David Hogg needs to just go away. His 15 minutes of fame are up.

Most of his classmates seem to understand that. They’ve seemingly slunk away back to school. Instead, Hogg and his sister just signed a book deal.

I wonder what the chapter on his latest boycott will say when he finds out just how tricky it is

David Hogg, the outspoken gun control advocate who emerged from the Parkland, Florida school shooting, called for a boycott of financial institutes that invest in gun companies.

“(BlackRock) and (Vanguard Group) are two of the biggest investors in gun manufacturers; if you use them, feel free to let them know. Thanks,” Hogg wrote on Twitter on Tuesday. He followed up with hashtags for boycotting both companies and a screenshot of a list of major shareholders for a gun maker.

.@blackrock and @Vanguard_Group are two of the biggest investors in gun manufacturers; if you use them, feel free to let them know. Thanks 😉

— David Hogg 📢 (@davidhogg111) April 17, 2018

The two investment groups, BlackRock and Vanguard, own significant shares of publicly traded gun and ammo companies such as American Outdoor Brands, the holding company for Smith & Wesson; Sturm, Ruger & Company; Vista Outdoor; and Olin Corp, which owns Winchester Ammunition.

These two also own a large chunk of Twitter, which is Hogg’s preferred platform for spreading his “message.”

Vanguard is the largest shareholder for the social media network with BlackRock coming in at number four. The two companies account for more than 11 percent of Twitter’s stock.

If Hogg really wants to hurt Vanguard, wouldn’t it also stand to reason that he and his band of merry followers would jump ship from Twitter and go elsewhere? Reduced traffic on the site would reduce advertising revenues, thus devaluing the company. That would hurt both Vanguard and BlackRock’s bottom line, right?

Yet I doubt Hogg has the intestinal fortitude to actually make a stand. Not that one, at least.

Instead, he’ll keep on using Twitter because it’s convenient for him to not just spread his message but to bash anyone he disagrees with. He’s not someone who is that deeply devoted to his convictions. He just wants other people to be that devoted. He wants others to make the sacrifices, to carry out the boycotts and be the muscle.

Meanwhile, he’ll just sit on his throne of hypocrisy and order around the drones so he can feel powerful. Oh, don’t get me wrong, I think he genuinely doesn’t like guns and genuinely thinks his efforts will save lives, but that doesn’t mean he’s somehow above reproach for his hypocritical actions.

As it stands, though, he wants people who are invested in these funds to make noise, a noise he’s free to exploit without having any skin in the game in a boycott like this. After all, he won’t lose anything of any consequence in any way, shape, or form. But other people might.

Somehow, I don’t think Sparky the Wonder Spud here really gets that. Like so many other activists, he’s fine with other people suffering–even if it’s from divesting themselves from funds and losing money in the process–so long as it supposedly helps his cause.

But he’s not willing to inconvenience himself in the least.