That aside. I asked for evidence. But anyway.

You said: It's not just plausible, it's a fact, but you or me being able to go without Amazon without taking too much of a hit doesn't mean there are plenty of people cannot boycott Amazon at all bcs the warm fuzzy feeling of being a good, moral activist doesn't fill your belly or buy you shampoo.

I said: There's no one in the USA (?) in financial dire straits who doesn't use Amazon?

Is that plausible?

Given what we've learned from enquires of old about the dishonesty of former TDs and leaders of the coalition partners, it would be a remarkable claim to say this is the most dishonest government yet.

But I'm beginning to think that...

I would add - Gwen said how few options people are left with. Not zero options.

I think you know I'm not saying that. I'd like some evidence that everyone in financial dire straits uses Amazon to sustain life though. It's just not credible.

There's no one in the USA (?) in financial dire straits who doesn't use Amazon?

Is that plausible?

There's a genocide. Amazon are complicit in a genocide. Shrugs...

Just moral, I guess. You?

Just me, I guess. But there used to be peace agreements, or peace treaties. How quickly the media has adopted and normalised the language of the orange one.

Just boycott them outright. I'm on a low income. I never use Amazon. I manage. Enabling genocide is a red line.

Indeed. And established military bases via invasion, globally, in the C19th, from which it still weilds extraordinary power.