Economic
Boycott as Nonviolence
PressInfo #
223
July
13, 2005
Johan
Galtung, TFF Associate &
Transcend
Denne PressInfo også på
dansk
og svensk
There is much talk of boycott of US
products all over the world,
and, particularly in Germany and France, people seem
much less inclined to buy US
products after the illegal invasion of
Iraq. Interestingly, there is no talk
about boycotting English or British
products, but much talk about Israel. The backdrop
is the successful action
against the apartheid regime in South Africa,
against Deutsche Shell in the North Sea, and against
the French nuclear testing in
Polynesia; all as parts of the political
scene of the 1990s. There is space for
revival!
Some
of the many factors and dimensions to
consider
A complete boycott would
cover US consumer goods, from movies,
Coca Cola-McDonald to cars and fuel, capital goods
of all kinds particularly
military hardware, finance goods like
dollars, using Euros, Yen etc. to
denominate prices, for contracts,
for tourism, also avoiding US credit card
companies, and divesting from
US bonds and stocks, demanding that governments
do not buy and that corporations divest from US
firms, starting with the most
reprehensible corporations.
A partial
boycott would focus on any subset of the
above.
The boycott could target all
U.S. companies within all or some
branches, or a subset, presumable the worst. The
list should be published and
the conditions for getting off the list
should be clearly stated.
The boycott might or might not be
accompanied by a girlcott,
selective buying from US companies that come out
positively on the criteria used (like
no military contracts), or at
least less badly. Girlcott of companies headquartered
in other countries might also
make the point, but probably less forcefully
so.
The purpose could be to hit the
U.S. Empire as such, with its coordinated
killing all over the world; creation of enormous
gaps between misery and obscene
wealth; political manipulation and
arms twisting instead of equal participation in
world politics and the "only we
know the answers" instead of dialogue.
Or the purpose could be more
limited, like withdrawal from Iraq.
In either case the conditions for
canceling the boycott should be
stated.
Translating
the boycott into change of policies
The mechanism that might translate
boycott into a change of policy
would be the dilemma of corporate decision-makers
like the trustees/executives
between loyalty to Washington geofascism
and their own profits, which might
decrease rapidly under conditions
of boycott.
The average profit of a US
corporation is around 6 per
cent, meaning that even modest participation will
have major impact. Even a 3 per
cent decline in sales will probably activate
the dilemma, which means that an
economic boycott is feasible, even
relatively easy to organize. And everybody can
participate!
Boycott
as an expression of moral sentiments & consumer
power
Added to this comes another and
possibly much more important
mechanism. Not the decline in sales, or even in
macro-economic indicators; but boycott
as an expression of a moral
sentiment that would communicate: You are on the wrong
path, my friend,
and we will no longer give you the implicit
moral support of
buying your goods and services. When you get on
a better path,
this will all change. Let us sit down and
talk!
In other words, the power lies with
the consumers. The factors of
production are all in the hands of those with
capital; be that resources, labor,
capital itself, technology or management.
The factors flow according to supply and demand.
Labor has little choice as technology
can be used as a substitute.
But there is no substitute for willing buyers!
Likely
U.S. countermeasures
Very well knowing this the U.S.
system will of course defend itself,
and the likely counter-measures against boycott
include:
- pressure on governments to outlaw
boycott; problematic because market
freedom is a major part of neoliberal
ideology;
- corporations asking Washington
for compensation; problematic given
the deficits in the US economy and the federal budget;
- decreasing expenditure by laying
off more workers; problematic because
this option has already been used to increase profit
and collective protests are now
increasing very quickly;
- U.S. boycott of products from
boycotting countries; problematic given
U.S. consumer dependence on foreign products (such as
China) and it might stimulate
buying from US-boycotted countries.
What is clear, however, is that
governments cannot, given the
overwhelming US military power, use their economic
weapon, economic sanction. They
may be bombed, and their addresses are
relatively clear, as opposed to the
diffuseness of "customers" who
change from U.S./U.K. gas stations to others.
The
nonviolent aspects and alternatives to the
market
Economic boycott was very important
in Gandhi's way of fighting the
U.K. Empire; and any boycott should be informed by
Gandhian nonviolence. The purpose is
to reduce and eliminate the
U.S. military, economic, political and cultural choking
grip on the world, not to kill
U.S. children by hitting the U.S. economy.
An emergency relief program for
those who suffer in the U.S. under a worldwide economic
boycott could be considered.
The target is the U.S. Empire, not the U.S.
Republic.
Another major purpose is to develop
our own economic capacity and
not submit to the "logic of the market", so blind
to such major side-effects as local
initiatives, local networks and
culture, effects on the environment, etc.
For that reason it is important to
keep communication and dialogue
channels open provided those channels are used well.
Visits to the USA should be encouraged, as well as
conferences, to communicate how
the U.S. Empire is hurting the world and how
the United States herself would be the
first to benefit from its fall.
You may also want
to browse these articles, related to Galtung's
argument:
TFF Fearur Collection
On
the future of the U.S. Empire - and its end - including
also Galtung's analyses of the empire
Lester Brown, The Earth Policy
Institute
On
the link between U.S. policies and declining sales
abroad
Jan Oberg
Four
more Bush years - What exciting
opportunities!
Get
free articles & updates
Få
gratis artikler og info fra TFF
© TFF and the author 2005

Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
You are welcome to
reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but
please retain the source.
Would
you - or a friend - like to receive TFF PressInfo by
email?

|