Fast or Boycott? Why the Target Conversation Isn’t Over
Every now and then, a moment comes along that reminds us how important clarity is in our movements. This week was one of those moments.
A video began circulating online in which Pastor Jamal Bryant announced that the “Target boycott” was over. For a lot of people who had been intentionally avoiding Target for more than a year, the news felt sudden. Confusing, even.
But the truth is simpler than the headlines made it seem because there’s a difference between a fast and a boycott. And that difference matters.
A Fast Is Temporary. A Boycott Is Accountability.
Many people understand the concept of a fast from religious traditions. During a fast, you voluntarily give something up for a limited period of time. It might be food, social media, or another daily habit.
Right now, many Muslims are observing Ramadan and many Christians practice fasting during Lent. In both cases, the abstention is temporary and spiritual.
A boycott is something different. A boycott is when people intentionally withdraw their money, attention, or participation from a company or institution in protest. It is not symbolic; it is economic pressure designed to force change.
One is temporary reflection and the other is organized accountability. In the case of Target, both things happened at the same time.
How We Got Here
To understand the current confusion, we have to go back a few years.
After the murder of George Floyd in 2020, many corporations rushed to make public commitments to racial justice. Target was among them. The company pledged to spend $2 billion with Black-owned businesses by 2025, expand partnerships with Black suppliers, and invest in programs meant to create economic opportunities for Black entrepreneurs.
For many Black consumers, those commitments mattered. Target had built a reputation as a place where Black brands could grow and where Black shoppers felt welcome. A lot of us had a relationship with that store.
But that was before the political climate shifted.
Once y’all’s president won in 2024, he demanded a rollback of diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Many companies (but not all - shout out to Costco) across the country began a full scale retreat from diversity initiatives. Target complied with Trump’s racist demands so fast that it was headspinning. The company abruptly abandoned its diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. Adding insult to injury, Target also made a $1 million donation to the presidential inauguration fund of Donald Trump.
For many of us who remembered Target’s earlier promises, the move felt like a betrayal.
The Boycott Begins
In early 2025, activists in Minneapolis, where Target is headquartered, announced a national boycott. The boycott founders/leaders are Nekima Levy Armstrong, Jaylani Hussein and Monique Cullars Doty. They argued that Target had walked away from its commitments to Black communities and that economic pressure was necessary. In my video on this topic, I discuss the timeline extensively and you can also see the details in the timeline posted here at targetfast.org.
Shortly after the boycott began, Pastor Jamal Bryant launched a separate effort: a 40-day “Target fast.” The fast was designed to align with Lent and encourage people of faith to temporarily stop shopping at the store.
So from the beginning there were two parallel efforts:
A boycott, organized by activists demanding structural changes.
A fast, organized by faith leaders as a temporary protest.
They were never the same thing.
What Were the Demands?
Activists laid out several clear demands for Target:
Honor the $2 billion pledge: Target should fulfill its commitment to the Black business community through product purchases, services, and advertising.
Fully restore DEI commitments: Target should reinstate all programs promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Pipeline community centers at 10 HBCUs: This would help establish retail business programs at Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
Deposit $250 million in Black banks: This would support Black financial institutions.
According to Pastor Bryant progress has reportedly been made on some of them. Target says it completed the $2 billion spending commitment - but with no receipts and no documentation, I supposed we’re just supposed to take them at their word…? Nah. Their word is trash in our community.
Unless they show receipts - this did not happen. Target also said they were not going to revive their DEI programs and instead they now have a new category called “belonging.” What the hell does that mean and how is it going to replace the positive impact that their Diversity Equity and Inclusion programs had for our community?
According to Pastor Bryant, Target has also made some work towards the HBCU demand but working with one HBCU on business programming is not the same as establishing pipelines of retail businesses at 10 HBCUs.
And the investment in Black banks, the demand many saw as the most important, has not materialized at all. That part pisses me off more than any of the others. We learned that Black people spent $12 million per day in the days before the boycott. Which means that they could’ve met that $250 investment pledge with just 21 days of Black community spending alone.
Three weeks of Black community spend at Target is a rounding error for them. But that $250 million investment in Black owned banks could’ve produced billions and beyond in investments, interest, and financial product benefits for our people.
In other words, none of the key issues that sparked the boycott have been fully resolved. At all.
Why the Confusion Happened
When Pastor Bryant recently announced that the “Target fast” was ending, many media outlets interpreted that statement as the end of the boycott itself. But the activists who launched the boycott say otherwise. Levy Armstrong and other organizers issued a statement that made it clear that the national boycott continues until Target restores its diversity commitments and addresses the remaining demands.
For them, hell, for me, the issue is not just about policy, it is about trust and how we wield our economic power..
The Real Lesson
What this moment really highlights is the importance of understanding how economic power works. Boycotts are not about anger alone. They are about leverage.
For decades, Black consumers have been among the most powerful economic forces in the United States. Our spending shapes industries, elevates brands, and builds corporate reputations. But that power only works when it is used intentionally.
Some people participated in the fast and have decided their protest is complete. That is their choice. As for me and my house, we are going to stick with the boycott. Target won’t be allowed to spit in my face and tell me its raining.
Where We Go From Here
The larger question is not just whether people shop at Target again. The deeper question for me is where our money and economic power goes next.
A boycott becomes transformational when it pushes us to build stronger economic ecosystems: supporting Black-owned businesses, investing in Black financial institutions, and strengthening the communities we say we care about.
If this moment teaches us anything, it’s that our collective choices matter.
And clarity, clarity about our goals, our strategies, and our power, is the first step toward using that power wisely.
Dear White America: Oh, So Now You Get It?
By Lurie Daniel Favors, Esq.
Dear White America: now you get it. Or at least, now you’re starting to.
For years, Black folks have been warning about the direction this country was heading. We have been sounding alarms about authoritarianism, about weaponized law enforcement, about white nationalist vigilantism, about the erosion of democracy. We were told we were exaggerating. Being divisive. Being dramatic.
But suddenly, a lot of people seem to be waking up. And I have to admit: I’m in a bit of an “I told you so” mood.
The Warnings That Were Ignored
Do you remember when Vice President Kamala Harris warned that a second Donald Trump presidency could lead to the military being used against American citizens? At the time, a number of media outlets and commentators dismissed those warnings as political fearmongering. They said it wasn’t realistic. They said it was campaign rhetoric.
But the warning wasn’t theoretical. It was about power. Unchecked power, to be specific.
And today we are watching events unfold that look eerily similar to what many of us were warning about all along.
The Minneapolis Killing
In January, the country watched the aftermath of shootings in Minneapolis that should’ve shaken every American to their core. The first was the shooting of Renee Good and the second was the shooting of 37-year-old Veterans Affairs ICU nurse, Alex Peretti. ICE agents killed Pretti at a community protest. By all reports, he was observing the situation and documenting it with a camera. He also had a firearm on his hip, which he was legally permitted to carry.
Remember: we’ve been told for decades that the Second Amendment guarantees Americans the right to carry firearms in public. That principle was previously defended loudly by the same political movement that now seems strangely quiet.
Because according to eyewitness video and reports, Peretti attempted to intervene when he saw a woman being shoved and pepper-sprayed by ICE agents. He stepped between her and the officers. Moments later, he was swarmed by agents, beaten severely, disarmed, and then shot ten times.
Ten.
Where were the Second Amendment activists then? Where was the NRA? Where were the voices that spent years insisting that armed citizens were a necessary safeguard against government overreach? Because suddenly, the rules seemed to change.
A Double Standard Exposed
Now we are hearing federal officials suggest that showing up to a protest with a firearm is itself evidence of violent intent, even when the weapon is legally carried.
But that logic wasn’t applied when:
Armed protesters surrounded government buildings on Jan 6, 2021
Militias pointed rifles at federal agents in Nevada
Armed men patrolled state capitols during election protests
Kyle Rittenhouse crossed state lines with a rifle
In those moments, we were told guns represented “freedom.” Now they apparently represent terrorism. So the question becomes obvious: Who is allowed to exercise these rights and who isn’t?
ICE as a Militia
What makes the Minneapolis situation even more disturbing is what followed. Minnesota law enforcement officials reported that when they attempted to investigate the shooting, they were blocked by federal agents. Even after obtaining a judicial warrant granting them access to the scene, they were still denied entry. Then the FBI Director, defying all American history and logic, basically took a position that said the 2nd Amendment is not applicable to people who carry a firearm to a protest.
Let that sink in.
State investigators with a court order were prevented from examining a shooting scene within their own jurisdiction. Meanwhile, thousands of armed federal personnel had been deployed in the area, far outnumbering, and according to this local chief of police, harassing and abusing local law enforcement.
At that point, we have to ask a difficult question:
When it comes to ICE, are we looking at federal law enforcement, or something closer to a federally sanctioned militia? Because when armed agents operate without transparency, block investigations, and answer only to political leadership, that is no longer standard policing (which, frankly, was bad enough already). That is something else. Trump now has his own army. His own private militia. And your local police, even if they agree with you, are no match for them.
The Names You Don’t Know
The tragedy is that the national conversation has focused largely on two names: Alex Peretti and Renee Good. And yes, their deaths are tragic and deserve attention. But they are not the only victims.
According to reports circulating among civil rights advocates, ICE has shot multiple people this year, including Black, Latino, and immigrant victims whose names many Americans have never heard.
Parad Le
Herbert Sanchez Dominguez
Victor Manuel Diaz
Luis Beltran
Janes Cruz
Luis Gustavo Nunes Caceres
Heraldo Lunas Campos
Nine people have reportedly been shot this year alone.
And yet the public conversation exploded only when two of the victims were white. That should make us pause. Because as activist Hope Giselle recently put it: some people didn’t wake up because they understood the system. They woke up because the system finally looked like them.
The Electoral Connection
This moment isn’t happening in a vacuum. At the same time these events are unfolding, we are seeing increased pressure on states like Minnesota to turn over voter roll data to the federal government under the banner of “election integrity.”
If that sounds familiar, it should. We saw a version of this strategy in Florida when a newly created election police unit publicly arrested Black voters who had been told they were eligible to vote. Nearly all of those cases were later dropped.
The arrests weren’t about justice. They were about intimidation. And now similar mechanisms appear to be scaling nationally, just as midterm elections approach.
The Lesson Black America Has Been Teaching
Here is the painful truth: none of this is new.
Black communities have been warning about these dynamics for decades.
We warned when Trayvon Martin was killed. We warned when Michael Brown was killed. We warned when Breonna Taylor, Alton Sterling, and so many others lost their lives. We warned about vigilante violence and the merging of state power with extremist ideology. And every time, we were told we were overreacting. Until suddenly, more Americans, more white Americans, began experiencing the consequences themselves.
A Different Path Forward
So as we move forward, there are lessons here; not just for white America, but for Black America too. We been right and we been knew. No matter how much whiteness culture demands that we shrink ourselves for the sake of their comfort, we are no longer going to do so. Y’all can keep ignoring the warnings coming from Black communities until tragedy forces everyone else to listen. Sadly, by then, it’s already too late.
The Bottom Line
Yes, America is waking up. Yes, people are starting to see what Black people have been describing for years. But the real question is this: What will America do with that knowledge?
Because if the lesson of this moment is simply to acknowledge that Black people were right, without changing the structures that produced this crisis, then we will be right back here again.
And next time, the cost will be even higher. The truth is painful, but it’s simple: had America listened to Black people from the beginning, we might not be here today. And that is the tragedy we are all living with now.
FAFO and such.