When the Consumer Becomes a Revolutionary Force (ENG)

In recent weeks, various boycotts against Tesla have emerged. Several Tesla facilities across the United States have been vandalized, while other forms of protest have been organized on streets and across social media. It's reasonable to assume that these incidents - including arson attacks on vehicles, anti-marketing campaigns, and sabotage of charging stations - are a reaction against Tesla CEO Elon Musk and his growing political influence.

The protests have been coordinated via social media using hashtags like #TeslaTakedown and #Swasticars, spreading messages of boycott and discontent through various channels. The British activist group Led By Donkeys recently conducted a high-profile protest where they used a Tesla to write "Don't buy a Tesla" on a beach in Wales. Tesla dealerships have received new signage, and similar campaigns have appeared in the London Underground. Demonstrations have taken place outside dealerships, and in one incident in Las Vegas, the word "resist" was spray-painted on a building's facade. In South Carolina, an individual was seriously injured after accidentally setting themselves on fire during an attempted act of sabotage.

Trump is furious and has described these actions using terms like "domestic terrorism," while Elon Musk himself has expressed huge concern on Fox, describing the attacks as "surprising" and attributing them to his efforts to improve government operations. The concern is understandable - Tesla's market value has halved since its peak following the presidential election.

This isn't a new phenomenon - protests arising against individuals or groups whose power and wealth have become heavily concentrated (hey, French Revolution anyone?). Perhaps it looks so different today without the pitchforks that we haven't yet recognized this as a significant development. The question is: what effects could emerge if these protests continue? On social media, there's speculation about Musk's actual wealth, his leveraged positions, and how a collapse of Tesla could trigger loan defaults with consequences throughout his business empire. And what's to stop the large, angry crowd from moving on to the next company? If the market currently governs democracy in the US and certain individual companies are its kings, shouldn't it be the consumers who attempt to overthrow them?

The Digital Feudal System: When Platforms Become the Lords of Our Era

Tesla is not just a car manufacturer – it's a symbol of the power concentration in the new digital economy. Economics professor and former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis argues that we have already left traditional capitalism behind and stepped into a new era: technofeudalism.

In classical capitalism, profits were generated through production and market transactions. But today, Varoufakis contends, real power no longer resides with producers or even banks, but with digital platforms that function as our era's feudal lords. Tech giants like Amazon, Google and Meta own the "land" – the digital ecosystems we depend on – and we, the users, are the new serfs, governed through attention and paying with content and data about ourselves.

Companies seeking to reach consumers are no longer free agents in an open market but are forced to rent space on these platforms through advertising, transaction fees, and algorithmic conditions they don't control. Value is no longer created through production, but by controlling the digital rules of engagement where all interaction takes place.

If Varoufakis is right, it means that today's protests aren't merely targeting individual corporate actions – they represent resistance against a deeper structural shift where economic power no longer rests with nations or even in classical market dynamics, but with a handful of platforms controlling the digital infrastructure for work, commerce, and information.

In this light, the protests against Tesla become part of a larger movement: a struggle over who truly holds power in the digital era.

Protest, Power, and the Market as Battlefield

We've been taught that our primary influence as citizens lies in voting every four years. But if the forces that govern our lives - those that determine what gets built, what gets shut down, what thrives, and what withers - are no longer subject to democratic decisions, there is a new playing field.

Market logic has crept into every corner of our existence: politics, work life, public spaces, even how we understand relationships and time. It happened so gradually that we barely noticed. Another health center privatized. A government agency hires a PR firm to "manage its brand." A library closes. A town square, once a meeting place, transforms into yet another café chain. Maybe we have reached a tipping point?

If market forces have become the real power in society, it follows that resistance must also engage on the same arena. Protest is no longer just a political act - it's an economic one. And history shows that when citizens lack direct political influence, they turn to economic disruption as a strategy.

Boycotts, economic sanctions, and supply chain blockades have long been effective methods of resistance, from the Montgomery bus boycott in the 1950s to the anti-apartheid campaigns of the 1980s. Similarly, economic resistance has been a defining strategy of modern labor and social movements. The Indian farmer protests of 2020-2021 not only blocked highways but also targeted corporate supply chains, boycotting businesses tied to the controversial agricultural reforms. France’s Yellow Vest movement, which began as opposition to fuel tax increases, evolved into a broader critique of economic injustice, disrupting major commercial hubs and forcing the government to respond. These actions demonstrate that when political avenues fail, economic pressure can serve as a powerful tool for change.

These examples highlight a shift in strategy: instead of merely appealing to political leaders, movements are directly challenging the economic structures that sustain inequality and environmental destruction.

System Change: Fighting Back with the Same Weapons

Tesla is not just a car company. It represents the myth of "green capitalism" - the belief that we can consume our way out of ecological collapse. The protests against Tesla expose the contradiction in this narrative: a sustainable company that in reality depends on exploitative supply chains, anti-union strategies, and land expropriation.

What we're witnessing is a shift from traditional political protests to economic resistance strategies. When political institutions fail to hold companies accountable, people turn to the last power they have left: disrupting market flows. The question is no longer just “which laws need to change?” but “how do we make unsustainable business models unprofitable”?

Beyond Protest: The Need for Parallel Systems

There's a risk in merely being in opposition - constantly reacting, always operating within the same logic that created the problem. Protest is not enough. For real change, we must also build parallel systems that aren't dependent on the structures we criticize. Support businesses that are built differently. In Sweden, another week-long protest is currently underway - a boycott against major food chains that has caused more sustainable, local initiatives to double their turnover. Many alternatives exist, but the challenge now is creating a new market and easier access to these options as well. This means strengthening local economies, creating alternative supply chains, developing cooperative ownership models, and prioritizing resilience over efficiency. It means asking ourselves not just “how do we stop destructive systems?” but “what do we build instead?”

Around the world, we see initiatives demonstrating that other ways of organizing economy and society are possible . and already happening. In the Netherlands, a large national push for a circular economy is underway, in Germany, the energy transition "Energiewende" has shown that an industrial nation can take steps toward a fossil-free energy future. At the local level, cities like Porto Alegre in Brazil have introduced participatory budgeting, giving residents direct influence over how public funds are used and the Transition Towns movement is spreading globally, with local communities organizing to increase their resilience through regenerative food production, sharing economies, and local currencies. These initiatives show that transition isn't just about protesting against what doesn't work - but also about creating viable alternatives.

The protests against Tesla represent more than opposition to a single company. They signal a significant shift in how people relate to powerful corporations in our global economy. We have reached a point where minor regulatory adjustments or corporate policy changes may no longer address the underlying tensions between business interests and broader social and environmental concerns. These demonstrations reflect a growing recognition that economic power structures require meaningful transformation, not just incremental reform.

As this awareness spreads, we're seeing the emergence of both new forms of economic resistance and alternative models that challenge traditional business paradigms - evidence that the relationship between corporations, citizens, and the planet is being fundamentally reconsidered.