I am kind of fascinated by boycotts, or rather, why people choose to boycott at specific times and not others, especially living in a country that has been boycotted. Recently I've been thinking about Yemen, thousands of Yemenis killed by US and British made weapons,
yet no boycott of US or UK. No substantial boycott of China despite internment of millions of Uighur Muslims. Remember that boycott of GAP, but not particularly other brands equally culpable in sweatshop labour? Trump's de facto boycott of Muslim countries, done as a policy
instrument, yet no boycott of US goods. Every boycott, or potential boycott is different, but the egregiousness of the original act certainly does not seem to be the soul component in allowing something to cross the boycott threshold. I think what's theoretically interesting,
is that the capacity of boycott is pragmatically limited. If we boycotted every country based on ethical concerns, everything could be boycotted, quite literally, which would be catastrophic given global interconnectedness. And I say this as a general supporter of BDS.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
