activism-promotion, morality, ethics, boycottThere is a burgeoning movement within Facebook to start a boycott of the fast-food restaurant chain Chick-Fil-A, because of their affiliation with a venomously hateful anti-gay group. I haven’t eaten at a Chick-Fil-A for years because (1) I don’t approve of the religious message that the senior leadership of this company espouses: they are evangelical Christians who have made it company policy not to be open on Sundays, and (2) I don’t like the taste of their food.
There are similar reasons why I don’t order Domino’s Pizza: the owner is an evangelical Christian who, last I heard, was trying to build a fundamentalist community in Florida (it may even be fully constructed by now). In the case of Domino’s, I find that the food tastes better from their competition as well (both national and local pizza franchises).
In the case of both of these companies, I can argue that my distaste for the food is at least an alternate reason, over and above my distaste for the worldview of the leadership of those companies (and I even concede that I may at least partially have that distaste for the food as a result of my distaste for the leadership).
But if I didn’t dislike the taste of their respective food offerings, would it still be right not to patronize these companies? How ought this rule extend to other companies take on an overly religious (and completely unnecessary) series of policies?
I boycott companies with overtly religious stances and policies as often as I can. Why should I give my hard-earned money to Chick-fil-A, the U.S. Boy Scouts, or the Salvation Army when I know that as a corporate policy they despise me?
I think refusing to patronize companies which hold stances to which we object is pretty much the definition of “boycott.”
Of course it is. Any reason you find valid and ethical is valid. It’s not as if there’s some higher power directing your decisions or imposing some external morality to force your hand upon pain of eternal torment.
Yes, it is sufficient reason, if it can be shown that a boycott would likely have the desired effect. A boycott, if done the right way, can show to a company’s leadership that mixing their religious views with business is not in their best financial interest. And that might lead the leadership to stop whatever activity you feel is unacceptable.
In a capitalist system, the ultimate power in the power of the purse.
I disagree with @Webnet in that the companies in question are large enough that no amount of incidental promotion can possibly be in their interest. It is simply not true that “any publicity is good publicity”. I don’t know how many people who eat at Domino’s or Chick-Fil-A know how retrograde these companies are.
Even with small companies, boycotts can be quite effective. These companies are utterly dependent on their reputations for their business, and any impact to that reputation is likely to cause them to review their practices.
A boycott will not necessarily succeed, though. They usually fail where the majority of the population is on the company’s side; minority interests are unlikely to succeed in boycotting popular corporations. But when a company could face significant shame is having their practices exposed to the public, boycotts are usually at least partially successful, as in the recent case of Target giving money to rabidly anti-LGBT candidates.
Obsolutely! When you give someone your business you are giving them money that they will then use to pursue their goals. When you seriously disagree with those goals you need to stop giving them your money and hopefully convince others to do likewise.
Help those whom you want to succeed. Your money is the help they need.
Absolutely! Why in the world should you give your money to people who are going to use it for things you detest?
I've boycotted many companies for all kinds of reasons. For instance:
I doubt my refusal to buy their products has changed any of these companies' policies, but at least I have the satisfaction of not giving money to people I consider scumbags.
Based on what I’ve heard, companies welcome boycotting because it gets people talking about their company and products, whether good or bad. Merely by posting here you’ve now promoted the names of Chick-Fil-A and Dominos in whoever reads this post. Spreading the word of a boycott will only do the same thing. Should you decide not to eat there for whatever the reason, the biggest damage you can do to them is to not tell anyone you don’t eat their food.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.