The notion that "Not doing politics" is political position is a fairly recent fallacy. I believe that the individuals who parrot this sentiment verbatim have been reinforced with this idea from lobbyists and monied interests (including corporations and the media). The reason that I think this is as follows:
This notion helps to habituate partisan zealotry, which allows individuals to have their attention captured for profit, and makes them more manipulatable. If non-involvement in one facet of one dimension of life (politics for the benefit of corporations) is now not possible, then nobody is safe from the moral imperialism of political movements.
There are many spheres of life and influence within the world, and politics is but one of them. In modern times, however, the lines between different currencies of power are blurring, and there are clear channels for the transmutation of different types of power and capital to political power. For corporations, this is very appealing because democratic ideals, the environment, or individual rights might be at odds with their interests. Therefore, if they can convince you to give up your individualism in order to become politicized towards a cause that benefits the corporation, that is a wonderful way to circumvent democracy and concentrate power.
No it’s not. It’s an endorsement of norms about the role of political activism in relation to other aspects of society. But it’s not an endorsement of the status quo on particular substantive issues. It doesn’t necessarily even have the indirect effect of propping up the status quo.
Consider, for example, endorsements of political positions by Hollywood celebrities. The practice probably had a net negative impact on most of the substantive political positions they support. (E.g. Jane Fonda effect.)
This is the point that folks that repeat the line:
"It is a tacit endorsement of the political status quo.
reply
"
never seem to have an answer for.
Let's say I own a company and I'm not happy with the status quo, but I decide that the best way to enact change is via my agency as a private citizen instead of throwing my company brand and money after it. What gives someone the right to think that they can read my mind as to whether I'm ok with the status quo or not?
It drips with arrogance as it's just a cheap line to repeat instead of actual productive work.
Maybe I've decided that having me tackle it and not my company is more effective due to people seeing a company endorsement of a political message as a diluted bandwagon hopping exercise.
