While I'm an unapologetic supporter and defender of Free
Enterprise, fully participate in it myself and believe that the
vast majority of companies make their money in ways that greatly
benefit and add value to the general populace, that doesn't mean
that just because a business exists that it always acts in
acceptable and appropriate ways.
Whether committing ongoing, horrible customer service, mistreating
workers or animals during its daily routine, or even continually
not honoring agreements yet being too big to successfully go after
personally, there's no reason people have to stand by and accept
that behavior as "just the way it is."
And, the fact is, even if
the "disturbing thing" they are doing is legal, we still might
consider it to be unsavory, unethical or immoral to the point that
we'd like to influence the company to cease that particular
practice or practices.
Fortunately, there is a way to influence businesses - even the
giant ones - to mend their ways. And, this way is indeed savory,
ethical and moral.
In a free society; i.e. where the rights of the individual reign
supreme (which, as history has proved, happens to result in a
higher standard of living for the masses), one of the most
effective forms of peaceful yet powerful change is boycotting.
This
is where large numbers of people *voluntarily* (the key word) agree
to cease doing business with a company until such company makes
changes that would result in the boycotters once again being able
to justify doing business with it.
I would call this an excellent form of Winning Without
Intimidation on a group level.
Here's why:
1. No one's rights have been infringed upon
The offending company does not have to adjust its ways of doing
business should it choose not to.
If it doesn't mind losing the
business of the boycotters (or, feel that having the boycotters'
business is not worth the trouble to change its ways, or that it
can hold out until the boycotters "lose their will to continue" the
boycott), that is its choice. The company's rights have not been
usurped through the force of violence or government.
(Note: In a free society, individuals have the right to live their
lives and conduct their business as they see fit, providing they
don't infringe upon the rights of anyone else to do the same. While
this definition has never been 100 percent honored in the U.S.
since inception - first and, by far, foremost with the monstrous
institution of slavery, and now with more and more senseless
regulatory policy that cripples everyone from rich to poor - it is
still the "gold standard to which we aspire.)
2. It's easier and faster to implement than ever before
Technology rocks when calling for a boycott.
Yes, like any
Universal Law that can be used for good or evil, technology - in
this case we're talking about the Internet - should be handled with
care and discretion. Many people use this technology to dishonestly
influence others.
It's a shame, but that's life and we need to be
aware of it. Fortunately, there are protections, such as websites
like Snopes.com, where you can check out
rumors before clicking the "send" button and filling up your
friends' email inboxes with untruths.
| Better to err on the side of caution, while leaving the door open for new information |
Important! . . . Checking on Snopes.com is not enough if you plan
to participate in a boycott that you are not originating (and don't
know the facts first-hand).
Recently, something came up where I
very nearly participated in a boycott and planned to publicize it.
It dealt with a cause in which I truly believe. The evidence was
compelling and nowhere on the Internet did I find any refutation.
So, I personally called the corporation that was being targeted and
spoke with its public relations manager. He directed me to some
information that - while certainly not conclusive - proved to me
that I knew it would take further research before I could honestly
claim to "know enough facts" to participate in potential harming
the company.
Of course, I also spoke with a representative of the organization
calling for the boycott and, while I very much appreciated their
point of view, again, it simply wasn't conclusive. (My opinion is
that it is better to err on the side of caution so as not to
unintentionally commit gossip, while still leaving the door open to
new information and future action.)
When there is a boycott request you truly believe in (or wish to
organize yourself), and know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the
cause is just and the facts support it, you can quickly and
effectively make use of this amazing technology in order to get the
word out faster and to more people than would have been imaginable
years earlier (yet, even then, boycotts worked).
Of course, in a
local situation, while the Internet may be helpful, word of mouth
person-to-person can also work very effectively.
3. It is measurable
You know if any changes have taken place or are in the process of
taking place. As Thom Scott Thom Scott says, "What
can be measured, can be improved." Monitoring the process allows
for communication between boycotters, and between boycotters and
the offending party.
We've seen boycotting work numerous times in our past. Sometimes we
agree with things people boycott for and other times we don't. When
we don't, we can choose to communicate our disagreement, as well.
We've also seen boycotting fail.
Remember, a boycott is not a
guarantee of getting one's way, but it certainly increases the
chances, and respects everyone's rights in the process.