When the US government put TikTok on trail, people all over felt a great rush of mixing emotions: emabrassment, amusement, dread. These representatives held so much power over so many aspects of our lives. And here they are about to make a decision over an app that has fully shifted our current economy and they can’t even understand how connecting to the internet works.
That feeling is what I’m going through now, watching people spread the word to buy used and refurbished devices “in solidarity with The Congo.”

A Little Context

The Congo has been a hotspot for colonial exploitation and violence for lifetimes. First with King Leopold and his hunt for rubber, but when that was stopped the reigns were passed right over to new masters out to extract Cobalt; a mineral that is key to litium ion batteries and thus key to not only most of the devices in our everyday lives, but also to a lot of devices, such as electric vehicles, that are expected to shepard us into a green future.

The Cobalt that is put in thousand dollar phones is taken from the land destroying the environment, the economy for the locals, and the lives of the deeply exploited and abused people.

And so for a lot of people, the solution was clear. “Don’t buy any new devices. If you need a replacement, buy something used or refurbished.” (At least that was the tune in the beginning. Black friday hit and it shifted to “Don’t wait, buy all the used devices you want on sale.”)

The problem is: in Most refurbished devices (used as well if listed as having any form of repair or mantinence) the battery is going to be The First and most likely thing to be replaced.
If that’s the case? Why is the idea so popular?

I think that it’s so popular, not because it’s rooted in any real or practical effect it will Actually have on the demand in the Congo, but because buying used is seen as the poor person’s relationship with tech consumerism. So, giving up your privilege in Some way is seen as taking a step in the right direction.
But at the end of the day, it doesn’t hit many of the positive changes people are saying it does.

If anything, it worsens the battery issue, cause now you have a device that has had at least two in it’s lifetime. And it only keeps companies from making money if you’re making sure that the places you’re buying from don’t buy these from Samsung or Apple wholesale. You also have to make sure that they Are Not certified sellers, refurb sites, or repair site because if they are, they are buying replacement parts directly from these companies and often have to pay a regular recertification fee to keep that title. Which means more money. (And that doesn’t touch on the fact that in order for this plan of only buying used to exist long term, someone has to continually be buying new in order for there to be used devices that can keep up with advancing software demands.)

Don’t get me wrong, there are many benefits to getting used devices. But because no one is discussing these core concepts there is no discussion on if these things allow buying used to be more beneficial that just buying new and using your device till it’s dead. And there is especially no talk of seeking out devices not by these primary offender companies and what potential that may have at pressuring for change.

And why would there be. The conversation is being led by people who don’t understand tech.
Which brings us to our problem.

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. — Harlan Ellison

I think the situation with Used for Congo is a great example of this “Talk First. Ask Questions, Maybe” culture that we have.

There is simply no other way to describe why so many loud voices felt so confident in never seeking out information from people in tech to figure out what a future in tech consumerism could look like. Why no one seemed to even take time to learn what happens when a device is refurbished.

They are devaluing the voices of people with experience in the topic and leading with bias.
And this is not the only space this is happening in. This is happening with abled folk talking over the disbled on the topics of assisted suicide and COVID, and even queer youths talking over queer elders on what things have historically helped queer movements.

When do we stop and address the fact that while we may not know what we don’t know, we should still know better than to forge movements and spread information without dedicating time to educating ourselves on the exact things we’re talking about and where these ideas are coming from?

Another phenomenal example of this is when certain groups of feminists talk over anyone bringing up Stockholm Syndrome to say it isn’t real because it was created to discredit a woman criticizing the powers that be. But similar to a term like autistic, no one says Stockholm Syndrome because they are trying to reference the very first instance of the term’s usage. They are using it based on the symptoms and behaviors it describes and a lot of those are associated with issues that are very common today. So in a public forum you are saying that people that have feelings for domestic abusers, make excuses for abusers to downplay the harm, and refuse to leave abusive situations when offered help are not actually experiencing any problem. That they have a master plan and it is misogyny that tells you they are a victim. A belief that has effeciently grown from the topic. And that’s all fine and good, because that’s what the person who introduced the idea of Stockholm Syndrome being fake wanted people to think. On one diagram they listed Stockholm Syndrome, cycles of abuse, and even trauma as fake concepts used to pathologize outspoken women.

Would people have thought differently if they were open to voices that had experienced situations they self-described as Stockholm Syndrome?

Would people be so quick to scream “Listen to women because they don’t have Stockholm Syndrome” if they were willing to listen to disabled people who said using any disability as an excuse to ignore someone is an act of oppression?

People just don’t seem to understand the importance of being informed when it’s something that they have feelings about, but a cishet white man tells girls to hold in their period and people will scream about “The Science”. How do you have faith in building something better with people who can’t see how they reflect the leaders you’re trying to escape?

This issue is a symptom of many problems in our culture: lack of intersectional consideration, anti-intiellecutalism, poor social media habits, lack of bias reflection, and an education system that teaches us that it’s better to guess than to say you don’t know. But if we are to build a community that will be anything other than the monster we already have. We have to prioritize learning what we haven’t already intentionally sought out and being quiet other wise.