Beyond Target: Can Boycotts Still Break Corporate Power? (with Earl Ofari Hutchinson & Nikki Porcher)

After Trump’s new executive orders dismantle federal DEI programs, corporations like Target follow suit, shuttering racial equity initiatives and cutting ties with Black-owned businesses. Communities respond with boycotts—but do they still work in an economy dominated by giants like Amazon and Google?

Host Emily Williams speaks with:

• Nikki Porcher, founder of Buy From a Black Woman, about redirecting dollars to strengthen community resilience.
• Earl Ofari Hutchinson, activist, political analyst, and author of The Myth of Black Capitalism, about the power and limits of boycotts, capitalism as a tool for liberation, and lessons from the Civil Rights Movement.

This episode digs into how organized economic resistance can still shake corporate power, the dangers of rolling back diversity initiatives, and why building intergenerational, cross-community solidarity is key to survival.

We’d love to hear from you! Rate & review the show on Apple Podcasts or Spotify to help others find us.
And, join the conversation on IG @arcuscenter.

Follow our Guests: 

Earl Ofari Hutchinson
http://www.thehutchinsonreport.net/
https://www.instagram.com/earlhutchinson

Nikki Porcher
https://www.buyfromablackwoman.org/

https://www.nikkiporcher.com/

https://www.instagram.com/nikkiporcher/

Episode Transcript

Emily Williams (00:30):
Welcome back. Thanks for joining us. On our
last episode, we talked to awardwinning journalist Karen Attia
about the imminent and growingcrisis our democracy is in and
the impact that's had across thecountry. Among the dismantling
of so many critical governmentprograms, we've also seen a
targeted attack on diversity,equity, and inclusion policies

(00:52):
in the federal government andacross corporations. In
response, marginalizedcommunities have come together
to make their disapproval knownthrough widespread boycotts of
those companies.
But are boycotts still aneffective tool for us today when
we're up against corporatebehemoths that are so deeply
entrenched in our daily lives,like Apple, Amazon and Google,

(01:14):
especially when those companiesare working closely with a
government that's seemingly morefocused on enriching its leaders
and imposing its own narrowideology than enacting the will
of the people? I'm EmilyWilliams. Welcome to Beyond

(01:42):
Voting. This podcast is rootedin our conviction that democracy
requires more participation thanjust voting. It's up to all of
us to take action if we want tosee real change.
We'll feature conversations withjournalists, activists and
scholars discussing the state ofour country's institutions,

(02:02):
ongoing systems of oppression,and most importantly, how We the
People can take critical actionsin pursuit of true equity and
justice. Broadly speaking, DEIis a set of values and practices
used by governments, businesses,schools, and other organizations

(02:25):
meant to foster a diverse groupof participants and ensure that
the treatment of thoseparticipants is equitable and
inclusive. It attempts to dothat by acknowledging systems
that have been used to impedethose outside of the majority
culture and by implementingpractices meant to combat those
systems within theirorganizations. Since January

(02:47):
2025, there have been a handfulof executive orders signed by
the president directly targetingDEI in the federal government
and beyond. One of them reads inpart: Critical and influential
institutions of Americansociety, including the federal
government, major corporations,financial institutions, and

(03:08):
institutions of higher educationhave adopted and actively used
dangerous, demeaning, andimmoral race- and sex based
preferences under the guise ofso called diversity, equity, and
inclusion that can violate thecivil rights laws of this
nation.
The order then goes on to say,Those DEI practices threaten the

(03:31):
safety of American men, womenand children across the nation
by diminishing the importance ofindividual merit, aptitude, hard
work, and determination whenselecting people for jobs and
services in key sectors ofAmerican society, and then
revokes many earlier executiveorders meant to address
environmental racism, diversityin government jobs and

(03:54):
contracts, and critically, theexecutive order from 1965
establishing equal employmentopportunity. Of course, we know
the justification behind thiswasn't to restore fairness to
education and employmentopportunities that had allegedly
been threatened by DEIpractices, but rather to roll
back the considerable progressmade in granting equal access to

(04:18):
people who historically had beenbarred from those opportunities.
These weren't imagined barriersthey were explicitly laid out in
the law, and when those lawswere abolished, they continued
for decades through de factopractices. And we'll get into
the disastrous effects thoseexecutive orders have had and
how they mirror an earlier timein this country's history later

(04:40):
in the episode. The order alsoincludes a section titled
Encouraging the Private Sectorto End Illegal DEI
Discrimination and Preferences,which instructed federal
agencies to take all appropriateaction with respect to the
operations of their agencies toadvance in the private sector
the policy of individualinitiative, excellence and hard

(05:02):
work.
As a result, a number ofbusinesses rushed to comply with
the order and began rolling backor even completely shuttering
their DEI programs, pullingsupport from projects that
benefited their employees, aswell as outside initiatives
meant to support businessesowned by members of marginalized
groups. A mere three days afterthe release of that executive

(05:25):
order, retail giant Targetannounced that it would be
ending its DEI programs, andaccording to reporting from
Reuters, that would also includeits Racial Equity Action and
Change initiatives, otherwiseknown as REACH, under which it
had pledged to invest over$2,000,000,000 with Black owned

(05:45):
businesses by the 2025,including plans to add more than
500 Black owned brands toincrease exposure of diverse
owned brands. Black buyersresponded immediately and
organized a boycott of thestore. And in May 2025, Target
CEO Brian Cornell admitted in anop ed that sales were in fact

(06:10):
down, in part due to the DEIboycott. But with all these
black dollars no longer going toTarget, I wanted to know if
those funds were beingredirected elsewhere in a
conscientious way.
So I had a quick conversationwith Nikki Porche, founder of
Buy From a Black Woman, anonprofit dedicated to
supporting and amplifying Blackwomen business owners through

(06:33):
advocacy, education and economicempowerment. I wanted to hear
her thoughts on boycottingbusinesses that abandon DEI
practices, as well as herthoughts on economic resilience
and community driven businessmodels in the midst of it all.
Nikki Porche, thank you so muchfor joining us on Beyond Voting.

Nikki Porcher (06:54):
It's so good to be here. Thank you so much.

Emily Williams (06:56):
Let's get right into it. There was research that
came out that 300,000 Blackwomen have exited the workforce,
and that's by and large a resultof the mass firings in the
federal workforce. That's alsolargely due to the rollback of
DEI policies. By these systemiccuts and changes, Black women

(07:18):
are often the most impacted, andwe're seeing that right now.
Also in this moment, it seemslike we're all working from a
slightly different dictionarywhen it comes to DEI.
Can you define diversity,equity, and inclusion for us?
And why is it an important sideof struggle right now in this
country?

Nikki Porcher (07:37):
Yeah. So diversity, equity, inclusion
means a lot of things to a lotof other people. For me as a
Black woman, it means, okay,you're actually going to listen
to the words I have to saybecause I don't look like the
norm. It means that you're goingto actually factor in what
happens to me in my communityopposed to just making sure it's
for white men. It also meansthat, okay, their stats matter,

(08:00):
their numbers matter, whatthey're doing does matter,
right?
We did a report called theRollback of DEI Social Justice
Impact and what it did to Blackwomen business owners, right?
And what we found is that wereally didn't benefit a lot from
it. Yes, there were marketingdollars spent. There was some
grants that were spent also, butwe weren't the big
beneficiaries. And if we werethe big beneficiaries, it

(08:21):
wouldn't be so easy for it to berolled back.
So I do think that they're usingthat as a scapegoat term,
saying, Okay, we're rolling backDEI, but what we're really
saying is we don't want Blackcommunities to get it ahead
anymore. But what they forgot isBlack women were the ones who
built this country. So they wentahead and empowered us in a way
that they did not think wasgoing to actually empower our
communities.

Emily Williams (08:42):
Right. You know, not to mention that, like, you
know, we just aren't resilientas it is anyway. You know, we've
been rising above systemicoppression since the beginning
of this country. Okay. So we canbe real about that.
You know, it's also when I thinkabout who actually benefits from
DEI, it's kind of like welfare.You know, what the narrative is,
what the myth is, is that Blackpeople and Black women are

(09:04):
benefiting. You know, they'regetting a free pass when really
the beneficiaries, the greatestbeneficiaries are White women.
That's true for DEI policies.That's also true for welfare.
So, Nikki, now this is somethingthat I'm really interested in
because I know there are somepeople who said, but we never
benefited from DEI. It was neverthe thing that we needed. So why
would we want to protect it inthis moment? So I wanna ask you,

(09:27):
if DEI isn't the thing that weneed, what should we be
advocating for in the future?And I just wanna say to all of
our listeners, there will be afuture America beyond this
administration.
So everybody just hold that astrue. K? And so when that time
comes, Nikki, what should we beadvocating for?

Nikki Porcher (09:45):
Ourselves. And when I say that, I mean, like,
if you are not pouring intothings that represent you, then
they're going to be gone. If Iam a black woman and I'm not
supporting other black womenbusinesses, then what am I
doing? If I'm a black person notsupporting black businesses,
what am I doing? If I'm a womannot supporting other women, then
what am I doing?
If I am not supporting thecauses that I want other people
to support, then how can Iactually advocate? How can I

(10:07):
actually demand from otherpeople to support these things
if I'm not doing it first? Sogoing into the future, you need
to make sure that you are doingwhat you want other people to
do. You know, the whole sayingis treat others how you want to
be treated. It goes with thistoo as well.
When it comes to the rollback atDEI, what we're asking for, you
know, our study says that it didnot benefit, but we have to
really also acknowledge that itdid help somewhat, right? There

(10:28):
were marketing dollars wherethere was a lot of businesses
who people didn't even knowexisted that were being pushed
because they wanted to benefitfrom that. Even though it was
temporary, they did benefit fromthat. There were people who were
put into programs that we didn'teven know that their businesses
exist. We didn't even know theprograms exist.
So there was some benefit whenit came to that, but we had to
continue to support thosebusinesses. We're relying on,
and I use this as an examplewhen it comes to Target, because

(10:50):
Target is such a hot topic andwe just focus on them so much,
right? There's a lot ofbusinesses who were in Target.
And then when the rollback cameout and we found out those
businesses were no longer on theshelf, there was a mixed
conversation. Oh, well, we stillneed to go to Target because we
need to support those Blackbusinesses that are on the
shelves in Target.
And some businesses were like,well, I'm going to leave the
shelf on Target because they'renot supporting my community,
right? So it was just that backand forth. However, if you do

(11:13):
not have community, if you arenot supporting community, if you
are not building community, itdoes not matter. We can't rely
on these big boxes to speak forus as a community. So in the
future, you need to make surethat you're building community.
You need to make sure thatyou're supporting your community
before you ask other people tosupport the community.

Emily Williams (11:28):
Yeah. And I think there's also DEI in the
way that it supported blackbusinesses and black business
owners, but there's also DEI.I'm thinking about the programs
for underrepresented students tohave access to college and
college readiness programs. AndI think it's also important to
mention that there is such aneffort to dismantle DEI policies

(11:51):
because they worked. And we wereseeing more social cohesion than
we had, let's say, in the middleof last century, right?
So the DEI programs and theemphasis and the awareness
raising also was having animpact. If it wasn't having an
impact, then they wouldn't bedismantling them, right? Now
those things can be true, thisis for our listeners, those

(12:11):
things can be true and whitewomen can still be the greatest
beneficiaries. And I mean, Ijust would also say that perhaps
in the future post thisadministration, that also we
should be taking a closer lookat what worked, what was
actually benefitingunderrepresented communities,
What was actually working, andhow do we do more of that? How

(12:32):
do we transform our institutionsfrom the inside so that we're
not constantly bumping upagainst bias and inequities,
right?

Nikki Porcher (12:40):
I'm a very strong advocate of that part. We have
to become the people who aremaking the decisions. We have to
actually vote as well. We can'tkeep saying that voting doesn't
matter and we don't votebecause, of course, it's not
going matter if you don't vote.You're not going to see the
impact of the vote.
And not just in the bigelections, your local state
elections. There's so manypositions that people don't even

(13:01):
know that you have to vote for,right? There was a runoff that
we just had here in Atlanta forour public service commissioner.
And there was, I think, maybelike a less than 2% turn up for
the runoff. Nobody went andvoted again.
In order for us to get ahead, wehave to make sure that we're
seeing us in these positions aswell.

Emily Williams (13:20):
Okay. Thank you for that. We're always
reinforcing that on this show.But I wanna go back to the DEI
rollbacks because some consumershave responded to the boycotts.
You know, there's been varyinglevels of organization and
success because people areboycotting Target.
They're boycotting Amazon.They're boycotting Walmart.
They're boycotting a whole listof companies that support

(13:41):
Israel. So do you see thesecurrent boycotts as an evolution
of the civil rights boycotts inour country? You know, like, we
always, at least our studentsand one person on my team,
they're always bringing up theMontgomery bus boycotts.
Right? So, what do you say topeople who say that we can't use
the strategy of the past andthat the boycotts can't work?

Nikki Porcher (14:03):
Yeah, so I agree and also disagree. When it comes
to the Montgomery bus boycott,always being used as an example,
what we have to remember is thatwas an isolated boycott. It was
a certain one community doingone thing together in that small
segment, right? And then theyalso redirected. They were
working as a community.
They said, Okay, I'm not goingto ride the bus. However, I do

(14:24):
know Joe is going to pick up agroup to go here. I do know that
this group is going to work withthat group. If I see, you know,
Emily walking down the street,I'm going to offer her a ride.
Emily can trust me to get intomy car and take her safely where
she needs to go.
So, it was a whole differenttype of climate back then as
well. Now, I know if I see a mandriving down the street, I'm not

(14:46):
gonna get his car because I

Emily Williams (14:50):
Wouldn't advise it. I mean, if you don't know
them, right?

Nikki Porcher (14:53):
Right. So, it's a whole another different. World.
Yes, it's a different world now,a different time, and also a
different type of community.When it comes to the Target
Boycott, we see that it is beingvery impactful, but again, we're
not redirecting our money.
So, think part of the boycottconversation is only giving,
okay, don't go there. But a lotof the people are not saying
don't go there, instead do this.And that's what needs to happen.

Emily Williams (15:15):
Yeah. And I like that, Nikki, because it's a
bothand strategy, right? So wecan both boycott and redirect
our funds to Black ownedbusinesses, to women owned
businesses, to minority ownedbusinesses. And then that way,
we're both curbing corporatepower and building up the power

(15:36):
of our communities. So Iappreciate that approach, and
thank you for that.
And I also want to say, what canwe learn from the Montgomery bus
boycotts? This is where I thinkmutual aid also comes in and the
emphasis on building communitylocally, because there actually
is no reason why we couldn'trely on someone to give you a
ride to work if you're nottaking public transportation. We

(15:59):
just have to build ourrelationships and start to weave
that fabric into society wherewe can actually trust one
another, rely on one another,share resources with one
another, right? And hopefullythis can open up a new paradigm
of politics, right, and of oursociety, moving away from
individualism and back into moreof a community approach.

Nikki Porcher (16:21):
Yeah and that's really what it's going to take.
We have to have community,right? It always goes back to
community. There are some peoplewho don't even know their
neighbors, Emily, and it's likewhy don't you know your
neighbors? A lot of it has to dowith this individuality I'm a
keep to myself.
And I'm seeing, like, Well, I'mnot gonna give you a ride to the
airport. Call Uber. If you're myfriend, why would I not give you

(16:43):
a ride to the airport? Can't younot rely on me to do this for
you? And it's just that we hadto get away from that part, so
that we could actually buildlocal community.
There was a woman, she asked me,she's like, Well, if I don't
have a charger, where am Isupposed to get it from? I'm not
going to Target or Amazon. Youcan go see your local Goodwill.
A lot of your local thrift shopsare supporting a cause. Find one

(17:05):
that's supporting a cause thatyou like.
Also, are lots of neighborhoodyard sales. There is a group on
Facebook called Give Something,Buy Nothing type of situation
where people have more thanenough, and they're putting it
on there. That's how you get toknow your neighbors. You cannot
be afraid to know the people youlive around because that's how
you keep your neighborhood safe.We need each other.
So we have to remember that weneed a community in order to

(17:27):
survive this.

Emily Williams (17:28):
Exactly. Exactly. You know, we can't be
afraid to know our neighbors. Wealso can't be afraid to ask for
help. Right?
Like, really, no one is out heredoing it alone. Some people are
surviving, and and thereprobably is a lot of isolation
and not survival. But it doesn'thave to be that way is the
point. Right? And and and thatactually doesn't serve us.
It serves these people inpositions of power who actually
want to continue to exploit usand exploit the planet, really.

Nikki Porcher (17:51):
Well, even with them, they're not by themselves.
Right? They need other people todo their work, to do their
things.

Emily Williams (17:56):
Right. So we all know there was a huge debate
among Black women businessowners who had their products in
Target. When the calls for aboycott were first started, you
know, Tabitha Brown, you know,who has namesake gifting,
kitchen and grocery essentialsat Target, she said on a social
media platform, contrary towhatever the world might tell

(18:17):
you, it's been very hard forblack owned businesses to hit
shelves, right? Which is whyit's such a big deal when we
finally do, you know? And thenon the contrary, we had Melissa
Butler of Lip Bar.
She said, I'm quoting here, Andthat's not to say that people
should continue or go back toshopping at Target. It's just to
say that we knew that there wasgoing to be huge impact. And to

(18:40):
offset the impact, it requirespeople to be really intentional
about where they're shopping. Sohere we have kind of like a
predicament. On one hand, havethe entire black community and
many people are gonna beimpacted by this rollback of DEI
policies, but she's saying,still buy my products.
Right? Then you have other blackbusiness owners who are saying,

(19:00):
We kind of knew that this was acontradiction and a risk. So
where do you land with all ofthis? I mean, should we be kind
of taking what some might thinkof as more closer to abolition
on the spectrum of, let us getout of corporations altogether
and build from the ground up inour communities and for our
communities? Or do you thinkthere actually can be kind of a

(19:23):
half step?
Well, let me just go into Targetand get my hair care product
because it ultimately is gonnasupport a black woman. What's
your take on that?

Nikki Porcher (19:30):
Girl. Okay. All right. So, Juan, Tabitha is a
dear friend of mine. I love herto death.
So like, that's my girl. So letme just go ahead and reference
that. Love you, Tab.

Emily Williams (19:44):
Got it.

Nikki Porcher (19:44):
When it comes to stuff like that, one, I walked
away from a corporation, right?When I was working with H and M,
I never told anybody to go andbuy from H and M. I never said
shop with H and M. I said, Hey,we're working with H and M.
We're bringing Black businessesinto it.
Visit the H and M to buy fromBlack women. So walking away
from a corporation, I don't havea problem doing that. I've done
it publicly. I've shared whyI've done it. When it comes to

(20:08):
the promotion of, you know, withTabitha brand versus, you know,
the Lip Bar and other brandsthat are stores, in we have to
remember Tabitha has a licensingdeal with Target.
So, the Lip Bar has an actualbrick and mortar in Detroit.
They have an actual websitewhere you can buy from. They can
build a community of people toactually support their

(20:31):
businesses outside of Target.And this goes back to what I was
saying earlier. If these smallbusinesses are only relying on a
corporation for their businessesdrive, then we have a problem
there.
We have a community problem.Because you're saying that your
business is relying on thiscorporation and cannot stand
alone. If your business is forthe community, if you start your
business with the intent to helpand solve problems for your

(20:52):
community, a corporationshouldn't be the only reason why
that you can do that. And that'swhere I stand with that. If
you're not building a community,then you're going to be in these
type of predicaments where youcan only survive because of the
corporations.
And if you're not like, Hey, I'min this store. However, I do
have a brick and mortar.However, I do have a website. I
need you to redirect your moneyto these places instead of keep

(21:15):
talking about the corporations,then you're not going to be
successful. And that's what I'mtalking about.
Like, okay, stop doing this anddo this instead. We have to make
sure we're doing all of this.

Emily Williams (21:23):
Let's think a little bit more about ethical
consumerism. Is there a spacefor more ethical consumerism in
this economic resistanceconversation, Or should we be
moving to give up consumptionaltogether?

Nikki Porcher (21:37):
So there's a couple of things around that,
right? A lot of that is going tobe hard to do immediately. I
don't know if we'll see it inour lifetime in just full
transparency, but we can do morenow to help that cause in the
future, right? But at theconsumer, it's just like, you

(21:58):
know, making sure that you arenot being as wasteful, that you
are not just buying things justto have, and that you are, you
know, doing those exchangethings, trying to figure out how
you can reduce it individually,and then also share with other
people. With me, with Buy From aBlack Woman as an example, there
are so many people who will comeup to me and be Oh my goodness,
I bought this from a Blackwoman.

(22:18):
Because they're just so proud totell me that they bought
something from a Black womanbecause of the work that I'm
doing. And somebody's Oh, Ididn't watch TV this week. I
read this book. And they want totell you about it because they
want to show you that they alsoare doing something that they
did not think they were able todo. But because they admire it
and now you're being a leadingexample, a living example, now
they're doing it because they'rethinking about what you did, and

(22:38):
and that's how the stuff getspassed on.
So I have not shopped on Amazonsince 2023, and I don't miss it.
You gotta change that mindset.And also ask yourself, how much
are you spending on it and howmuch of that stuff do you use
right away? One of the biggestthings that I bought on Amazon
were books. I was a person, if Iread a book and that book
referenced a book, that's whatI'm buying that book to.
You know?

Emily Williams (22:58):
I can relate to that.

Nikki Porcher (23:01):
It was like, I have to have this book today,
but then I didn't even read thatbook when it was delivered. I
didn't read the book right away.Now that I'm doing that, I'm
going to my local library. I'mrediscovering books I have on my
shelves. I'm playing book swapwith my friends.
I'm in this neighborhood bookclub where we go ahead and we
meet for lunch, they're andlike, oh, here are some books
that I've read that I'm nolonger gonna read. And they

(23:21):
introduce books to me too aswell. And I'm even finding,
Emily, there are books that Ibought more than once. And it
was like, oh my goodness, why doI have three copies of this
book? Because you know?
But I had to have it in thatmoment. So reprogramming
yourself with that, start withyourself first. Know, it goes
back to as a consumer, like, wehad to make sure we were a
reprogramming ourselves. We hadto make sure that we are being
true to our culture. We had tomake sure that we are doing the

(23:43):
work that we want other peopleto do as well.

Emily Williams (23:45):
Yep. 100%. And that's, you know, it also is
collective action. Right? Soit's also understanding the
power that we have when we actas a collective.
Alright. There we go. Thank you,Nikki. This has been really
good. Oh, thank you.
Such a good and importantconversation.

Nikki Porcher (24:01):
I really appreciate being here. Thank you
for the invite.

Emily Williams (24:05):
Our main conversation today is with LA
based author, activist, andpolitical analyst Earl Ofari
Hutchinson. Earl is president ofthe Los Angeles Urban Policy
Roundtable and the author ofmultiple books on race and
politics in America, includinghis 1970 book, The Myth of Black
Capitalism, in which hechallenged the idea that

(24:27):
capitalism, in any form, couldrectify the injustices against
black people in America. Weinvited Earl to talk to us about
the effectiveness of boycotts asa political strategy against the
dismantling of corporate DEIpolicies. To learn if his
thoughts have evolved on theidea of identity based
capitalism as a tool forliberation and what younger

(24:48):
generations can learn from thewisdom and strategies of those
who lived through the civilrights struggle of the nineteen
sixties. Earl Ofari Hutchinson,welcome to Beyond Voting.
Thank you so much for joiningus.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (25:04):
My pleasure.

Emily Williams (25:05):
Great. Now why don't you tell us about your own
experience with boycotts? Couldyou have seen that an activist
strategy such as boycotts issomething that we would have had
to employ in 2025?

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (25:19):
You know, boycotts is a it's a tricky
issue. It's not a straight lineproposition. There's an upside
and there's a downside. Let'sdeal with the the upside first.
The upside is, number one, itdoes get attention.
Number two, if properlyorganized, it does act as kind
of a focal thing to galvanize alot of people. Now the third

(25:42):
thing is boycotts can be veryeffective if they're sustained,
and that's where the problemcomes in. You you can announce a
boycott. We're gonna boycottthis, boycott that, and I've
seen so many in different venuesand different targets. But the
thing is, can it be sustained?
Can the energy be sustained? Canthe momentum be sustained? And,

(26:04):
also, you have to have anendgame. Is it really a good
chance that you're going to havesome kind of satisfaction or
resolution for the endgame? Letme give you an example.
Target, DEI, big boycott againstTarget. Don't buy, don't shop,
don't go there, don't patronize,don't even look at Target. The

(26:25):
reason being it was a clearlydefined goal, clearly defined
goal with Target. I think thisis a good example in the
political arena with boycotts.The defined goal was Target has
rolled back DEI.
That boycott seemed to beeffective. Target got a big hit.

(26:47):
It got a big, big hit in termsof stock went down patronage
customers. A lot of vendorspulled out. So the message was
delivered in a way that Ithought was very focused.
So that's the upside. If youhave a good endgame, if you have
a good ground game to bring itabout mobilizing, energizing a

(27:12):
program, a plan, sustain, youknow, there's a good chance of
success. Now downside. Thedownside is everything I just
said, if none of those thingsare there, you're just blowing
smoke. And the danger is whoeveror whatever entity you're
boycotting can come back andsay, you see, we were resistant

(27:36):
to that.
We did not buckle to that. We,in fact, whoever the we is, in
this case, the target is, didnot give in. We're staying the
course. So I think it has to bedone very carefully. It has to
be thought out.
And most importantly, I have toask the question, who is gonna

(27:56):
lead it?

Emily Williams (27:57):
Yeah. You know, that's a great question. Also,
because it's a collectivestrategy on a mass scale in
order for boycotts to beeffective. But let me ask you
this. Are you surprised that weare still employing boycotts in
2025?
I mean, what does that say aboutthis moment that we're in as a
country right now, and what doesthat mean for marginalized

(28:17):
groups?

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (28:18):
No. I'm not surprised. The short answer.
Simply because we've come to asituation, a point in this
country, Trump on down, theymade that quite clear, we're
coming after you. We're gonnaroll everything back.
All the gang, labor, civilrights, all the gender issues,
everything, abortion, just aboutanything you can think of that's

(28:40):
been hard fought over the years,civil rights, civil liberties,
social justice, and especiallyrace is under attack. So a
boycott is a weapon. It's anancient weapon. It's not new. So
it's like it's kind of a returnto the past, bringing something
back that has been used,particularly effectively during

(29:02):
the civil rights era in the1960s.
So there's a template for usingthat. Now, I guess the only
element of surprise, and I'm noteven sure I can say that, but
for the sake of conversation, isthat many organizations and
individuals are at the point nowof almost what else can we do?

(29:26):
Mean, it's not like the 1960s.Let's be clear on that. You had
the NAACP strong.
You had the Southern ChristianLeadership Conference strong.
You had the Urban League strong.For a time, you had the Black
Panther Party strong. You hadthe student nonviolent
coordinating committee, SNCCstrong. You had a lot of

(29:48):
organizations that were activelyinvolved with civil rights.
Now they weren't necessarilyusing the boycott because they
had an organizational structureand they had a mass following
and they had momentum, but thatwas fifty years ago. We live in
a totally different time now. Soboycotts, when we come back to
that, can be effective. Andunfortunately, it's going to

(30:13):
have to be if you've noticedboycotts led by individuals, not
organizations as in the past.And that's where the difficulty
comes in trying to bring peopletogether on a mass basis to make
it work and to be effective, theone thing now that is there that
is in place that was not therefifty years ago, which is a plus

(30:38):
social media.

Emily Williams (30:38):
Right.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (30:39):
That is a way to reach a lot of people.
Very quickly, if you're gonnatalk about boycott in any way,
in any venue, in anything that'smeaningful, there is no way
around using social media.Certainly, Trump has understood
that.

Emily Williams (30:56):
Right. Yeah. You got that right. And we've also
seen that the boycott of Huluand Disney plus was effective in
getting those companies toreinstate Jimmy Kimmel's
television show. And thatcertainly, that campaign was
proliferated on social media.
And, also, to your point, it'snot clear that there is any

(31:18):
organization or exactly whatindividuals were behind that
effort to boycott Disney plus.But, certainly, with the help of
social media, it spread, and itwas effective. So now and I
wanna ask you a questionbecause, you know, I work with
students at the Arcus Center forSocial Justice Leadership. A lot
of the work that we do is withstudents who are concerned with

(31:39):
making social change. And I haveto tell you that we got a a lot
of pushback from students aboutboycotts as a strategy.
So what do you say to people whobelieve that boycotts are a
strategy of the past and thatthey won't work now?

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (31:55):
Well, but that's not true. You mentioned
Jimmy Kimmel. I don't think thatwas too bad. Think the result a
lot of result positive on that.So I think that's nonsense to
say that boycotts don't work.
Think the only caveat on that, Ihave to go back to something I
said a little bit earlier. Icannot emphasize this point

(32:15):
enough. It's got to be properlyled. It's got to have a good end
game, and it's got to be I gotto have some way to have
measurable results. Then you cango and say, like they did with
Jimmy Kimmel, it costs ABC, whatwas the figure I saw,
$3,400,000,000, their stocktank, and they're squirming now.

(32:39):
Wait a minute. We're losing lotsof money, not just viewership,
but we're losing a lot of bucks.

Emily Williams (32:46):
Exactly.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (32:47):
When we talk about boycott, just be
clear. I think what we'retalking about is the number one
thing to measure. We're talkingabout hitting some entity in the
pocketbook. I mean, becausethat's what's almost anyone
understands. That is ameasurable result.

Emily Williams (33:06):
Right. And I just would also add that
boycotts are often brought onbecause companies are playing a
role in, diminishing our rightsin some way, whether that's
civil rights, human rightsviolations, threatening
democracy. And so I just wouldalso say to any of the critics
out there, you know, theseboycotts are not unwarranted, I
should say. They're preceded bya serious threat to our rights.

(33:29):
I also just wanna say to ourstudents, you know, this was
back in early twenty twenty fivebefore any of the boycotts had
started.
And we have seen successfulboycotts of now Hulu, Disney
plus, Target. And to be clear,the sticking point was also
Amazon. And I think many morepeople are struggling to boycott
Amazon precisely because of theconvenience that it provides and

(33:51):
that people have becomeaccustomed to. So I just wanna
say that just to give a a littleshout out to our students
because they still did do somework around conscious
consumerism and and challengingthe rights violations that are
alleged against Amazon. You'relistening to Beyond Voting.
We're back with today's guest,author, activist, and political

(34:13):
analyst Earl Ofari Hutchinson.Earlier in the episode, he
talked about the importance ofstrategy when it comes to
effective boycotts, stressingthe need for strong leadership
and a measurable goal orendgame. That's such an
important point when it comes toany kind of protest. Protests
aren't just an airing ofgrievances. They also require a

(34:36):
clear demand and a strategy forholding the line if those
demands are not met.
But I wanted to hear more fromEarl about his perspective on
the flip side of boycotts.Namely, the idea that if we
boycott corporations and insteadspend our money within our
communities, that the resultantrising tide of wealth created

(34:57):
for a select few in ourcommunity would eventually lift
all of our boats. Let's get backto that conversation. Let me ask
you this. What are your thoughtson investing in businesses owned
by members of marginalizedcommunities in an effort to
transform the economic realitiesof those communities.

(35:17):
Is there anything about thatthat's unique to black
communities, or does that applyto other marginalized groups? I
guess also this is a questionabout what is the impact of
capitalism overall? I mean, canwe do the work of liberation
from a from oppressive systemslike capitalism while still
investing in individual smallbusinesses?

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (35:38):
Well, that's good to bring the flip
side of this. Now I thinkthere's a general way to
approach this question, and itfits in with the boycott issue.
Boycotts tend to be againstsomething. You're not boycotting
necessarily for something.You're boycotting against
something.

(35:58):
Now contained in that is for anin game four plus. So almost
inherently, it's negative. Now,let's flip it again. How about
not necessarily boycotting, butsupport of something that is, in
fact, beneficial to ourcommunity, beneficial to our

(36:19):
life. So we're not we're kind offlipping the boycott on its
head.
You mentioned African Americanowned businesses in the in the
capitalist system. I mean,that's the system we live under
for better or for worse. Itcomes up support. Support black
businesses. Patronize blackbusinesses.

(36:39):
Why? You wanna not only sustainthem, but you wanna build them.
And it ties in with the boycottissue. Because if you have very
strong, very financially secure,a support base behind it, a
customer or a client base behindblack businesses, then you can
enlist them in a boycottcampaign too with the added

(37:03):
incentive there that there mightbe a vested interest in it for
them. And certainly from apromotional standpoint, a
business standpoint, if they'renot in the same area that that
particular business is thatyou're boycotting, then there
might be a payoff there too.
So I think you can weld the twotogether. I don't think they're
mutually disparate. I thinkthere's a commonality that we

(37:28):
can bring to bear. I've alwaysbeen a big supporter and
advocate with one littleadmonition. Make sure that those
businesses support ourcommunity.
You know? And by that, I meanproviding jobs, providing
income, providing training,providing a lot of different
things. In other words, it's atwo way street. So I think

(37:49):
coming back to the boycottissue, when you have a strong
financial structure within acommunity, that makes it work.
Let me go back to on that pointwith the Kimmel thing.
Well, a lot of celebrities thathave businesses in our business
owners, they weighed in on that.And remember, they said we're
going to come in on the stockissue. We have stock in Hula. We

(38:12):
have stock in ABC. We have stockin Sinclair.
They're stock in a lot of theentities behind Kimmel. So in
other words, they brought abusiness angle to the boycott.
So I think, again, all of thisto me is interconnected. They're
not separate.

Emily Williams (38:28):
Okay. I mean, I wanna ask you too because, you
know, it's like we can supportblack businesses and ostensibly
would then support blackcommunities, and maybe that's
something that we would demandwith our financial support. But,
also, so much of these politicalattacks have been a strategy of
divide and conquer, particularlyof marginalized groups. And so,
you know, do you see a strategywith boycotts, is uplifting

(38:51):
marginalized communities ingeneral, not necessarily only
supporting Latino businesses oronly supporting women owned
businesses. But is there a wayin which we can direct our
consumption so that it'sincreasing solidarity between
groups?

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (39:05):
Yeah. You know, you mentioned divide and
conquer on that, and I thinkthat's a good point. Any time
you're talking about a boycott,let's say Target, let's go back
to that. On the surface, it wasvery successful. Target lost
customer share and they lostmoney.
And I mean, that was wellpublicized. But let's face it,
You have a lot of working classAfrican Americans, a lot of

(39:28):
working class Hispanics, a lotof working class anybody that
goes to Target. They shop atTarget. They get deals at
Target. So you go to Target, thewhole point is to save money.
Now you're asking working peopleand lower income folk across the
spectrum, don't go there. Whatwhat are gonna tell them? To go
to Saks Fifth Avenue? I I don'tthink that's gonna work.

Emily Williams (39:53):
Right.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (39:53):
So now you gotta Right.

Emily Williams (39:55):
Not practical.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (39:55):
Yeah. You got a little problem now. You
got a lot of people that havebeen shopping at Target,
shopping at Kmart, shopping atWalmart, you know, for millennia
to save money. Now you're sayingdon't do that. You know, for a
working person living or someoneon a fixed income, especially a
person of color, you know,you're asking a lot.
You really are. So how do you dothat? How do you get over that?

(40:19):
They're not actively opposing aboycott necessarily on political
grounds or, you know, distinctgrounds. It's just economics now
on a personal basis.
So I'm mindful of one people'spocketbook. It is tough to
overcome that. But at the end ofthe day, does that mean you

(40:41):
don't do anything if you letthat get in the way? Because if
that's the case, you'll never doanything. So the whole point is,
you know, once you start downthat path of a boycott, be very
clear how you're gonna bring itabout, the means to organize
that, and most importantly, whatis your end game?

Emily Williams (41:01):
I think that's a good question. And, also, I
think in some ways, justweakening the power of these
corporations is is also enoughof an endgame. And where we are
right now, even sending amessage about the power of the
people is an important endgameas well because we need to know
as a society that we have power.Right? And and boycotts have

(41:22):
been a a really effective way atshowing that so far in 2025.
So now I wanna talk with you alittle bit about capitalism's
role in shaping identitypolitics. When you first wrote
your book, The Myth of BlackCapitalism in 1970, you argued
that Black wealth could nevercombat the extreme inequality
faced by Black Americans, andthat ultimately just reinforced

(41:43):
a Black bourgeoisie thatexploited the black underclass
to increase its own wealth.Right? Have your views changed
at all since then? What's youranalysis now?
And, again, could capitalismever be a tool for liberation,
or is this still a trap?

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (41:59):
Well, actually now there's been an
update. Now the myth of blackcapitalism, that was my first
book. Actually, it was writtenwhen I was in college. They
reissued the book on thefiftieth yeah. Well, on the
fiftieth anniversary.
Don't have a problem with that.I'm still here. We're still
Congratulations.

Emily Williams (42:16):
It's clearly a great book.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (42:17):
Actually, I was kinda surprised. I I just
thought that was in the dustbinof history, and I did a new
introduction to update it. I waspleasantly surprised at there
was a good response to it. Ijust thought, you know, two
generations have passed sincethat book has been written or
was written and updated now. Thetwo premises have not changed of

(42:40):
the book.
Circling back on your question.Premise number one, obviously,
in a capitalist system, you'regonna have rich and you're gonna
have poor. You're always gonnahave a tiny strata at the top
that control. And we certainlysee that now. If anything, it's

(43:01):
even worse.
Certainly have an ironcladcontrol on the wealth, on all
the productive mechanisms insociety, the businesses,
corporations, financialstructure, you're always going
to have a small tiny percentagethat control the wealth and the
power in the system. That wasthe case fifty years ago and

(43:23):
it's been the case probablysince the dawn of humankind, And
it's certainly the case now, ifanything has gotten worse in
terms of corporate capitalistcontrol right at the top. And
something that did not existfifty years ago in the in the
lexicon, the wealth gap, theincome gap. I mean, that wasn't

(43:44):
there in in the the terminology,in the language then. Well, it's
there now and it's there with avengeance now.
So I talked about that, and thatwas one of the great that was
one of the premises of the bookthat we come to the second
premise. How do how do AfricanAmericans fit in all of this?
Basically, we are working classpeople. And for much of our

(44:05):
history in this country, at thelower end of the working class,
oftentimes, if at all. Now thedifference fifty years ago and
now, I must concede this,nothing stays the same.
We didn't have then a wealthyblack upper class, corporate
CEOs, obviously mega superstarathletes, celebrities of all

(44:29):
sort, you know, the Oprahs ofthe world, the Bob Johnsons of
the world, the, LeBron James ofthe world. I mean, I can go on
and on. People that are verywealthy, African Americans. And
many of them, I must say, arewilling to invest in the
community. They set upfoundations, they fund different

(44:49):
programs, and they do a lot ofdifferent things.
So I'll give, you know, I'llgive credit what creditors do.
So that in a sense would seem tonegate the premise that blast
cannot be capitalist. No. Itdoesn't negate that. The fact of
the matter is when you'retalking about major
institutional capitalism thatcontrols corporations,

(45:13):
businesses, major, and mostimportantly, the financial
structure, it's still white andmale at the top, generally
speaking.
Individual wealth is not thesame as capitalism and control,
namely the mechanisms of power.That's not the same. You know,
you can be a rich person and notcontrol anything. So it's not

(45:36):
the same. So the only littlenuance there is that more
African Americans than ever havemoved up the income scale and
the wealth scale.
But that doesn't change thenature of dominance and control
at the top under capitalism. Andfor the masses of African
Americans, it's even worse. It'seven worse now than it was fifty

(46:00):
years ago in terms of ourexistence. Let me ask you this.
Fifty years ago

Emily Williams (46:04):
Right. Mhmm.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (46:05):
In your wildest dreams, you know, as
poor were then, we went back tothe sixties, did she ever in
your wildest dreams think thatshe would see whole families of
African Americans, men and womenand children, sleeping on the
streets, sleeping on sidewalks.I'm not even talking about in

(46:28):
homeless encampments. In tents.I'm talking about sleeping on
the sidewalk, begging all overthe place. I mean, you ever
think in your wildest dreams?
We're not talking about poverty.We're talking about something
else now. We're talking aboutrock bottom destitution, a
society that has completelyabandoned a whole group of

(46:48):
individuals, a whole subset. So,again, when we talk about black,
we talk about capitalism, wetalk about where we stand today,
in many ways, I have to saythis, it's been a step
backwards.

Emily Williams (47:03):
Yeah. I would agree. And, also, just because
we have wealthy blackindividuals or wealthy Latinos
or, you know, wealthy people ofany race or ethnicity doesn't
change the system, which stillrelies on the exploitation of an
underclass. And I think thatwe're seeing a resurgence of an
extreme exploitation of multipleunderclasses. So it sounds like

(47:28):
it's still a bit of a trap tothink that if we just get enough
wealthy black folks or enoughwealthy folks of color, that
then that means liberation forall of us.
And now I wanna get even moreinto identity politics, girl,
because it's it's just soingrained in everything that
we're talking about. And Ireally do wanna, like, look at
capitalism's role in shapingidentity politics and

(47:51):
particularly where it intersectswith our government,
particularly this currentadministration. We saw a
surprising amount of votes comein for Trump from black and
Latino citizens in 2024 ascompared to 2020. According to a
post election survey conductedby Navigator Research, the
largest shifts in support forpresident Trump were seen among

(48:15):
men, particularly men of color.Trump almost doubled his support
from Hispanic men.
He tripled it from black men. Sowhat do you think is behind that
shift, and what's the classanalysis that working class and
low income people of color needto have right now?

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (48:36):
Yeah. That did surprise a lot of
people that so many younger. Nowremember, the key word is
younger. African American menback Trump, actually back in the
first time too, and then muchmore so the second go wrong.
Well, two things about that.

(48:57):
One, remember, you're talkingabout it's not one, two
generations removed from thestruggles of the civil rights
movement. So you got an age gapthere. But not only an age gap,
you've got folk that did notcome up having that
consciousness that came out ofthe whole civil rights movement
decades ago. In many ways,they're beneficiaries of it. A
lot of them are youngentrepreneurs.

(49:18):
A lot of them wanna beentrepreneurs. A lot of them are
in entertainment. As we know, alot of them are into sports. A
lot of them into a lot ofthings, but they're not in the
politics. They're not in thethings that will build social
consciousness and politicalconsciousness.
Trump comes along and says, youknow what? I've done more for
African Americans than anybodyelse. Look at all the

(49:38):
businesses. You know? Look atall the money you could make.
Look at all the prosperity. Lookat this system. Look how great
it can be. You could be acapitalist too. That appeals to
a lot of young people.
You know, it touches a nerve. Sothat's one thing. No surprise on
that. The second thing is notthat political and social
consciousness there. But now,again, I think we don't want to

(50:02):
make more of that than itactually is.
We're still talking about aminority, a relatively small
minority of African Americans,even at that age level, I would
just say under 40. Even there,every Poland's every Poland
survey I've seen that themajority, even within that age

(50:24):
group, did not support Trump. SoI think we have to be clear on
that. But even if he had anuptick, I think that was just
enough in many ways in a closeelection could have gone either
way. It could have gone eitherway with Hillary first time, and
it could have gone anyway eitherway with Kamala Harris.
So it only took a smallpercentage to tip it in several

(50:47):
swing states to Trump. But Idon't think going forward now,
Trump has been in there. He'smade it crystal clear what he
thinks and what he's going to doand how he's gonna attack
African Americans up and downthe food chain every which way,
all the way from old the oldConfederates renaming this DEI.
Now you got Charlie Kirk, yougot white supremacy, you got all

(51:09):
that stuff coming up. You know,they made it clear on that.
So I think anybody with a tenthof a brain, I don't care what
age you are. If somebody'stelling you, hey, I hate you,
and I'm gonna support those thatdo, and I'm not gonna give you a
darn thing, I I don't think it'srocket scientists to figure out
you better better get on boardbecause things are not working

(51:33):
for you.

Emily Williams (51:34):
Right. And part of me really worries about
social media's impact on youngergenerations and their political
views because so much of whatthey're consuming online is
informing their their politics.And, also, we're in a moment of
incredible loneliness. I mean,we have a loneliness epidemic in

(51:57):
this country as well, which isalso linked to social media. So
do you believe that a lack ofcommunity is partly why some of
our younger generations lackperspective or maybe are not
putting to the forefront thatthey are beneficiaries of, you
know, the civil rights movementand the activism and organizing
of generations before them?

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (52:18):
Yeah. So you've got to have some
organizational structure toreally effectively push the
envelope on social change. Youknow, I am a believer in the
organization, but I'm also abeliever in this not waiting for
an organization to act. If Ifeel strongly and passionately

(52:38):
about an issue, I do believethat one person can make a
difference. I do believe that.
And history has shown a person,one person can make a difference
provided they have the energy,they have the drive, they have,
I keep going back to this termbecause I think it's so
important, an end game. Theyhave a plan, they have a

(53:00):
strategy, they have a tacticalapproach. And how do you get
attention? It's good to getattention because you want to
expand the base. The challenge,coming back to your point, the
challenge is twofold.
One, when you don't have anorganization, can an individual
step in? I say yes. And I haveproven that. The second thing is

(53:24):
what do I want to accomplish?And can I accomplish that with a
finite period of time, with afinite number of individuals?
So going forward, I have to bebrutally frank. This is not the
1960s and it's not going to bethe 1960s. Yes, you have a well

(53:45):
pring of individuals andorganizations at the grassroots
level, you know, that haveactually marched. They picketed.
They've had every kind ofprotest under the sun, boycotts.
They've done all of that, andthat's good. But I think at some
point, when you look at theother side and you look at how
they organize, you know, theythey don't take any prisoners. I

(54:06):
mean, they take no prisoners,and they're dead serious. We're
gonna take this thing back. Howwe see America, we're gonna take
it all back, lock stock inbarrel.
And we can we have state power.Congress control, Supreme Court
control, definitely the WhiteHouse control, many state

(54:28):
legislatures, GOP control, thefederal judiciary, GOP locked
down in many ways. So that's atough one. You're dealing with
state power we're up against. Socoming back to everything we've
been talking about, really aconcluding statement I want to
make is this.
Yes, boycotts are important.Yes, they have a place. And yes,

(54:52):
they can be effective if doneproperly for all the reasons
that, you know, I talked about.I think it's not the only thing,
though. There are other thingsthat can be done, too.
Emily, I've always been a bigbeliever in this. When people
ask me, and I'm sure you getthis, we all get this that are
activists, people say, Well,what can I do? What can I do? I
have a simple answer. Whateveryou can do.

(55:14):
I'm not gonna tell you. I'm notgonna give you any marching
orders. I'm not gonna presume todo that. I don't know who you
are, what you could do. Whateveryou can do, if you're a teacher,
be a good teacher.
If you're a doctor, be a gooddoctor. If you're an attorney,
be a good attorney. If you're acarpenter, be a good carpenter.
You see where I'm going withthis? You're whatever you are,

(55:37):
be a good that and be a goodsomething for your community.
That is the thing. We live in anera of individualism, like it or
not. Yep. So we have to havethat perspective.

Emily Williams (55:50):
Okay. In your radical imagination, we want you
to paint us a picture. Whatwould a world without capitalism
look like, and how do we getthere from where we are now?

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (56:04):
You know what, Emily, I'm laughing for
another reason. Uh-huh. I'm notmaking this up. Just last night,
you know, I tried to spend inthe evening late. I turn off the
lights in my study.
I close the door. I light acandle, an incense candle, and I

(56:25):
close my eyes. And I try tothink about nothing, you know,
just freedom, mind, nothing fora period of time, just to
refocus at the end of the day.You're not going to believe
this. I'm not making it.
Maybe you have ESP. I don'tknow. Last night, for the first
time during my meditation, Iasked myself, Earl, what kind of

(56:48):
world do I want to live in? Iasked myself that and I had a
fantasy. I started thinkingabout the world.
Let me go through the checklistof things that I thought about
during my meditation. Absolutelyno violence. Number two, none of
the isms, sexism, racism,religiousism, none of the isms,

(57:15):
They were banished. They don'texist anymore. The third thing I
thought about, a world of peace,tranquility, a pastoral world.
A fourth thing I thought of, Ikeep hearing the term beloved,
making real meaning when someonesays, I love you. Ashley's

(57:36):
showing that, a world of love, aworld of compassion, a world of
empathy, a world of helpingthose that are less fortunate,
the dispossessed. In otherwords, a utopian world, no
violence, love, peace,tranquility, none of the isms,

(58:00):
You know what they are, allgone. None of that stuff
vanished forever. But, Emily,unfortunately, you know what I'm
gonna say.
What? I woke up from mymeditation. I opened my eye, and
then I said, you know what?Dream time is over. I gotta come

(58:23):
back to I gotta come back todoing an interview with you
about things I don't I don'teven wanna talk about and
shouldn't have to talk about.
Look. At my age, can I just sayone other thing in in line with
that?

Nikki Porcher (58:35):
Yes, please.

Emily Williams (58:36):
Mhmm.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson (58:36):
Emily, I thought and I'm not this is not
a fantasy. I thought a few yearsago, I thought earlier getting
up there, you're getting intothe seventies now. You know,
what I am thinking, and this wasbefore Trump came along, I'm
thinking this would be a worldthat I can step back. I can

(58:59):
retire from all the littleactivism, all the little things
I can lead. I love classicalmusic.
I love to travel, you know,within limitations. I can travel
a little bit, listen to myclassical music, you know, go
out and just have coffee andjust relax with a couple of
friends, not think about theproblems of the world. Why?

(59:23):
Because we've got individualslike Emily coming along that are
much younger, that essentiallyare progressive. They're gonna
remake America.
All the old fuddy duddies of mygeneration, they're dying off
with all that bigotry. They'relong gone. We got young people.
It's gonna be a real progressiveAmerica. Don't need Earl

(59:44):
anymore.
Earl, you serve your purpose.Put the old guy off the pasture.
And then, Emily, guess what? Igot I got a left curve and a
right hook came that I couldn'tforesee. And not just Trump, but
everything he represents, Icouldn't foresee that.
I didn't think at my age I wouldstill be out here having to

(01:00:05):
fight the same frigging battlesthat I had to fight fifty years
ago. I could not predict that.So I hope that answers your
question. And at the end of theday, thank God and I praise the
creator. I'm still here.
And hopefully, I can haveanother day or two to be here.

Emily Williams (01:00:26):
Right. Right. And I also think we gotta build
the next generation of leaders.Right? We're out here.
It's a new fight. Some of itlooks familiar from things that
we've seen in history, thingsthat you've seen in history. And
so that can also be a road map.And I think that's exactly what
we're seeing with theseboycotts. So, again, thank you
for your time.
Thank you for your work, andthank you so much, Earl. Thank

(01:00:47):
you for sharing so much wisdomand, your perspective. Boycotts
aren't a new tool. We've longused economics as a battleground
in the fight against harmfulgovernment and corporate
practices. From the widespreadsugar boycotts of the eighteenth
century that helped pressure theEnglish government to abolish

(01:01:08):
the slave trade, to the economicboycotts of South African
products and travel duringapartheid, to the Montgomery bus
boycott of the American civilrights movement.
People have been practicingtheir politics by not using
their pocketbooks for a longtime. And while our current
fight against the destruction ofso many of our hard won rights

(01:01:29):
and protections isn't exactlythe same as it was in any of
those eras, it's still very mucha fight we can win. And boycotts
are a useful tool in that fight.As Earl mentioned, we know that
boycotts work. Take Target, forexample.
Since the boycotts began earlythis year, their stock has
plummeted 33%. Rolling backtheir DEI initiatives cost them

(01:01:55):
over $20,000,000,000 inshareholder value over the last
nine months. And while there aremany factors as to why that
might be inflation, decreases inconsumer spending due to a
tanking job market. The DEIboycott is undeniably part of
that. And there's no end to thatboycott in sight.

(01:02:16):
That said, the impact of theanti DEI movement on women,
people of color, collegestudents, faculty and staff, and
the disabled and LGBTQIA pluscommunities has been undeniably
grim. And we know that antidiversity policies in the
environments that they fosterdon't just end with a negative

(01:02:37):
effect on our livelihoods. Theyalso have significant
consequences for our mentalhealth. According to a May 2025
article published in the Journalof the American Medical previous
studies showed that states withpolicies that supported the
Defense of Marriage Act a lawthat defined marriage as a legal

(01:02:59):
union between a man and a womanlesbian, gay and bisexual
populations had higher rates ofgeneralized anxiety disorder,
alcohol use disorder and mooddisorders compared with LGB
people living in states withoutthis discriminatory law. In
addition, transgender peopleliving in states where they were

(01:03:21):
concerned that policies toremove their rights would be
enacted in the future had higherrates of depression, anxiety and
post traumatic stress disorderthan transgender people living
in states with fewer worriesabout the implementation of
discriminatory policies.
Similarly, for Latinapopulations, anti immigration

(01:03:42):
policies enacted at the statelevel were associated with more
poor mental health days thanLatina people living in states
without anti immigrationpolicies. It's also important to
note that an overtlydiscriminatory climate was shown
to have a detrimental effect onthe mental health of young
people. Research shows higherrates of drug use and depression

(01:04:05):
among adolescents, especiallyamong Black, Latine, and lower
income youth, when theyperceived there was increasing
hostility and discrimination ofpeople of their race, ethnicity,
and sexual orientation,immigrant status, religion, or
disability status in society.And though DOMA has since been

(01:04:26):
struck down by the Obergefellruling that enshrined the right
to same sex marriage, there arevalid concerns that it's not
safe from being overturned. Justlike we've seen with other
statutes we've considered to belong standing, such as Roe v.
Wade and the Chevron doctrine.And we know these are not
unintended consequences becausewe've seen something very

(01:04:46):
similar play out in our historyjust over a hundred years ago.
Shortly after he took office in1913, President Woodrow Wilson
took steps to resegregate thefederal workforce. At the time,
roughly 10% of the federalworkforce was made up of Black
Americans, many in professionalpositions. The effect the

(01:05:07):
resegregation had on the Blackmiddle class was devastating.
Discriminatory policies reducedthe number of Black people
employed by the federalgovernment, increased the pay
gap between Black and whiteworkers, and decimated Black
generational wealth. Thepolicies continued for nearly
three generations until thepassage of the Civil Rights Act
repealed them. But the harm donestill resonates today. And

(01:05:31):
sadly, that has been reflectedin the widespread federal
layoffs this year thatspecifically targeted so called
DEI hires. That's why we cannotrely on a strategy of wealth
building as a means ofliberation for marginalized
people.
Because something that can beripped away so easily on a whim
isn't a solid strategy to enactchange. That's the weakness of

individual wealth (01:05:56):
Its inability to wield power. Collective
power, especially when it comesto our money, is a much more
useful strategy we should beusing to hold corporations and
governments accountable.Doubling down on capitalism and
investing further in a politicalsystem that divides us into an

(01:06:16):
owner class and a worker classwill never liberate all of us,
especially when it's a systemthat requires the exploitation
of that worker class, and itwill certainly never bring us
together to fight fascism. Weneed to start looking closely at
other political economic systemsthat will work for all of us and
start looking to strategies fromBlack radical organizers and

(01:06:39):
activists in the civil rightsmovement.
It's easy to scoff at history asnot relevant to today's fight.
But building intergenerationalcommunity with our elders
provides us with sorely neededwisdom and perspective for the
fight ahead. They've been wherewe are headed, and they can help
point the way, which fits inwith Nikki's larger point about

(01:07:02):
building community. And not justamong our cultural identities,
but a community that buildssolidarity across marginalized
groups and demographics.Demographics.
Because we cannot fight backalone. But what does it mean to
not just build a community, butbuild one that is self
sustaining and can resource itsmembers without relying on

(01:07:24):
corporations? When we take theleap to get rid of something
that's really comfortable andreally convenient, like shopping
on Amazon, we can actuallycreate space in our lives to
find other solutions thatstrengthen our bonds to our
communities. It's not eitherboycott corporations or build
community by supporting minorityowned businesses. It's a bothand

(01:07:48):
with each supporting the other.
A strong unified community isthat much more powerful when it
comes together to protest andboycott. And the health of our
communities relies on the powerwielded by a strong organized
boycott. Let's take Earl's hopein the younger generation of
leaders as a serious call toaction, That we do have to take

(01:08:10):
responsibility for building theworld that we want to live in.
We can't live in a bubble orthink that just posting on
social media is enough. We haveto really learn the strategies
to organize and hold systemsaccountable.
And then we can truly startdoing the work of creating the
world we all deserve. We want tohear from you. Did you

(01:08:33):
participate in the boycottsagainst Target or other
businesses who roll back theirDEI practices? How are you
thinking about using your moneyto support your community? Have
you divested from using placeslike Amazon for convenience and
started using more sustainablepractices like book or clothing
swaps?
Tell us on IG at Arcus Center ortell the world in your five star

(01:08:56):
review of the show and help usgrow our audience so we can keep
bringing you episodes about thetopics that matter to you. Many
thanks to our guests, NikkiPorche and Earl Ofari Hutchinson
for joining us and helping ustalk through why multifaceted
strategies for resistance are soimportant. You can find Earl at

(01:09:16):
the hutchinsonreport.net, Andyou can find Nikki on IG at
Nikki Porsche and on herwebsite, nikkiporsche.com.
That's P O R C H E R. If youliked this episode, don't
hesitate to spread the word.
Share it on social media and letyour friends and followers know

(01:09:38):
about us. You can also visit usat arcuscenter.kzoo.edu and
check out the important workwe're doing with the next
generation of social justice andhuman rights leaders. This
episode of Beyond Voting wasbrought to you by the letter b
for boycott and build. Untilnext week, thank you so much for

(01:10:00):
listening. See you in thestreets.
Beyond Voting is hosted by me,Emily Williams. Keisha TK Dutas
is our executive producer.Kristen Bennett is our producer.
And this episode was written byKristen Bennett and me. Our
sound designer and engineer isManny faces.

(01:10:22):
Marketing is courtesy of FabianMickens. And our music is
provided by Motion Array.Special thanks to my team at the
Arcus Center for Social JusticeLeadership, Quentin, Crimson,
Tamara, Winter, and Cara. BeyondVoting is a production of Philos
Future Media.