Controversial ‘Steal from Loblaws Day’ is not just illegal — it won’t foster meaningful change

Canadians are frustrated

The motivation behind both the posters and the boycott stem from growing frustration with rising grocery prices, often attributed to “greedflation” — a term describing how corporations leverage inflation to raise prices and bolster profits.

Loblaws’ record-high profits and recent corporate practices have made it, in particular, a target of consumer outrage. Loblaw chairman and president Galen G. Weston, for his part, has called the accusations of profiteering “misguided” and “untrue.”

The misconception that large corporations like Loblaws can simply absorb losses from theft without consequence is a significant misunderstanding fuelling the calls for theft as a form of advocacy.

The ripple effects of shoplifting extend far beyond the immediate loss of merchandise. While individual instances of theft might appear insignificant, they accumulate, forcing retailers to make difficult decisions such as reducing operating hours, altering product selection, increasing prices and reducing employee benefits.

These actions can unintentionally harm the very communities the organizers aim to help.

The misguided Robin Hood mentality

Another common self-justification for shoplifting from large retailers stems from the perception of redistributing wealth — from the affluent to the less fortunate. This Robin Hood mentality, while seemingly noble in intent, fails to account for the significant adverse consequences inflicted upon employees and honest consumers.

These groups face the brunt of the repercussions as businesses, in response to losses, are compelled to increase prices and reduce the quality of services in an effort to bolster security measures and mitigate financial damage.

This approach to social justice, by focusing on immediate redistribution, ignores the broader implications such actions have on the community. The direct impact on businesses is just one aspect. The ripple effects extend deeply into the lives of everyday individuals who rely on these businesses for their livelihoods and services.

When prices increase and service quality drops, it is not the corporate executives who suffer, but the average employees and consumers who find their costs rising and their shopping experiences diminished.

Moreover, this kind of mentality perpetuates a cycle of distrust and economic hardship rather than alleviating it. By undermining the rule of law and societal norms, such actions foster an environment where dishonesty becomes normalized, and mutual trust— the foundation of any stable community — is eroded.

Rather than achieving any meaningful poverty reduction, this misguided attempt at social justice often leads to tighter community divisions and heightened security environments that serve as deterrents to the welcoming, open nature of community spaces.

Rethinking corporate accountability

It is important to note that while the goal of addressing economic inequality is valid and necessary, the means of achieving it through acts of theft under the guise of wealth redistribution is counterproductive. It does not bring about true social justice but instead entrenches the very disparities and distrust it seeks to eliminate.

To genuinely assist those in need, it would be more effective to engage in sustained advocacy for systemic change, support community-enhancing initiatives, and participate actively in democratic processes that aim to reform the structures perpetuating economic inequality.