Boycotting Amazon when they pay Clarkson £800,000 per episode?

oh not that poem again!

Wow- how judgemental is THAT- truly, can't you see?

This is an internet forum- someone asks a question and asks for opinions. People give their opinion, sincerely and politely-nobody is pusing anything down anyone's throat, or sitting on any high horse - the exchange is friendly. Then several people say 'not my problem' and others say 'this is a shame'- and they are told to p*ss off and get off their high horse for stating that someone does not care- when this is exactly what they said.

This is sheer madness, truly. Telling someone that because they have a different opinion to yours, and explain why they feel differently- they are being 'judgemental' is JUDGEMENTAL in the extreme, can't you see that?

It reminds me of that famous poem 'First they came for ...'

It's not the posting so much as the self-righteousness that comes across from the posts of some posters with their inherent judgmentalism and intimation of moral superiority. That is what gets up one's nose.

It is the same with religious in-your-facedness. The harder I am exhorted to believe exactly what someone else believes, against all my (god-given?) intelligence and knowledge, the more I resist. I do not have the precious ability to discriminate so that I can ignore discrepancies and be blindly obedient to a single authority.

I mostly ignore the political threads.

Less is more.

I'm guilty of posting political stuff on Facebook, despite knowing full well that most of my friends will agree and the ones' who don't, won't be influenced. Good points there thatbags

What the self-righteous naggers don't seen to understand is that some of us prefer to do our "be the change" quietly and without fanfare because we find the noisy, public, in-your-face righteousness exceedingly distasteful and—this is the important bit—we don't think it is any more effective, possibly not even as effective, as the quiet kind of Be The Change. The "do what I do because what I do is good" approach to social change does not appeal to everyone. In my case it does more than not appeal.

ruby,

What doesn't work, what has the opposite effect from that intended, is the self-righteousness of nagging, judgemental, full-on "look at me! I'm such a good person", social justice warriors.

Meanwhile other things to improve things for other people work too. Things that people do but say nothing about because they don't want to be bracketed in the same group as those in the previous paragraph.

Luckygirl Boobylady might be more to my discription than rubylady, .

Wow, you guessed. I'll have to be more careful what I write.

So will others, of course. Anyone who thinks that the working conditions of people at Amazon or any other company is not their concern is actually contributing to those poor working conditions.
Boycotts do work. It's just laziness on the part of those who say they cannot be bothered. Either that, or they really do not care.
I await a few swear words.

I've never heard of Oliver Bonas, but they are the first high street retailer to be given living wage foundation accreditation. Ikea is likely to be the next.
It is possible to positively discriminate by shopping at those stores rather than others to show appreciation.

Well - this thread has proper cheered me up. thatbags losing her cool (good on you) and Elegran suggesting that durhamjen could be a died in the wool Thatcherite, soontobe a professor of Islamic studies amongst other wonders.

Bung another p in aposite

I have just learned, via Twitter (it's good is Twitter ), that ostentatious self-righteousness, some of which we've seen on this thread, now has a new name: it's called "virtue signalling". Aposite.

Thank you, merlot, too

If we go only by what people post on here, no-one knows anything at all about anyone else. We create our own persona, and what we miss out could be the most important part.

For all we know to the contrary, granjura could live in Australia and break every law and civilised custom she can find, durhamjen could be a dyed-in-the-wool Thatcherite and spend her spare time terrorising asylum seekers, and soontobe could be a professor of Islamic studies, and part of a wirches coven in her spare time.

And I could be the Queen of Sheba - but who knows?

Judging people by what they don't say about themselves is blind man's buff.

In which case, I apologise-however the comment still stands. And yes, as we do not know each other personally (I've met 2 people only who are on GN)- comments and perceptions can only be made on what is written. And perhaps get wrong, of course. To me, it seemed that 'employees poor conditions are not my problem' (words to that effect) sounded like 'I don't care'. I am trying to see it any other way- but ...

Thank you, elegran (who knows me about 99% better than you do, gj).

bags didn't make that comment, granjura

I did!

I won't be boycotting Amazon. I agree all Companies should be paying the correct taxes and treating their staff in a fair and considerate way. To extend a point made by grandMattie regarding Waterstones; I have to strongly disagree with this. A family member who worked for Waterstones for over 10 years with glowing reviews and a personal well-established customer base who repeatedly sought her advice on specialist books etc was forced out of her job in March this year following extreme bullying by her manager and an area supervisor. The glowing reviews ended when she supported a colleague who she felt was being treated unfairly and suddenly she was the "worst bookseller in the cluster", ie Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire and further afield. This is not a carping exercise. In the last 9 months or so 5 loyal employees of graduate status have been in one way or another forced to leave their jobs at Waterstones. These were dedicated and hardworking staff members with many years service. They didn't feel comfortable working in an environment where they were told to hard sell trashy books to unsuspecting customers who had already purchased the books they really wanted. Each sale was noted and 'encouragement' was given to sell, sell, sell. Waterstones is no longer a totally British Company - one of the main entrepreneurs is a Russian oligarc, Mr. Mamut, a close supporter of Mr. Putin! The staff are paid more or less the minimum wage and are treated like idiots. I wouldn't have believed it if it hadn't happened so close to home.

Your wish is my command bags- but surely if you write things like

I don't think the Amazon workers are my concern.

it's not surprising you give the impression you don't care, no. Truly?!

Ah, but remember that if you don't say at every opportunity that you care about others, thatbags, then it clearly stands to reason (?) that you don't give a tuppeny damn!

If that gets deleted, just know that it was worth it. My 'attitude' about boycotting Amazon is the same as that of several other posters: a company's failure to pay taxes is the government's fault, not mine, and I don't believe I can do anything about that. Some posters disagree with that and think they can do something about it, even with a Tory government. That's fine. They can go ahead and boycott. What they are not justified in doing is implying that they are better than anyone else.

Me, I'm too cynical to think a Tory government will try to force taxes out of reluctant companies that, nevertheless, provide jobs. I'm also too cynical to think a Labour or LibDem government would do it either. They've had plenty of opportunity between them and done nothing.

Oh piss off with your self-righteousness, gj! You know bugger all about how much I care for others. Damn cheek!

thatbags, I am personally very glad some people care about others, thanks.

Grumpa, Amazon can afford him indeed- as they do not pay fair tax and treat their workers like dirt. Call it what you want- I'll just call it 'wrong or immoral'.

Another long term Amazon boycotter here, too! Perhaps we should all get together It hasn't inconvenienced me at all.

I would be very surprised if Clarkson pays much of that £800,000 per episode in tax to the UK.

The money looks obscene, but Amazon can afford it and Clarkson is a very professional presenter, albeit probably not someone with whom I would want to spend an evening in the pub.

He also writes very well. His review of a Saab in the ST (yes I know it's a Murdoch paper) retold brilliantly the Cameron Diaz/Tom Cruise appearance on Top Gear, and he also wrote in the same rag a very sensible and sensitive piece about refugees/asylum seekers/migrants trying to cross from Libya to Italy by boat, concluding that they had to be let in.

Given the undoubted international success of Top Gear, Amazon must have reckoned he's worth the money.