Coca-Cola threatened with boycott for not opposing Georgia voting bills

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: The Hill

Georgia activists are planning to launch a boycott of Coca-Cola Co., one of Atlanta's largest and most well-known companies, over its apparent refusal to denounce a GOP-backed bill in the Georgia legislature that would limit voter access.

Speaking to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the AME Sixth Episcopal District said they will be calling for a statewide boycott of Coca-Cola's products until the company publicly comes out against the proposed voting measures that would impose new ID requirements and change when voters could submit their ballots.

Bishop Reginald Jackson told the Journal-Constitution that he hopes this boycott will show that if "Coca-Cola wants Black and brown people to drink their product, then they must speak up when our rights, our lives and our very democracy as we know it is under attack."

"We will speak with our wallets," Jackson added. "This past summer, Coke and other corporations said they needed to speak out against racism. But they've been mighty quiet about this."



Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/coca-cola-threatened-with-boycott-for-not-opposing-georgia-voting-bills/ar-BB1eXKSm?li=BB141NW3&ocid=DELLDHP

[TwilightZone]

1. Per WaPo on the 15th, they already did.

"On Friday, the advocates scored a win when the Georgia Chamber of Commerce issued a statement expressing “concern and opposition” to the measures under consideration in the legislature, which would end no-excuse absentee voting, limit early voting hours, restrict drop-boxes for mail ballots, and curtail early voting on Sundays.

Representatives from Coca-Cola and Home Depot told The Washington Post that their companies are “aligned” with the Chamber’s comments."

(snip)

"Though Coca-Cola and Home Depot representatives said their companies were “aligned” with the Chamber, other companies targeted by voting-rights activists have instead issued cautious statements of principle that neither endorsed nor opposed any particular proposal."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/15/georgia-voting-business/

[rockfordfile]

16. I agree

[maxrandb]

17. That's such a bullshit statement from Coke and Home Depot

As early as today, Coke, Home Depot, Delta and other corporations, their CEOs and Shareholders will be donating millions to politicians that voted in favor of this racist bill

Corporate America and the 1% are very skilled at convincing us progues to buy their products and services, while they fund politicians that want to kill us.

It's time to put a stop to it by harming them the only way we can.

It's pretty obvious that votes and people don't matter to them.

Maybe money does.

[Faux pas]

2. ...

let's get them where it hurts, the bottom line. It's easy for me I don't use any of their products.

[luvs2sing]

3. I've been boycotting Coke since 2004.

It was my one addiction. I kicked it cold turkey in 2004.

[maxrandb]

18. Umm, they fund politicians that voted it into law?

[Loki Liesmith]

4. What does a soda company have to do with voting legislation?

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

5. It's a major employer in Georgia

[Fiendish Thingy]

10. Their headquarters are in GA and they are big GOP donors. Nt

[BComplex]

6. North Carolina is with you, Georgia!

[Decoy of Fenris]

7. This bothers me. Not the boycott per se, but forcing/bringing companies into the political arena.

We've railed against Citizens United for how long, insisting that money and corporations shouldn't have political speech, and now we're holding an economic gun to their head saying "SPEAK". Something about the precedent it sets just doesn't sit well with me, even though it's the 'right' thing to do.

[UGADawg]

9. Political speech is OK. Bribes are another matter **

*

[LanternWaste]

12. You then believe the anti-Apartheid boycotts were 'bothering'?

[Decoy of Fenris]

13. I wouldn't class the largely ineffectual early anti-Apartheid boycotts as in the same domain as Coke

It wasn't until Sharpseville and the proper formation of the AAM that anything resembling progress took place. Regardless, -international- political repercussions are drastically different than internal lobbying-by-proxy.


The point that I'm making isn't that the planned boycotts are bad or anything, but trying or allowing big companies to influence political decisions is an incredibly dangerous line to ride. Just as the left can boycott Coke to try to force political policy, the right can do the exact same, and at that point the government becomes beholden to whatever the largest corporations within a state support. Governance becomes less about voting, democracy and elections, and becomes crony lobbyism to corporations and their interests.

Yeah, that strikes me as wrong.

[Steelrolled]

15. You are so right,

and I'm not a fan of boycotts either.

This kind of stuff reminds me a little of the Seinfeld episode where Kramer didn't want to wear the "ribbon."

[maxrandb]

20. Right, because they aren't in the "political arena" already

"This" is what will "force" them to "get involved" in politics?

[UGADawg]

8. Not just Georgia! All the USA, Put it on all

forms of media!

[oldsoftie]

11. Coke boycotts never work.

[BradAllison]

14. Except I heard they did oppose it almost immediately

They were the first company I heard of doing so.

[maxrandb]

19. So, I guess they won't fund politicians that voted in favor of this?

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

21. 200 Brands worldwide. Coca Cola Brands and Products Here:

https://www.coca-colacompany.com/brands