I've been reading a depressing novel that touches on world issues (children kidnapped to work as prostitutes! fathers shot in the street in front of their wives and children! very cheery stuff!), and meanwhile my childhood friend Jen in MI made a very good point on Facebook about how time/money could be better focused, and those two things together gave me the idea for a compromise.
What if everyone who wanted to show support for a fast-food restaurant's spending priorities bought GIFT CARDS at that restaurant, and donated them to a shelter or food pantry or other such organization? They could then hang around and have a soda or something to show warm-body support for the fast-food employees, who have probably been having a rough couple of weeks.
Meanwhile, everyone who wanted to show NON-support for a fast-food restaurant's spending priorities could (1) write a letter to the restaurant (boycotts may or may not do any good, but they definitely don't do any good if no one knows you're doing it---and an absence of $7 doesn't show up in the annual report); (2) send the money NON-spent at the restaurant to a non-profit organization that DID reflect the person's point of view (see also: Spite Charity), perhaps with an accompanying letter about the reason for the donation.
(Both sides could, if they liked, crow about how their side's larger contribution to good causes meant significant things about the quality and legitimacy of their side's point of view.)
Everyone who didn't care either way could carry on as usual.
Let's not have a re-hash of the reasons a person might make one of those three decisions. What I'm interested in is whether these three options are enough choices to let everyone feel happy about their actions, while also funneling all this Enthusiastic Effort in a pleasing direction.
Life-improving products, part 4 - (Continued from part 1, part 2, and part 3.) Stearns Youth Life Vest (photo from Amazon.com). I’d been too scared to take the kids to any body of water oth...