[rayiner]

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.)

[ac2u]

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.