[Vision2020] Boycotts Ineffective?
Nate Wilson
natewilson@moscow.com
Mon, 20 Oct 2003 10:32:58 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------030009030202060509010206
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Richard,
I'm afraid I wasn't aiming for "the melodrama of the childhood
lemonade stand." I was unaware of the lemonade stand's role as a
melodramatic motif. You provided the melodram. Ready, this is for reals.
My kids, when they have a couple more years under their belts, will no
doubt have a lemonade stand. They will actually tithe to Christ Church,
and Christ Church will actually send tithe money to west Africa for
building projects. Maybe we just lead melodramatic lives (you know,
lemonade stands and all)?. Of course, my kids might also send some of
their money to another ministry we have connections to (Servant Group
International) which is currently establishing and running schools in
Northern Iraq (and was well before the war). Please overlook the melodrama.
If personal conviction is the issue behind personal boycott, and the
courage of your convictions will not allow you to consume a Bucer's
pastry, how much more would your convictions prevent you from buying
directly from Douglas Wilson's grandkids? And no, my "personal
integrity" would not prevent me from buying from yours.
I like Wheatberries a lot. The point is this: If you don't want to
buy pastries from conservative Christians (who might believe Leviticus)
then I'm not sure where you go. Bucers, Zume, and Wheatberries are all
run by Christians. In otherwords, they are all on the same team. The
evil, bad team. The vast right-wing baked good conspiracy.
I'm sorry if I haven't tried to convert you yet. Would you like me
to? Drop me a line, I'd love to buy you a bun (or a beer) from the
establishment of your choice. Cheers.
NDW
Amy & Richard Newsome wrote:
> All,
> Nate finds boycotts "amusing and ineffective". First and foremost, in
> my opinion, this is about personal integrity, a put your money (or
> don't) where your mouth is. With that in mind, for me, a personal
> "boycott" is the only option, and very effective. If Nate isn't
> hampered by that kind of personal integrity, more power to him.
>
> If Nate really doubted the power of people withholding their
> patronage, would he have resorted to the melodrama of the childhood
> lemonade stand? Can you all see the sweet little kindergartener,
> heartbroken, just trying to raise money for poor Africans, with a
> single tear running down her cheek? Just maybe the tithe isn't for
> West Africa, but for the Pastor's new pick-up, or to publish a book
> showing the "paternalistic" nature of slavery.
>
> Where did the mention of Wheatberries or conservative Christians come
> from? I didn't see any mention of "conservative Christians". This
> wouldn't be a pot shot at the bakery competition would it? If somebody
> could illuminate me on this I would appreciate it.
>
>
> "You can pry my coffee money from my cold dead hand", now that's
> melodrama.
> Richard Newsome
>
>
> P.S. Nate, if your father's idea of a paternalistic relationship is
> that of the slave/owner, you have my sympathies.
>
>
>
>
> Nate wrote:
>
> Joan and Amy,
> Actually, I agree with you both (as far as consumer rights go), and Joan
> was obviously on her game as she was a pleasure to read. The
> "Intolerance" subject line was not my own. However, what would the
> vision2020 response be if we called for a boycott of all Muslim
> businesses because we didn't want to endorse their views of women? We'd
> get called the same thing my father has already been called for thinking
> slavery in the South didn't merit the bloodshed of the Civil War. I
> personally find boycotts amusing and ineffective, but that's just me. In
> my strange world the tastiest cinammon roll is the most Christian no
> matter who made it (but I think that only works with Christianity). If
> you all don't want to buy your baked goods at Bucers, Wheatberries, or
> Zume because they were made by conservative Christians, or because your
> money might be going toward some kid's private education, or into the
> coffers of the church, that is most certainly your right. Why would Joan
> go to some place where they think she's an abomination (her word not
> mine)? Because they have the best chocolate cake? The best music? The
> best interest rates? Why would I go into a business where they insist
> (despite my denial) that I'm the bigoted son of a racist (assuming they
> recognized me)? For all the same reasons.
> Feel free to avoid my kids' lemonade stand (when they're old enough)
> because they will tithe their dimes to Christ Church (and their money
> might end up going toward building projects in west Africa). But if your
> kids have the best lemonade (or they're just cute) I'll be there with my
> quarters. Cheers.
>
> NDW
>
> P.S. Tom, I'm afraid I was just amusing myself with the BATH party. It's
> a bad habit, I know.
--------------030009030202060509010206
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Richard,<br>
I'm afraid I wasn't aiming for "the melodrama of the childhood
lemonade stand." I was unaware of the lemonade stand's role as a
melodramatic motif. You provided the melodram. Ready, this is for
reals. My kids, when they have a couple more years under their belts,
will no doubt have a lemonade stand. They will actually tithe to Christ
Church, and Christ Church will actually send tithe money to west Africa
for building projects. Maybe we just lead melodramatic lives (you know,
lemonade stands and all)?. Of course, my kids might also send some of
their money to another ministry we have connections to (Servant Group
International) which is currently establishing and running schools in
Northern Iraq (and was well before the war). Please overlook the
melodrama.<br>
If personal conviction is the issue behind personal boycott, and
the courage of your convictions will not allow you to consume a Bucer's
pastry, how much more would your convictions prevent you from buying
directly from Douglas Wilson's grandkids? And no, my "personal
integrity" would not prevent me from buying from yours.<br>
I like Wheatberries a lot. The point is this: If you don't want to
buy pastries from conservative Christians (who might believe Leviticus)
then I'm not sure where you go. Bucers, Zume, and Wheatberries are all
run by Christians. In otherwords, they are all on the same team. The
evil, bad team. The vast right-wing baked good conspiracy.<br>
I'm sorry if I haven't tried to convert you yet. Would you like me
to? Drop me a line, I'd love to buy you a bun (or a beer) from the
establishment of your choice. Cheers. <br>
<br>
NDW<br>
<br>
<br>
Amy & Richard Newsome wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid000c01c396d3$f3285b40$fd71fa43@res0gxyj">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1264" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div>All,</div>
<div>Nate finds boycotts "amusing and ineffective". First and
foremost, in my opinion, this is about personal integrity, a put your
money (or don't) where your mouth is. With that in mind, for me, a
personal "boycott" is the only option, and very effective. If Nate
isn't hampered by that kind of personal integrity, more power to him. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>If Nate really doubted the power of people withholding their
patronage, would he have resorted to the melodrama of the childhood
lemonade stand? Can you all see the sweet little kindergartener,
heartbroken, just trying to raise money for poor Africans, with a
single tear running down her cheek? Just maybe the tithe isn't for West
Africa, but for the Pastor's new pick-up, or to publish a book showing
the "paternalistic" nature of slavery.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Where did the mention of Wheatberries or conservative Christians
come from? I didn't see any mention of "conservative Christians".
This wouldn't be a pot shot at the bakery competition would it? If
somebody could illuminate me on this I would appreciate it.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>"You can pry my coffee money from my cold dead hand", now that's
melodrama.</div>
<div>Richard Newsome</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>P.S. Nate, if your father's idea of a paternalistic relationship
is that of the slave/owner, you have my sympathies.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Nate wrote:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Joan and Amy,<br>
Actually, I agree with you both (as far as consumer rights go), and
Joan <br>
was obviously on her game as she was a pleasure to read. The <br>
"Intolerance" subject line was not my own. However, what would the <br>
vision2020 response be if we called for a boycott of all Muslim <br>
businesses because we didn't want to endorse their views of women? We'd
<br>
get called the same thing my father has already been called for
thinking <br>
slavery in the South didn't merit the bloodshed of the Civil War. I <br>
personally find boycotts amusing and ineffective, but that's just me.
In <br>
my strange world the tastiest cinammon roll is the most Christian no <br>
matter who made it (but I think that only works with Christianity). If <br>
you all don't want to buy your baked goods at Bucers, Wheatberries, or <br>
Zume because they were made by conservative Christians, or because your
<br>
money might be going toward some kid's private education, or into the <br>
coffers of the church, that is most certainly your right. Why would
Joan <br>
go to some place where they think she's an abomination (her word not <br>
mine)? Because they have the best chocolate cake? The best music? The <br>
best interest rates? Why would I go into a business where they insist <br>
(despite my denial) that I'm the bigoted son of a racist (assuming they
<br>
recognized me)? For all the same reasons.<br>
Feel free to avoid my kids' lemonade stand (when they're old enough) <br>
because they will tithe their dimes to Christ Church (and their money <br>
might end up going toward building projects in west Africa). But if
your <br>
kids have the best lemonade (or they're just cute) I'll be there with
my <br>
quarters. Cheers.<br>
<br>
NDW<br>
<br>
P.S. Tom, I'm afraid I was just amusing myself with the BATH party.
It's <br>
a bad habit, I know.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------030009030202060509010206--