THE CURRENT OUTRAGE AGAINST TARGET SAYS A LOT
And it says that resistance itself remains fatally divided
When Target was stormed by looters, primarily black and working class, many so-called conservatives in the US denounced the looters. The lockdowns of 3/11 had a disproportionate impact on the working class and minorities, while crushing small and medium-sized businesses. Big box stores like Target profited massively. The latter is not what irked conservatives so much, rather it was the disrespect for “law and order” and the claim about defending “private property” which was stretched to the thinnest of limits.
What really disturbed some on the right can be gleaned by searching through Twitter, Telegram, and other social media sites. Search for “Target” and “looters,” and then add to that “savages,” “animals,” “beasts,” and “zoo,” and you get a good sample of exactly what bourgeois right wingers feared the most. Clutching pearl necklaces is not the monopoly of any one partisan camp.
Then look at what happens when Target starts talking LGBTQ. Target has now lost billions in value thanks to a boycott from consumers—infinitely more than anything it lost from looters (because the corporation in fact lost nothing, thanks to insurance). This attack is now celebrated by right wing media.
When it’s looters, the talk is about the “good” that corporations do, and how they provide jobs. When it’s LGBTQ, it’s all about burning them to the ground.
Both involve acts of resistance. However, a yawning chasm of ideology, classism, and racialism divides the two types of resistance and the quarters from which the resistance arises.
Use this as a corrective for any talk about how we have “transcended” the left vs. right divide—an assertion that more often comes from right wingers who think that, ideologically and morally, they have obliterated the left. Rather than obliterating the divide, this kind of selective outrage is more likely to perpetuate a class war and something else that sickens the US, i.e., its continued obsessions with “race”.
Meanwhile, Target remains standing. It will adjust to a boycott like it adjusted for looting. However, we remain divided. Who wins here? Isn’t it obvious?
In the interest of complete transparency, my policy with comments is that I will not allow them to escalate and spiral out of control. The rule here, for me or anyone else, is that something is posted, then there is a critique, and then the original author responds--and that is it. I don't want to see the comments section explode into some melodramatic novel. Anyone abusing this policy will be permanently banned.
Two commenters above are temporarily suspended, in the hope that this cools things down. One of them decided to post an abusive comment under another name (like a troll), and is now permanently banned.
Who's fault is the division really? Is it fair to dunk on "right wingers" for ideological differences when it's unlikely the other side has any desire to give an inch in their direction either.
Is it really so impossible that different groups simply have irreconcilable differences that should be peacefully negotiated, rather than inflamed with blame and shame?
Ultimately I agree with your conclusion that there is no overarching resistance across tribal affiliation, but what's the fix?
Is it to continue to nit-pick ideological differences, or find ways to connect despite it?