February 28, 2025, was the day when a consumer spending boycott known as the “Economic Blackout” hit the United States. The People’s Union USA, a movement led by the People’s Union, organized a 24-hour strike that called on people to abstain from consumption for the whole day as a form of protest.

The idea of the campaign was no doubt quite radical in that it allowed for the public’s expression of opposition to the power that the corporations and the well-off have over their lives. This growing dissatisfaction is reflected in the change in consumer’s moods and corporate behavior.

The Economic Blackout took place during a time when consumer activism was on the rise with the main emphasis on the equality, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies by companies. Some of the major corporations loosened their DEI priorities after a decision by President Donald Trump to cut most of the federal DEI programs.

This move led to public protests and consumer boycotts, some of which were focused on corporations like Target that had announced a reduction in DEI commitments in January 2025. Those actions

The participants in the boycott signed the support of social media platforms to share their participation. They uploaded videos of themselves brewing coffee at home instead of going out to buy it, packing lunches for work, and buying needs in advance.

The boycott was closely related to a social media trend named “No Buy 2025,” which called for people to reduce their consumption of any products in the year.

Even though the no-shopping day went viral and became one of the most hyped topics on the internet, nobody can say for sure whether it indeed had the desired economic effect.

At noon on February 28, no retail market research firm could report any drastic decrease in consumer spending. Research showed that usually, a 5-10% difference in customer traffic can be the result of normal everyday variables like weather conditions.

Marketing experts who specialize in such matters expressed differing views on the potential effects of the boycott. Some contended that the nonviolence program might slow down the retail business for the day and, therefore, increase the chances for economic activity to be somewhat problematic in the short run.

Another critical point is the difficulty of keeping a long-term ban due to consumers’ unwillingness to stop spending on these items for long periods.

Economic Blackout yet again brings back the memories of such historical movements as Occupy Wall Street in 2011, the wave of opposition that followed in the wake of the 2008 economic recession.

Occupy Wall Street, which took place at the location of the Occupy Wall Street protests, is distinct because the Economic Blackout campaign was predominantly based on consumer inaction and the use of digital media for the organization.

People’s Union USA formally declared plans to conduct future protests, underlining the fact that the February 28 Melbourne in the Morning event just served as a place to start. The group is contemplating additional economic actions, among them are selective boycotts against particular companies and lobbying activities aimed at affecting government policies on tax and labor.

The companies’ reactions to the boycott were not the same. While some firms kept silent, others put out positive affirmations of their commitment to fair labor practices and the use of social responsibility as a guiding principle in their business operations.

Observers say that the boycott may not have had an immediate financial effect but its overall image impact on the corporations may have been enough to result in some changes on strategic business levels.

These naysayers of the Economic Blackout justify their stand on the ground that faith-driven activism can have a lasting impact only by maintaining momentum. The people who object to the boycotts are among those who are certain that similar events are just temporary solutions that will have no significant impact.

The organizers are optimistic, contrary to this, believing that the companies’ policies will thresh out along with the stakeholders’ continued involvement.

The matter of consumer boycotts is still subject of debate amid ongoing debates regarding economic injustice and the power of companies. Although the cut one day of the consumer spending will be not so great change for the economy, it is a clear signal that the consumers have started the movement of not buying if it causes social or economics change.