• Poggervania@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    90
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I get what the guy in OP’s pic is saying, but realistically the ones who are affected the most are small local businesses. If we loot stuff from big box retail stores like Target or WalMart, they can easily absorb the losses and they don’t really give a shit either - they’d most likely just consider it shrinkage. You steal the same kind of stuff from a small independent convenience store, and suddenly the owner has a very real chance of being forced to close down the store, even if it’s a local chain. And even if you looted exclusively from big box retailers or other big name corporations, you’re still not affecting the guys at the top because they make fuckloads of money elsewhere, and last I saw, you can’t actually steal from Amazon unless you’re fine with being a douche and stealing other people’s packages.

    Looting doesn’t really do anything. Is it a form of protest? Sure, I can see the argument. Is it an effective form of protest? Fuuuuuuck no.

    EDIT: morer clearer message

    • gregoryw3@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Didn’t this happen to a Walmart in a small town? The Walmart took over all the small business and employed most of them, so when they pulled out of the area because of theft it took all the remaining jobs away?

      Daily Mail Link

      I found this article but it’s daily mail and doesn’t talk in depth about it.

      https://www.seattletimes.com/business/walmart-closing-an-everett-store-that-locals-say-was-plagued-by-theft/

      I think this might be it? However it doesn’t comment on loss of local jobs…

    • Omgpwnies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      And even then, you’re still not affecting the guys at the top because they make fuckloads of money elsewhere

      Also, they’ve already made their money off of that convenience store, since the store will have already purchased said stolen product.

      • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And if the store stays open, they have to buy more. So it was a free sale from their perspective, it’s actually beneficial.

    • Coasting0942@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You loot the Walmart, it shuts down, a food desert starts, humans start to starve.

      Or, gasp, big government invests some local taxpayer cash to build a grocery store that serves the community.

      • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        You know that the town existed before Walmart, right?

        You know that Walmart crushed the small mom and pop shops that existed before Walmart?

        You know that Walmart is a parasite?

        • Coasting0942@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am aware it is a parasite.

          I am also aware that after it shuts down because of crime, investors won’t be in a rush to start up another store. Leaving everybody in a small town fucked.

          I am also trying to highlight that one Republican town fixed the problem by building a government owned grocery store after their dollar tree shut down.

  • Lasherz12@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Playing into looting as a means to an end for change we want to see on the left is a political dead end. I don’t care if Walmart gets robbed, neither does Walmart, their insurance may care, but Walmart and businesses like it are part of the biggest lobbying groups for increased police presence and these events are a gift to their narrative.

    It’s fine to say I don’t care about retail theft on capital owners that rob workers every day. It’s a whole other thing to say this is how we go about change as a movement and that we actively support and encourage it. Just like abortions, the edge cases that barely happen are the only ones that will be talked about endlessly in media and if we’re simultaneously cheering on the more common cases where the “victim” is an oil baron it’s not a good look. Nuance ain’t America’s strongsuit.

    • daltotron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Walmart and businesses like it are part of the biggest lobbying groups for increased police presence and these events are a gift to their narrative.

      That’s kind of an argument you could make against any political activism, though. The civil rights marches were framed as riots in the media of their time, and obviously, they got at least some of what they were looking for, in the end, so their tactics were successful. Arguments about optics never really strike me as supremely convincing. They don’t argue about the merit of the act in general, they argue about the aesthetics of it, which is much more fraught, and theoretical, and doesn’t actually really have to do with the thing itself. I also don’t really find this whole like, strategic nihilism to be a convincing counterargument either. “oh, well, walmart as a whole won’t be toppled by any actions we take on the ground, our energy would be better spent doing something else”, and then you ask “what else” and people just kind of gesture in the direction of a nonprofit, or local politics, or something to that effect. That’s not to say those more organized forms of activism don’t have their place, but if we were just relying on easily corporate captured nonprofits and easily corruptible local politics for activism, we’d also be fucked.

      Both things, to me, would seem to have their role. They are all mutually beneficial to one another in terms of political leverage.

  • Rosco@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Doesn’t looting only really affects the small shops and the people working at the shops? I don’t imagine big corpos losing their shit over one or two stores burned. Drop in the sea for them. Boycott at a massive scale would be more effective to bring those fuckers down, easier said than done though.

    • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Looting or boycotts, you need a certain amount of people dedicated to the cause to make corpos sweat. Sporadic actions by varying groups for different reasons is a mild inconvenience and achieves little. Not to say we shouldn’t be doing both, we absolutely should, but it needs to be organized and I don’t think there’s a large enough political body that would adopt these tactics yet.

      I’d also like to add the looting small shops for no reason other than fuck capitalism isn’t a great message. If the owner was a dick then go for it and make it known why. Large chains aren’t going to punish employees for shoplifting, at least there hasn’t been any real evidence to support that. They threaten to close stores all the time due to “crime” but it’s never once panned out to be the real reason if they do wind up closing a store. I wouldn’t worry about the employees, it’s a very slim chance that they’ll see any punishment for it and even then, that could be used as a radicalizing force to bring more people into the movement

    • psud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The boycotts against Nestle have been popular in the boycotting community. Nestle don’t care though, not enough people boycott anything to make a difference

  • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    To me, it undermines the message of people demanding equality when their main goal seems to be stealing shit from people just like them. When someone puts up signs begging not to be looted because they can’t afford repairs, you’re not a fucking hero or a revolutionary. You’re a piece of shit and you create enemies to your movement.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They would have more of a legitimate sounding argument if they just took food from stores and then gave it to food banks or something. When it is done to get free TVs (and people do take stuff like that) it rather undermines the message.

      • Facebones@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’d be more legitimate sounding if yall stop pretending that the electronic section gets ravaged while grocery goes completely untouched. “Fuck the 237 people who grabbed some beef and diapers, run the footage of 4 people with tvs on loop for 2 years”

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have no idea what video footage you’re referring to, I’m talking about the people that actually said they did that, you know the people who bragged about it on Twitter and Facebook because they’re morons.

          • Facebones@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Congrats on explicitly ignoring the point to continue pretending that every part of the store but the TV section goes untouched.

    • daltotron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, anyone can put up that sign, though, that doesn’t really mean it really has any bearing on reality.

      I also don’t really think that “whether or not they can afford repairs or insurance” is on the foremost mind of looters. Well, foremost, I would think “hey this is easy money” for the vast majority, or “hey fuck everything”, maybe,

      But I would also think that, in terms of political activism, you would want to target businesses which aren’t equitable, and which are leeching things out of the community. Gentrified businesses, businesses which are just kind of, external to the community, businesses where the owner is just a real piece of shit, stuff like that, I think, would be more in the realm of political activism. You know, if you’re doing any of that, then you would more likely want to target businesses that don’t have insurance or can afford repairs, actually, because you’d be more likely to get those businesses shut down, or driven out of the community.

      • smeg@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        No nuance allowed on the internet! Everyone who doesn’t agree with me is one of them!

      • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I believe it meant tongue in cheek but it made me laugh. I’m against theft but there is a big difference between stealing from Walmart and stealing from a local small business. Maybe I’m a hypocrite but I hate large chains like Walmart. I’m old. I remember pharmacies owned and run by pharmacist. They were part of the community and not just draining money from the community.

        We had downtowns filled with local shops. Yes things were more expensive but I’m ok with that. The quality of life was much better.

    • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      51
      ·
      1 year ago

      BooHoo, Grandpa got rich selling addictive poison, he is still a part of the bourgeoisie and can get bent.

      • Poggervania@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        So everybody who runs a mom and pop shop or runs their own small little independent store is now part of the bourgeoisie and elite like Elongated Muskrat and Jeffrey Bezos?

        • Mac@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Eh… It depends on how you apply the definition to modern times. As literally defined: yes. They are business owners and merchants.
          However, realistically they are much, much closer to the proletariot as these people are also exploited by the Musks and Bezoses and there isn’t really much of a middle class anymore. On top of this they don’t hold any actual power politically which is an important part of being in the bourgeoisie.

          This is how i understand it all, anyway. Feel free to correct me.

  • lurch (he/him)@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It definetly doesn’t help, if the small business corner shop owner gets looted. It just eliminates big corpos competition.

      • Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think they’re talking about yanks. Uncivilised greedy rabble would just loot anything 🤨

  • 31337@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe in an abstract way. I don’t think looters are typically thinking about anything but stealing stuff for themselves. It’s also bad optics, as the media always tries to conflate looters and people destroying random people’s property with protestors to paint movements in a bad light.

  • kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    No, the ultimate strike is asceticism and going without unnecessary shit.

    Looting is buying into the idea that the shit has value but declaring that the people downstream in the supply chain don’t deserve to make a living off that value.

    Looting a store doesn’t rob the producer of the product exploiting child labor in slavery conditions. They likely already got paid much earlier in the supply chain.

    It’s just taking money out of the pocket of the local reseller who now is out both the principle and markup of the goods. It’s theft of distribution, not of production, and arguably provides a greater case for disintermediating the supply chain towards Amazon which is environmentally worse and likely worse for labor.

    This is just rationalizing shitty behavior with pseudo-intellectual BS when really the ‘ultimate’ rejection of capitalism is reduction of consumption and communal support structures for necessities, not equal or even increased consumption while simultaneously stealing from one’s local community.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I learned my lesson from Hurricane Katrina. Black people “loot.” White people “find food.”

  • CaptainProton@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Except they’re always looting the wrong people, the victims are so far off that I don’t doubt the theorists who say it’s all false-flag psyops doing the organizing and directing useful idiots.

    Loot Microsoft’s, Google’s, and Amazon’s offices and data centers. They’re at the root of a lot of this mess. Google controls the flow of information. There are next to no people at data centers and each graphics card in the AI training servers is worth many thousands of dollars, better than anything you’ll get from a CVS.

    Hell, loot an Amazon warehouse if you lack the imagination and need it to be something you can use at home.

    Loot real estate holding company offices. Burn those down if you MUST burn anything down at all. Those are key culprits.

    And don’t forget about the people who rubber stamp all the evil systems.

    The mom and pops and chain retail stores have nothing to do with it.

  • doctorcrimson@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    All right but they’re not looting rich districts (because those places are armed to the teeth), so realistically anybody who loots is only damaging infrastructure local to the disadvantaged.

    If anything I think the majority of looting and arsons during protests are by counter-protestors, such as when Denis Molla staged a fire in 2020 before blaming it on BLM protestors. In fact, I doubt very many people even know that the George Floyd protests were statistically the most peaceful protests in US History, because of how easy it is to discredit those protests in the eyes of the public.

  • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is crazy. Any given business isn’t the one who “commodifies every aspect of living” even if that was a thing that really happened. Maybe you consider looting as a form of protest, maybe you don’t, but it has absolutely nothing to do with hypocrisy from people acting as described.

  • Gigan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

    No it’s not, looting isn’t organized. It’s just people taking advantage of an emergency to steal a bench of stuff for themselves. It’s completely selfish.

    • Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can make a counter argument without explicitly saying someone else is wrong.

      And honestly, your position doesn’t make anything about what the OP said untrue.

    • Seraph@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Super confused. If looting was organized you’d be on board?

      Ok everyone take a number!

      • nieceandtows@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Sure. If looting resulted in redistributing the stolen goods to the less fortunate people, a la robinhood. Not this looting where opportunists loot stuff to make personal money out of an injustice, giving everyone a bad name. These looters are like a lynch mob waiting for an opportunity/justification to lynch somebody. They don’t lynch for justice, they just lynch for their personal pleasure under the safe cover of justice.

        • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Not this looting where opportunists loot stuff to make personal money out of an injustice

          If they make money it’s 'cause they’re selling it which means someone else gets the goods for a cheaper price.

          Shiiiit, I love boosters.

          • nieceandtows@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Where did I say I defend capitalism? Oh so if I say I don’t like these looters that means I’m a capitalist? You are able to read the comment and figure out it’s not capitalistic, but still label me as defending capitalism, that’s on you.

            • psud@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              You compared looters to lynch mobs. You’re clearly not on the side of the common person

            • Seraph@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              My dude, did you even check what thread you’re on? The whole premise is defense against looting is defense of capitalism.

              • Poggervania@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Which is a dumb premise - just because a person might not support looting (and rightfully so) doesn’t mean you support capitalism. The opinions on the two matters aren’t mutually exclusive.

                Flip the logic the other way: if you support, say, socialism for example (i.e. anything that’s not capitalist), does that mean you support looting? If I support looting, does that mean I am a left-leaning communist?

                • Seraph@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m responding to someone else and you crazies keep defending each other.

                  If looting resulted in redistributing the stolen goods to the less fortunate people

                  That sounds a little left leaning communist to me. But you didn’t say that so I get you might have a different opinion.

      • chaotic_disorganizer@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem lies in the fact that looting hurts the wrong people. It’s not the big corporations that suddenly see a huge drop in sales, after all, that is only a tiny amount of their global stock and it has been sold to the retailer already, it is the owner of the store that sees the most damage. And since there is no organisation, theres no way of telling if people are gonna loot a megacorporation outlet or a mom and pop store.

      • astreus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Fun fact: this actually happened during the 2011 London Riots. BBM was used to organise the rioting and looting (and then used as evidence against the organisers)