I am incredibly perplexed by the incessant posting about Chick-Fil-A. I would have to say, by and large, the argument seems to be a soapbox platform for what I would call “White People Problems.” I’m not meaning to suggest that this is only a political issue for White people or that only white people are saying that CFA is run by politically conservative folk, but want people to recognize that the casual statements and arguments spouted throughout most of the Facebook posts I see are problems people of “privilege” have time to bitch about.
Let us get real for a moment? Is this about CFA? Maybe. Is this about something people who run CFA have done? More likely. Is this about a particular political stance advocating against homosexuality that upsets many people? Even more likely. If you have a problem with the choices the people running the corporation have made, or the corporation itself has made, why not just stop eating there? (Not to mention the fact that I find it ironic to know many people who are posting some of these comments shop at other places–like Wal-Mart–and do not seem to be crying out about the choices of these companies… well, unless everyone on your Facebook Wall seems to be rising up at the same time.)
So, here is my problem with the continual banter about CFA: Why is this issue the issue of importance that seems to be sweeping through so many posts?
#1 – It is easy.
- It’s easy to sit in a chair at home, criticizing people who hate homosexuality instead of doing anything that would actively correct this problem.
- It’s easy to point a finger at people who don’t have the same political agenda, rather that sitting down with people and engaging in dialogue about the differences in opinions.
- It’s easy to boycott a fast food joint if you have other places to eat (and I know many of us do this easily because we may not eat fast food or are privileged enough to eat at more expensive locales).
#2 – It is a political argument using tunnel-vision as a lens to neglect issues with broader impact.
- So you hope to alter the minds of corporate executives at CFA because of your choose to boycott CSA specifically? Tell me how much you know about the political choices of corporate officials or the political choices made when structuring a food-supply chain for your local grocery store. It is just as likely that many of the chains we buy from on a daily basis engage in similar contributions and/or have an array of political stances you may take issue with if you took the time to look. Or, tell me if you know the political beliefs of the farmer you buy from at a Farmer’s Market, who might also be donating money to the same institutions, just in a smaller scale.
- So you choose to boycott CFA, which is a fast food chain? Why is it that the choice of a fast food company to support social issues that are anti-homosexuality have upset so many people when it might be more important to question the motivations of a fast food company as a company of food? Why not consider the economic factors that contribute to how the food even arrives in its /very cheap/ form at a fast-food store? Why not consider the atrocious prices of non-processed food, which are expensive for many lower-income families resulting in fast-food as one of the only choices for meals? Why not criticize how most fast-food companies provide food that contributes to more significant issues like childhood-obesity?
If you want to post about CFA incessantly, tell me what will change about our culture if the boycott were successful and if the company shut its doors? Will we have changed the nature of the fast-food industry? unlikely. Will we have changed the frequent corporate donations directed toward conservative political organizations? unlikely. Maybe, what people should be posting about are the possibilities that we might do something more important with /lasting/ impact.
How about leaving the armchair from which we ramble about CFA on Facebook to, instead, go out and engage with our community by finding ways to educate people about social issues? Wouldn’t it better to understand more about corporate politics that influence trans-national trade so that we might understand how truly troubling something like a “food chain” can be when we try to follow the links along the kinked chain of supply and demand? Wouldn’t it be better to actually engage in constructive conversation and debate about the ways that children (or adults) are educated about differences?
The issues at hand can be much broader than corporate choices to donate monies to particular political/social organizations. The impact can be much more influential than dropping CFA’s bottom line for a week or so. And, asking questions on a grander scale and engaging in discussions that are not so “easy,” might prove to be far more enlightening.
