Manchester University boycotts coca-cola
Mar 9 2007 11:58
At the AGM a couple of days ago Manchester Uni voted to stop providing coca cola.
I rolled my eyes when I first heard the "good news" but I've been thinking..... the trade union HAVE called for a boycott (although hippies don't seem to think this is important and so its not very well known) and while I'm definately opposed to individual people boycotting 'unethical' products, student unions are big clients for coca-cola, and if NUS boycotted coke that could actually make a real difference.
At my university which has a coke ban in force, it epitomises the segregation/hostility between the liberal hippy activists and normal people who want to drink coke. I have previously been opposed to the coke ban for this reason, but maybe if the reasons for the ban were explained better normals would be won round?
Also, does anyone from manchester uni (I know theres lots of people with good politics there) know anything more about this boycott, like who was campaigning for it? I've read the AGM motion and it doesnt mention that the union have called for a boycott so I'm guessing they're the same kind of people who campaigned for it at sussex;)
Mar 9 2007 12:19
#2
I think one coke union in Colombia support the boycott but I believe other unions of coca cola workers don't. I'm not sure though, anyone else?
Mar 9 2007 12:25
#3
I wasn't enthused by a boycott because I didn't see how it would improve conditions for the factory workers at the time.
Mar 9 2007 13:20
#4
UEA voted for a coke ban last summer, but when I spoke to a student a few weeks ago I found out that they were selling coke on campus again. Apparently lots of people couldn't be bothered to walk to the tesco garage just slightly down the road from the campus, so the union called another vote. I'd expect something similar will happen with this.
Mar 9 2007 13:28
#5
Exactly - there are Newsagents's and Fast Food shops all over campus. I doubt it would affect Coca-Cola's sales by a significant amount.
Mar 9 2007 13:55
#6
there has been similar motions passed in the past, like the fair trade policy, which is not only student union, but the whole university food outlets (dozens of them on the campus).
Didnt even hear about this coke thing, cant hurt thats for sure.
Mar 9 2007 17:09
#7
its good news according to other SDA people it is a boycott in solidarity and support of the columbian workers in struggle, another good motion passed was the University of Manchester is to twin with the biggest uni in palestine, at which point the zionists and tories got up and left the GM, so all other motions went through easy.
Also today we held a demo for home fees for asylum seekers, with about 35 people outside teh chancellors office, went really well.
Mar 10 2007 01:00
#8
On a related matter Coke or one of the other junk drink multis are proud to announce ... 
the first soft drinks machine which accepts payments by credit card...it is at a sporting rink - ice hockey iirc... even if the effect is minimal a boycott can't hurt - sick of these creeps finding ever insidious ways to promote their nutrient free drinks to poorer sections of the community..
Mar 10 2007 01:00
#9
On a related matter Coke or one of the other junk drink multis are proud to announce ... the first soft drinks machine which accepts payments by credit card...it is at a sporting rink - ice hockey iirc... even if the effect is minimal a boycott can't hurt - sick of these creeps finding ever insidious ways to promote their nutrient free drinks to poorer sections of the community..
Mar 10 2007 01:08
#10
was never totally sold on the coke boycott stuff and i'm sure as fuck not buying Pisspee it tastes like shite!
Mar 10 2007 04:09
#11
This has been happening at a few U.S. universities. I'm fairly certain that the group on campus that just got the Workers Rights Consortium "passed" (Student government decisions are merely polite suggestions) will move onto a Coca-Cola ban next.
Mar 10 2007 07:36
#12
revol68 wrote:
was never totally sold on the coke boycott stuff and i'm sure as fuck not buying Pisspee it tastes like shite!
We don't have pepsi here, we have virgin cola. Presumably because pepsi is an EVIL MULTINATIONAL just like coca-cola.
Mar 10 2007 07:47
#13
Lone Wolf wrote:
On a related matter Coke or one of the other junk drink multis are proud to announce ...
Can a boycott hurt though? I think they're a problem when people think they're really significant and a boycott by your SU is considered an 'achievement' by the president. When the reason for the boycott isn't adequately explained to students (and arguably there isn't a good reason for it), and this while there are real issues with teaching and housing on campus which more than a small group of activists care about... it just pisses off a lot of students who can't understand why the hippies banned their coke, and why their SU doesn't seem to do anything relevant to them.
For me the fact that a union of coca-cola employees have called for a boycott is the crux of any argument for one, and it says alot about the moralising, patronising liberal-guilt hippies who campaign for boycotts that they don't even mention it.
Not that I'm talking about my university of course... *ahem*.
Mar 10 2007 17:32
#14
JDMF wrote:
Didnt even hear about this coke thing, cant hurt thats for sure.
It definitely could hurt. What could well happen is that the apathetic will resent the "do gooder leftie" hacks at the SU for yet more hand-wringing over their consumer choices (I know I can't stand this patronising obsession with "healthy, ethical" diets right now) and those who actually stop to consider the plight of the poor Colombians will have their energies and efforts directed the futility of the boycott. I don't really understand why you have such a soft spot for liberalism JDMF.
Mar 10 2007 18:15
#15
so your counter suggestion would be to pass a solution to set up reading groups and read some marx? 
Boycott is a great way to publicise a struggle, and if it has been called for by the workers involved then where's the harm?
OK, what is the strategy here? if there is a clear strategy and demands for some concrete concessions from the company then boycotts can be a great tool, much better than just having lectures about the subject, maybe produce a leaflet...
Mar 10 2007 18:53
#16
Jess wrote:
revol68 wrote:
was never totally sold on the coke boycott stuff and i'm sure as fuck not buying Pisspee it tastes like shite!We don't have pepsi here, we have virgin cola. Presumably because pepsi is an EVIL MULTINATIONAL just like coca-cola.
virgin cola is good though. Mmmm.
Mar 10 2007 20:35
#17
John. wrote:
Jess wrote:
revol68 wrote:
was never totally sold on the coke boycott stuff and i'm sure as fuck not buying Pisspee it tastes like shite!We don't have pepsi here, we have virgin cola. Presumably because pepsi is an EVIL MULTINATIONAL just like coca-cola.
virgin cola is good though. Mmmm.
it's not bad but it's no coca cola and nowhere seems to stock Virgin cola over here.
Mar 11 2007 02:15
#18
revol
Like your subject field heading almost as much as i like Grace's!!
Not tried Virgin cola but i feel it would prolly taste kinda diluted...and i am a bit pissed off with the Branson boy atm for good reason ... so he can fuck off and take his nutrient-free liquid shite with him!! . 
Mar 11 2007 09:33
#19
I believe a few unis, Jess´included have boycotted Bacardi. Bacardi don´t seem to care much.
What is important is the same as with any action.
What do we hope to achieve? How will this action achieve it? Can the group manage the effort required or would it be better spent elsewhere?
Mar 11 2007 14:50
#20
Quote:
What do we hope to achieve? How will this action achieve it? Can the group manage the effort required or would it be better spent elsewhere?
Well I imagine if you as many anarchists in Ireland have campaigned to have their SU ban coke, (Its banned in Trinity, UCD, NUIG and few other colleges UL, DLIAT and a few smaller ITs), then what you are trying to achieve is to have the SU ban coke on campus. Why do this? Well because a basic principle of anarchism is workers solidarity. If workers in struggle call for an international boycott of coke products because hundreds of Coke workers have been tortured, kidnapped and/or illegally detained by violent paramilitaries, working closely with plant managements and 8 union organisers have been killed, then we as anarchists, as people who believe in the international solidarity of labour should support them.
Don't get me wrong if our efforts could be better spent elsewhere, then fine. I didn't campaign in this years referendum in Trinity because I was putting all my activist energy into organising the Dublin Anarchist Bookfair. But it is definitely a worthwhile endeavour and about 5 or 6 of the 15ish person campaign team in trinity were anarchists. (All class struggle anarchists with the possible exception of one).
Did the campaign this year achieve anything beyond a boycott? Well yes, it enabled people to make arguments about class and the nature of capitalism, gave people experience of organising, it created a 'left' on campus, a left in which anarchism is the strongest tendency although not the largest, it exposed the absence of democracy in Trinity SU. This 'left' has already gone on to table a motion of no confidence in the SU Deputy President, the SU person whose responsible for SU campaign and runs the SU paper.
And although pretending personal comsumption choices can have any political impact is idiotic, organised directed political boycotts involving thousands of people do have an impact. And anyone who says otherwise is silly.
A letter from the president of the union that called the boycott.
Quote:
Dear Brothers and Sisters:We need your help to stop a gruesome cycle of murders, kidnappings and torture of SINALTRAINAL (National Union of Food Industry Workers) union leaders and organizers involved in daily life-and-death struggles at Coca-Cola bottling plants in Colombia.
In July 2001, the United Steelworkers of America and the International Labor Rights Fund (www.laborrights.org) filed a lawsuit on behalf of SINALTRAINAL, several of its members and the estate of Isidro Gil, one of its murdered officers. The lawsuit and campaign aim to force Coca-Cola to prevent further bloodshed and to provide safe working conditions.
Coca-Cola bottlers “contracted with or otherwise directed paramilitary security forces that utilize extreme violence and murdered, tortured, unlawfully detained or otherwise silenced trade union leaders,” the lawsuit states. It also notes that Colombian troops connected with the paramilitaries have trained at the U.S. Army’s School of the Americas (SOA) at Fort Benning, Ga., where trainees were encouraged to torture and murder those who do “union organizing and recruiting;” pass out “propaganda in favor of workers;” and “sympathize with demonstrators or strikes.” This was made public when the Pentagon was forced to reveal the contents of training manuals used at the school. (For more information, see www.soaw.org, the website of SOA Watch.) The year that the lawsuit was filed, The Coca-Cola Co. made $4 billion in profits and paid its CEO, Douglas Daft, more than $105 million. Coca-Cola continues to rake in billions each year, yet the frightening conditions at the Coke plants remain unchanged. Labor unions and human rights advocates in the United States can stop these atrocities at Coca-Cola’s bottling plants.
Please read the enclosed exposés. The Campaign to Stop Killer Coke will move the fight to the doorsteps and into the boardrooms of Coca-Cola and its key financial ally, SunTrust Banks. As long as SunTrust, “the bank of Killer Coke,” maintains its intimate ties to Coke through board interlocks, large stock holdings and credit relationships, SunTrust, along with Coca-Cola, will be a principal target of this campaign. We ask you to take part in this most important struggle. Any contribution you can make to the campaign will serve as a critical building block and act of solidarity to help end one of the ugliest chapters in labor history. Please make a financial contribution, participate in protest activities and mail in the coupon below. By working together, we can protect our sisters and brothers and restrain corporations like SunTrust and Coke that behave so immorally and irresponsibly. Any support you give will be greatly appreciated and acknowledged.
In solidarity,
Javier Correa, President, Sinaltrainal
William Mendoza, President of SINALTRAINAL, Barrancabermeja.
Ray Rogers, Director, Campaign to Stop Killer Coke
Mar 11 2007 21:34
#21
The campaign to boycott "killer coke" is mostly led by WWP in the unions and groups like the iso on campuses. Still, I stopped drinking coke in '91. Pepsi tastes better anyway and now that I know Revol hates pepsi I'm sure I made the right decision.
Mar 12 2007 02:09
#22
thugarchist wrote:
The campaign to boycott "killer coke" is mostly led by WWP in the unions and groups like the iso on campuses. Still, I stopped drinking coke in '91. Pepsi tastes better anyway and now that I know Revol hates pepsi I'm sure I made the right decision.
Now that i know you are brain damaged I feel bad for ever having a pop at your politics, sorry.
Mar 12 2007 05:16
#23
thugarchist wrote:
The campaign to boycott "killer coke" is mostly led by WWP in the unions and groups like the iso on campuses. Still, I stopped drinking coke in '91. Pepsi tastes better anyway and now that I know Revol hates pepsi I'm sure I made the right decision.
I'm not sure the WWP has a presence in the unions to begin with, especially after their split. USAS chapters or labor rights groups typically un the coke campaign on campuses. The ISO only has a major presence in a limited number of schools. USAS, labor groups and "social justice" groups typically have a presence on any campus with an activist community. I’ve personally never run into more than a handful of ISO folks on the coke campaign or the like and I do a lot of campus-labor solidarity activism.
Mar 12 2007 15:19
#24
Coke Zero is the real enemy here.
'Zero sugar, zero taste'.
Mar 12 2007 16:42
#25
What? Why is an individual consumer boycott any better because some union bureaucrat says its a good idea?
'Boycotts' can realistically only be organised collectively, e.g. workers refusing to load a product at docks or collective actions against products being used to scab a strike (eg attempted blockades of scab coal from poland during the miners strike). An individual boycott is utterly meaningless and in the case of a popular cultural product. like coca cola, likely to be counter-productive.
Mar 12 2007 16:44
#26
coca cola, the secret ingredient is eroticised middle class guilt.
Mar 12 2007 17:04
#27
cantdocartwheels wrote:
What? Why is an individual consumer boycott any better because some union bureaucrat says its a good idea?
'Boycotts' can realistically only be organised collectively, e.g. workers refusing to load a product at docks or collective actions against products being used to scab a strike (eg attempted blockades of scab coal from poland during the miners strike). An individual boycott is utterly meaningless and in the case of a popular cultural product. like coca cola, likely to be counter-productive.
Its not an individual boycott at UMSU its an institutional boycott and it shows solidarity with the workers, and it may not be the best thing that could be happening but unless you have all of of a sudden become dumbledore and can magic up mass ranks of class concious workers who will refuse to distribute and load coke, im sure an institutional boycott is a good thing.
Mar 12 2007 17:07
#28
i'd have thought that a boycott that hasn't done anything after close to 4 years should be given up as a dead end, no?
Mar 12 2007 17:09
#29
well atleast it shows solidarity and raises awareness on the shit treatment of workers in coke factories in columbia, so maybe it shouldn't be given up. What would you suggest people do in solidarity?
Mar 12 2007 17:11
#30
WeTheYouth wrote:
What would you suggest people do in solidarity?
Ditch lectures and have a lie-in.
I'm not sure, I was out of the loop for most of last year not being on campus. I believe the original idea was from the Latin American Society in 2004 (which I was in when the idea was fielded) because of the horrific conditions of Colombian plant workers and Coca-Cola's implicit involvement in assasinations of union leaders. I missed the General Meeting where it was voted on a few weeks later.
I have no idea what happened since then or how it gained so much support. Nestlé products are also banned on campus.