boycotts have always been very difficult to pull off and fail virtually every time.
For pros and cons a good place to start is Rules for Radicals, published in 1971 by the great community organizer Saul Alinsky. He has many stories to illustrate but in summary writes regarding boycotts:
Once the battle is joined and a tactic is employed, it is important that the conflict not be carried on over too long a time. …There are many reasons of human experience arguing for this point. I cannot repeat too often that a conflict that drags on too long becomes a drag. The same universality applies for a tactic or for any other specific action.
Among the reasons is the simple fact that human beings can sustain an interest in a particular subject only over a limited period of time. The concentration, the emotional fervor, even the physical energy, a particular experience that is exciting, challenging, and inviting, can last just so long — this is true of the gamut of human behavior, from sex to conflict. After a period of time it becomes monotonous, repetitive, an emotional treadmill, and worse than anything else a bore. From the moment the tactician engages in conflict, his enemy is time.
BTW Alinsky (b.1909) wrote this book to try to stop baby boomers from being dumb and fouling everything up. I am not a huge fan of the intergenerational model of class conflict but I think it is interesting.
It’s a difficult issue. I’m definitely not suggesting we shouldn’t attempt boycotting, just that our tactics need to change for modernity. As you said, they are already difficult to accomplish effectively. Even just 50 years ago, you and your whole town stopped buying from Joe’s Wares could work. Today, boycotting now that Joe’s Wares can make sales online means your town is never getting rid of him, regardless of whether you all never buy from him and actively dissuade others from doing so.
Moreso if Joe’s Wares knows they can buy reviews and other scummy tactics to make them look more worthwhile than they are.
That’s an interesting snippit, definitely something that feels true to society today still. Similar to how I said is disheartening in how many people are apathetic to a cause, that’s a very apt description to what exactly about it becomes so tiring.
boycotts have always been very difficult to pull off and fail virtually every time.
For pros and cons a good place to start is Rules for Radicals, published in 1971 by the great community organizer Saul Alinsky. He has many stories to illustrate but in summary writes regarding boycotts:
BTW Alinsky (b.1909) wrote this book to try to stop baby boomers from being dumb and fouling everything up. I am not a huge fan of the intergenerational model of class conflict but I think it is interesting.
It’s a difficult issue. I’m definitely not suggesting we shouldn’t attempt boycotting, just that our tactics need to change for modernity. As you said, they are already difficult to accomplish effectively. Even just 50 years ago, you and your whole town stopped buying from Joe’s Wares could work. Today, boycotting now that Joe’s Wares can make sales online means your town is never getting rid of him, regardless of whether you all never buy from him and actively dissuade others from doing so.
Moreso if Joe’s Wares knows they can buy reviews and other scummy tactics to make them look more worthwhile than they are.
That’s an interesting snippit, definitely something that feels true to society today still. Similar to how I said is disheartening in how many people are apathetic to a cause, that’s a very apt description to what exactly about it becomes so tiring.