100% until the conclusion of the last sentence. We have fundamentally and thoroughly demonstrated that individual consumer choice has almost no impact on the externalities. Recycling is probably the most egregious example of this. What fixed the CFC problem was cap and trade regulation, not consumer choice. These problem were never caused by individual consumer choice so making individual consumers choices will never be the solution. Not purchasing candy is not a component cell of collective action. A component cell of collective action would be showing up to the meetings every week and holding the discipline agreed to within the group based on material analysis of the system you are trying to change. If we don't have groups that have meetings, then choosing not to buy chocolate is going to be about as effective as praying for the child laborers. Because that's what these private individual consumer choices ultimately are - a way to self-soothe while standing on a pile of corpses. Are we going to sit here and argue that even though that group over there may be fascists organizating to maintain a white supremacist aociety, at least they're recycling?

Action must be grounded in theory, theory must be grounded in material analysis. Material analysis must be grounded in action. We have seen this loop for personal consumer boycotts in the Global North and the result has been no material change in the conditions of the workers. We have also seen how this form of moralizing works against organizing and recruitment because it actively destroys relationships. And of course it does, it's literally the same type of proselytizing that Abrahamic religions use to divide populations against each other. When we look towards other models of communicating morality, we see that it is entirely possible to integrate with people who are behaving immorally (up to a point) and that the outcomes in the short and long term are substantially better.