Where I Shop: A Values-Based Approach

Shopping as activism isn't much different than showing up for a protest. Your individual contribution is pretty small. It's only really effective in aggregate. This doesn't imply that you shouldn't be part of the aggregate—just don't overrate your personal influence.

So why bother?

I have strong personal integrity. If I take a position, I'll stay with it as long as it makes sense. For me, that means a collection of things: actually adhering to the shopping practices I profess, stating those practices and the reasoning behind them, and whatever individual influence I might have through conversation. That's likely the limit of my power at the moment. If I had greater influence in more strategic circles, I would align with my values there as well.

This isn't about moral superiority. It's about coherence between what I believe and what I do, regardless of scale.

The Situations

Let me get specific about where I actually shop and why.

Amazon: Seeking Alternatives First

I've been a frequent Amazon customer for years. The convenience, selection, and price are hard to beat. But I'm reconsidering that now.

The driver is Jeff Bezos's actions. His support of Trump and the MAGA slice of the GOP—whom I detest—appears to be calculated to establish Blue Origin as a primary space provider. Prior to Blue Origin's rise, he was a Trump/MAGA opponent. I'm not opposed to the paths being forged for the future of space travel, but the collateral damage being enabled to get there by their owners makes it very difficult to support them.

Here's where it gets complicated and ugly. Bezos is the driver behind Blue Origin, but his net worth is 90% Amazon (which represents about 10% of Amazon's total market value). A signal to Bezos by way of Amazon puts him at a disadvantage relative to SpaceX, though SpaceX is experiencing its own issues with Trump's lack of integrity.

There's an added complication: AWS powers 30 to 40 percent of the internet, at least in the western world. Even if I stopped buying anything from Amazon.com tomorrow, I'm still indirectly funding Bezos every time I use Netflix, browse sites hosted on AWS, or use countless services that run on Amazon's infrastructure. The entanglement is nearly impossible to escape.

Why should it be easy when it can be hard?

My current approach: seeking alternatives first. I'm not claiming I'll never use Amazon again. I'm putting in the work to find other options before defaulting to convenience. Sometimes Amazon might still be the answer—rare items, time constraints, accessibility needs. But it won't be my automatic first choice anymore.

This won't hurt Amazon. It won't change Bezos's calculations. But I'm being part of whatever aggregate exists while maintaining alignment between my values and my actions.

Starbucks: When a Local Decision Matters

Starbucks has generally decent corporate values. But they recently made a very stupid local decision that affects me dramatically and personally.

They closed the store at the bottom of my hill. This wasn't just any store—I was told it had the highest customer satisfaction rating in the Pacific Northwest. I can believe it. It was relatively small, part of my daily routine, and operated by genuinely pleasant people. Its closure has been extremely disruptive.

They replaced it with a new store much farther from me that, contrary to their attempted positioning, is much more like McDonald's. Another store on the same street is also very much like McDonald's. If I wanted McDonald's, I'd go there. I don't want McDonald's and haven't been there in years.

I'm very disgusted with this decision.

My response: I will no longer shop at Starbucks locally. Outside of this area, regional and global Starbucks remain untested at the moment. I'll likely be disinclined, but I'm still waiting for my anger to cool down before I make broader judgments.

This is a proportional response. They destroyed something good—a high-performing store with excellent staff and community connection—and replaced it with something that contradicts their own brand positioning. I'm not declaring war on Starbucks globally based on one local failure. But I'm also not pretending this didn't matter or that my anger isn't warranted.

Hardware Stores: Supporting What Works

For hardware, I tend to go to Ace Hardware. It's just down the hill from me, it seems like a decent company with an interesting blend of local and corporate, and the local part appears to be well run. I'd like to help them stay in business.

This is relationship thinking. I want a good local hardware option to survive. Ace represents a workable middle ground—not purely local, but locally operated within a larger framework that seems to work.

When I can't get what I need at Ace, I go to Home Depot. Home Depot's political and ethical alignment is mixed. One founder, now deceased, was a Trump/MAGA mega-donor. His partner founder is a strong Democratic supporter. The company itself is attempting to stay neutral. I'll accept that. Being in business is complicated even if one of the components of your business is an idiot. This is pragmatic, not ideological. Sometimes you need what you need.

A replacement for Robnett's Hardware recently opened in Corvallis. I'm intrigued and hear good reports, but I haven't investigated it yet. Maybe that becomes another option. We'll see.

The Messy Reality

This is what values-based shopping actually looks like in 2025. It's not "shop local, feel good." It's tracing connections between a coffee table purchase and billionaire space race positioning and Trump administration enablement. It's acknowledging that sometimes you're angry and need time before making permanent decisions. It's recognizing that convenience and accessibility matter alongside ethics.

There are no clean answers. The alternatives often have their own problems. The individual impact is negligible. The moral calculus is complicated.

But integrity means doing the work anyway—seeking alternatives, making distinctions, being honest about emotional responses, staying proportional. I'm not saving the world. I'm being consistent with who I am.

And I'm part of whatever aggregate exists. That's enough.