddler.
'I mean, who wouldn't invest in Elon Musk?' Lutkin said. The answer came quickly when Tesla stock again dropped after his comments.
A boycott has always been a powerful tool. It is, perhaps, the simplest form of direct resistance — don't give your money to companies whose actions contradict your values.
In one of this nation's most famous boycotts, more than 40,000 Black people — the majority of the bus riders in Montgomery, Ala. — turned to other means of transportation when Rosa Parks, a seamstress and NAACP secretary, was arrested in 1955 for refusing to move to the back of the bus as laws dictated for Black riders.
Instead of taking the bus, Black people walked. They carpooled with friends and neighbors. Black taxi drivers charged Black customers 10 cents a ride, the same price as bus fare. They absorbed the losses to keep the boycott going.
After 381 days, which included threats and intimidation, the boycott ended when the Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that racially segregated seating on buses violated the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law.
Coming months after the lynching of Emmett Till, a 14-year-old Black boy from Chicago who was kidnapped, tortured, and killed by two white men while visiting relatives in Mississippi, the bus boycott became a seminal moment in the civil rights movement.
Advertisement
In her 2018 book, 'History Teaches Us to Resist: How Progressive Moments Have Succeeded in Challenging Times,' Mary Frances Berry, a historian and legal scholar, wrote, 'It's crucial to recognize that resistance works even if it does not achieve all of the movement's goals, and that movements are always necessary, because major change will engender resistance, which must be addressed.'
Target and other large corporations that ditched DEI initiatives or have aligned with Trump will survive these boycotts. But damage to their brand image and reputation will linger and the financial jolts will be acute. As for Teslas, even those reluctantly keeping the cars are broadcasting their feelings with bumper stickers like 'Eco Friendly, Not Elon Friendly.'
Today's boycotts link arms across generations with those that came before and defined consumers' political power. As Benjamin F. Chavis Jr., president and CEO of the National Newspaper Publishers Association, an organization of Black newspaper publishers, told the Washington Informer, 'If corporations believe they can roll back diversity commitments without consequence, they are mistaken.'
And those mistakes will continue to eat into corporate America's bottom line, one boycott at a time.
Renée Graham is a Globe columnist. She can be reached at
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
7 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
‘Rights are under attack': S.F. Pride parade kicks off with mix of flamboyance, resistance
As San Francisco's month-long LGBTQ+ Pride celebration culminated Sunday in a massive rainbow-laden party packing city streets, event leaders made one thing clear: These were no ordinary festivities. President Donald Trump's recent assault on queer and transgender protections prompted some of San Francisco Pride's biggest corporate sponsors to flee, raising important questions about the iconic event's future. Should it become more of a protest than a party? And, present political climate aside, could a budget shortfall force organizers to scale things back? With Pride at an inflexion point of sorts, prominent officials tried to strike a delicate balance: voice defiance against many of the Trump administration's LGBTQ+-related policies, all while trumpeting Pride's potential as a unifying force during turbulent times. The result was a one-of-a-kind event that reflected the complexities of the moment and epitomized this year's theme of 'Queer Joy is Resistance.' 'This Pride hits different than recent prides,' Delaware Rep. Sarah McBride, the first openly transgender person elected to Congress, said in an interview with the Chronicle as she visited San Francisco for the Pride events. But, she added, it's also a moment to remember how far the LGBTQ+ movement has come, and to 'rediscover our superpower as a community.' As hundreds of thousands of spectators flooded Market Street and the Civic Center for one of the nation's largest Pride parades, they saw the zany antics and flamboyant fun that have long been Pride's signature. There was a lone nudist applying sunscreen, a group of dancers in glittering cowboy hats bobbing to Lady Gaga's 'Applause,' and rainbow-bedazzled attendees wearing Pride flags as butterfly wings. Through it all, somber reminders of the challenges LGBTQ+ people and other minority groups face peppered the festivities. At one point, San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto and a handful of SFPD officers passed through a mostly silent crowd, passing out rainbow flags. Wearing a purple hologram jacket, State Sen. Scott Wiener waved to the crowd atop a truck trailer as he held a sign that read, 'ICE out of SF.' Emblazoned across the T-shirts of San Francisco City Attorney's Office employees were the words, 'See You in Court,' with the Statue of Liberty and a rainbow flag. This was a not-so-subtle reference to the eight lawsuits filed by the city against the Trump administration. 'As the Trump administration violates the Constitution and undermines the rule of law every day, we have to defend our city and our communities,' City Attorney David Chiu said while riding atop a dinosaur float. 'Everyone's rights are under attack.' By taking a more obstinate stance than in recent years, Sunday's festivities conjured memories of Pride celebrations from the 1970s and '80s — a time when politics were at the forefront, and corporate sponsors remained an afterthought. The throwback vibe seemed warranted. After all, just days after the 10th anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling that recognized same-sex marriage nationwide, many LGBTQ+ people feel quite under attack. 'Trump is trying to take away the rights of human beings,' said Kristina Corrozza, who waited 30 years to come to their first Pride. 'San Franciscans won't stand for it.' Just in the five months since Trump took office for a second, non-consecutive term, he has removed transgender people from the military, prevented federal insurance programs from paying for gender-affirmation surgeries for young people, and attempted to keep transgender athletes out of girls and women's sports. Then the Southern Baptist Convention, empowered by the overturning of Roe v. Wade, set its sights this month on ending same-sex marriage. Some agendas, like Trump's move to rename the Harvey Milk naval ship, have felt like a direct shot at San Francisco — a city that has long taken pride in being a bastion for the LGBTQ+ community. In the process, S.F. Pride organizers had to reckon with a sobering truth: Major corporations tend to value moving product over inclusivity. Since Trump was elected again, LGBTQ+ allyship has become increasingly unprofitable. This helps explain why five major corporate donors — including Comcast and Anheuser-Busch — pulled out of the event this year. Despite a late fundraising push spearheaded by smaller businesses, S.F. Pride entered Sunday about $180,000 short of its $2.3 million fundraising target. 'If we, somehow, in these next 10 days, can find another $175,000, and people show up on Pride Sunday, and our beverage program does well and our donations increase at the gate, we might get through this difficult period,' Suzanne Ford, the executive director of San Francisco Pride, recently told the Chronicle. All that raised the stakes for what was once a lighthearted celebration of the LGBTQ+ community. For many of the families who flocked to Market Street and the Civic Center for parade floats, musical acts and general pandemonium, Sunday's festivities represented a vital opportunity — not just to show the world that inclusivity is worth celebrating, but to reaffirm that political oppression can only make allies stronger, corporate sponsors or not. Marcella Pesavento lives in the neighborhood and walks her dog by every parade. But for this Pride, she stopped and climbed atop a traffic bollard to show her support. 'With everything going on with Trump, it feels important to stand up and be ourselves,' she said. 'It makes people feel they are not alone.'
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Warner says DOJ letter to University of Virginia president was ‘explicit'
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) said in a Sunday interview that University of Virginia President James Ryan, who submitted his resignation on Friday, was given an 'explicit' deadline to step aside, in a letter last week from the Trump administration. In an interview on CBS News's 'Face the Nation,' Warner condemned the Trump administration's pressure campaign against Ryan, who resigned on Friday to avoid funding cuts to the university. Trump's Department of Justice had been investigating allegations that the school was not in compliance with President Trump's January executive order barring DEI practices at institutions that receive federal funding. 'This is the most outrageous action, I think, this crowd has taken on education. We have great public universities in Virginia. We have a very strong governance system, where we have an independent board of visitors appointed by the Governor,' Warner said. 'Jim Ryan had done a very good job; just completed a major capital campaign.' 'For him to be threatened, and, literally, there was indication that they received the letter that if he didn't resign on a day last week, by five o'clock, all these cuts would take place,' Warner added. 'It was that explicit?' moderator Margaret Brennan asked. 'It was that explicit,' Warner said. The New York Times reported Thursday night that the Justice Department demanded Ryan resign as a condition of a settlement in its civil rights investigation into diversity practices at the university. Ryan posted a letter publicly on Friday, confirming his resignation, saying he was 'inclined to fight for what I believe in,' but could not 'make a unilateral decision to fight the federal government in order to save my own job.' 'To do so would not only be quixotic but appear selfish and self-centered to the hundreds of employees who would lose their jobs, the researchers who would lose their funding, and the hundreds of students who could lose financial aid or have their visas withheld,' Ryan said in the letter.
Chicago Tribune
12 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Republican Senate tax bill would add $3.3 trillion to the US debt load, CBO says
WASHINGTON — The changes made to President Donald Trump's big tax bill in the Senate would pile trillions onto the nation's debt load while resulting in even steeper losses in health care coverage, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in a new analysis, adding to the challenges for Republicans as they try to muscle the bill to passage. The CBO estimates the Senate bill would increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion from 2025 to 2034, a nearly $1 trillion increase over the House-passed bill, which CBO has projected would add $2.4 to the debt over a decade. The analysis also found that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law, an increase over the scoring for the House-passed version of the bill, which predicts 10.9 million more people would be without health coverage. The stark numbers are yet another obstacle for Republican leaders as they labor to pass Trump's bill by his self-imposed July 4th deadline. Even before the CBO's estimate, Republicans were at odds over the contours of the legislation, with some resisting the cost-saving proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid and food aid programs even as other Republicans say those proposals don't go far enough. Republicans are slashing the programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks put in place during his first term. The push-pull was on vivid display Saturday night as a routine procedural vote to take up the legislation in the Senate was held open for hours as Vice President JD Vance and Republican leaders met with several holdouts. The bill ultimately advanced in a 51-49 vote, but the path ahead is fraught, with voting on amendments still to come. Still, many Republicans are disputing the CBO estimates and the reliability of the office's work. To hoist the bill to passage, they are using a different budget baseline that assumes the Trump tax cuts expiring in December have already been extended, essentially making them cost-free in the budget. The CBO on Saturday released a separate analysis of the GOP's preferred approach that found the Senate bill would reduce deficits by about $500 billion. Democrats and economists decry the GOP's approach as 'magic math' that obscures the true costs of the GOP tax breaks. In addition, Democrats note that under the traditional scoring system, the Republican bill bill would violate the Senate's 'Byrd Rule' that forbids the legislation from increasing deficits after 10 years. In a Sunday letter to Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley, the top Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, CBO Director Phillip Swagel said the office estimates that the Finance Committee's portion of the bill, also known as Title VII, 'increases the deficits in years after 2034' under traditional scoring.
