RIGHT TO THE CHIN

Wal-Mart or No Wal-Mart, I Like Target Better, Anyway...

I've decided to post my PULSE columns before they go to press. It helps to look like I'm actually blogging:

Wal-Mart or no Wal-Mart, I like Target better, anyway…

You may as well protest the wind. Because it, like Wal-Mart, isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

I don’t necessarily disagree with the wishes of those opposed to the building of another Chattanooga Wal-Mart. I am personally sick of Wal-Mart. I find the quality of many of their items to be lacking, and I’d rather shop elsewhere. But the chain is extremely successful. People love this store (even addicted to it), and to really make a dent in the practices and progress of the Wal-Mart empire would require changing the hearts and minds and shopping habits of millions and millions and millions and millions (and millions) of people.

The only way to “defeat” Wal-Mart, in my mind, would be a straight-out boycott. The Walton family would have to be hit in the wallet. And even then, to a family worth over 100 BILLION DOLLARS, a boycott might not even be successful enough.

Wal-Mart, like Big Tobacco, is now in a position where it can buy forgiveness in virtually any accusation of malfeasance, lawlessness, fraud, discrimination, or collusion. Does this make any of their “unfair” practices any less real? No. But they are as good as untouchable if charged.

It is because of the strength of the company’s position that I view the actions of local protestors as pitifully futile. I’m not saying don’t protest, but at least consider the odds…

What, really, did local members of Katuah Earth First! expect would happen when they stood outside Wal-Mart recently, attempting to “raise awareness of the labor and environmental injustices Wal-Mart creates?" Did they have a good point? Probably. Does it really matter? Probably not. I mean, AIDS ribbons raise awareness about AIDS, but AIDS still exists. “Raising Awareness” is never a good tactic. It often makes no sense in relation to the situation at hand. Especially when people are already aware, and still don’t care. Action is more effective. And, like I said, the only plausible action I can see that would affect Wal-Mart would be an insurmountable boycott by consumers. And that will never happen because other people don’t care enough to pull it off. Many people like the store, and simply don’t see another option that they’d prefer. They can leave the store with a bunch of crap that they love AND save money while doing it. It’s a tough combination to beat.

Perhaps the new Wal-Mart will spur the closing of the Hamilton Place store. Maybe another business could get a chance to thrive in that then-vacated space. And perhaps developers could’ve decided to build the new Wal-Mart inside the pathetic ruins of the Eastgate Mall. Maybe then they would’ve been seen as a corporation that recycles property instead of one that uses it and then abandons it when they see fit.

I wonder, though, if those outraged by Wal-Mart’s disturbance of the delicate Eastgate ecosystem (?) would be happier if something else were moving onto the land. Like, maybe a Patagonia outlet store. Or a Burt’s Bees packaging plant. Or maybe even a Noam Chomsky Regional Reading Room and Reflection Pool. I mean, is it just the fact that Wal-Mart is moving in? Would other businesses be more acceptable? Would it lessen the blow?

I don’t think the big danger is Wal-Mart moving in. I think the real danger is that, while in a Wal-Mart, you constantly have to be on the look out for falling prices. I saw a guy get hit by a falling price once, and man, it wasn’t pretty. But seriously, folks…

While we wait for the next Wal-Mart Supercenter to move in, protestors should know that Wal-Mart is a good place for all their protesting needs, as poster board and markers are low-priced everyday.