No.
The reality of the world is that no company operates in a vacuum. If a political organization gains power it wouldn't have had because you willingly entered into a contract with it, you are absolutely responsible for that. Pretending otherwise is just trying to absolve yourself of the real harm that you have done.
If people were more cognizant of the effects the things they made put out into the world, we'd be living in a better one. Claiming you have no responsibility doesn't absolve you of anything.
When I buy coffee (or chocolate), I make the choice that even though I am not sure the coffee doesn't involve slave labor, I am okay with buying it. Perhaps if I'm completely unaware of the slavery involved or the ineffectiveness of no-slavery certification I can claim ignorance, but that lasts only until someone informs me.
So while I disagree with what they were literally saying (because of that tree), I think the more limited message they were (at least in my opinion) meaning has far more truth to it.
> When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
Personally, I don't find the view that "nothing is apolitical" to be silly.
any organization or person with a capacity to be aware of politics and the consequences of their actions is political.
There's nothing "apolitical" about that.
Don't change the topic. This is the sweeping assertion I was addressing.
Plenty of things are apolitical.
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
Clarifying that "all" should be "most" is a good contribution. Writing off the comment with an insult is not. Especially if you don't even offer an example of one of the "plenty of things" to justify your claim.
In a casual forum, people use casual language, like using "all" for "most". Context matters, as when the comment is in response to saying something isn't political by an overly-narrow definition of "political"
I would posit that common sense obviated the need to justify this particular claim. As in, performing your morning dump rituals, for example, isn't a "political" act. Does that really have to be spelled out?