Not going to Starbucks: Boycotts and the out-scouring of politics in the branded world

Abstract

Focusing on boycotts of Starbucks over last decade, this article looks more broadly at the current states of buying and civic engagement in the United States and abroad. Contrary to what Robert Putnam argues, at least in part, in his now classic text, Bowling Alone, this article suggests that, as formal electoral politics have lost their hold on many, citizens have not abandoned trying to change things or making their voices heard. Instead, they have increasingly expressed their ideas about everything from local affairs to foreign relations at the point of purchase — through in this case, not buying a widely recognized product to gain a say in the larger distribution of social power. ‘Open brands,’ ones that are sensitive to consumer desires, have, in turn, responded, producing a kind of ‘rough democracy of buying’ by offering political solutions to win or retain customers. In the end, however, the evidence suggests that while pursuing political power through (not) buying makes sense and reflects broader changes in the neoliberal world, this strategy of engagement, nonetheless, had severe limits. The stories of Starbucks boycotts show that consumer actions are easily co-opted by the marketing prowess and deft moves of multi-national brands and by the notion held by some consumers that (not) buying is enough as a study of these boycotts also points to a new way of seeing buying not so much as politics themselves but a stage in the process of politicalization.