The Boycott Mania

The Ludwig von Mises Institute ^ | April 22, 2003 | William L. Anderson

[billbears]

Like the current French boycotts, all of these examples point to something that ultimately destroys any free society, not to mention a free market. The modern boycotts come about precisely because modern society has been poisoned by politics, and a politicized society is inherently not free. In such a society, every choice—and I mean every—is examined not from the perspective of the individual, but rather from the collectivist viewpoint.

BUMP!!!

[Pikachu_Dad]

So we should sell rope to the person who is going to hang us?

I don't think so.

Viva la boycott.

[billbears]

Notice that there is not a peep of dissent from the anti-France groups for this political intrusion into personal choices. Indeed, the politicians are carrying out part of the boycotters' agenda. So much for "voluntary" action.

So you see no problem with this. If you choose to not buy a product fine, but the author has a point. When it comes to the point that politicians are intruding on my choice then it is limiting the freedom we hold dear

Viva la freedom

[BilLies]

"So we should sell rope to the person who is going to hang us?
I don't think so.
Viva la boycott."
YOU ARE SO RIGHT. William Anderson provides NO reasoning for his directive re boycotts, he just thinks they are "poltical", Isn't that the point of an election or a boycott?

[DannyTN]

"Politics by its very nature is coercive, and is inimical to a free society."

No, every decision that ever gets made in any organization is political. It all comes down to who has the authority and influence to make a decision.

Politics is only evil if the tactics used are unethical. There is nothing unethical about boycotts. It is individuals exorcising their free rights and it might even become representative government excorcising the will of the people. That's ok.

Tactics like Jesse Jackson's where he is using his political base to shake down corporations for his own personal gain are unethical. However, spineless corporate leaders participated in it and allowed him to do it, instead of fighting him in the arena of politics. Eventually, companies teamed up and exposed him for what he is. That too is politics.

You can't remove politics. You play fair. You point out when others don't. And you use the tools available to you appropriately. Boycotts are just one of those tools.

[pupdog]

I've been discussing similar things in other threads lately. I don't think that the problem is so much that boycotts are inherently bad. I'm quite fond of the concept. I think the problem, more often, is that they are simply used poorly.

The Amy Grant story above is an excellent example of this. From the way it is portrayed, purchasing a CD of hers is, what, 5 steps removed from the actual abortion procedure? And how many more steps should you take it? Boycott stores that stock her CD? Boycott other business that deal with those stores? Boycott business that deal with those businesses? Do we at any point decide that we're getting so far away from what we're trying to stop that our show is greater than our effect?

If the reaction to this message is the same as any others in which I've tried to make this point, then I'll get swarmed with a "It's our right, hit 'em where it hurts, wallet power ho!" responses, which miss the fact that I'm not disagreeing with any of that. I'm saying that if they are to be used, we need to think carefully about our targets: who they are, and how we respond to their individual case. If we fired off missles the same way that we fire off boycotts, we'd take down half of our 747 fleet.

[Bahbah]

"You can't remove politics. You play fair. You point out when others don't. And you use the tools available to you appropriately. Boycotts are just one of those tools."
Agreed and it bears repeating. My choices are not being limited when I choose them myself.

[schaketo]

NEVER FORGET!

Gotta keep this alive. Share this link with all like minded family and friends. They are feeling the heat.

15000 french products that you can boycott:

http://howtobuyamerican.leethost.com/b-db-boycottfrance.shtml

[schaketo]

A short refresher course:

A list of French companies products to boycott. Some are well known, but many are not. Here goes.

It lists French products to boycott. You will probably be surprised to learn the French own everything from Wild Turkey to Car & Driver to Motel 6 to cheesy Spencer Gifts to disgusting Democrat schlock-show host Jerry Springer.

Air France
Air Liquide
Airbus
Alcatel - Based in Paris France
Allegra (Allergy Medication) - Produced by Aventis Pharmaceuticals based in Strasbourg, France
Aqualung (Including: Spirotechnique, Technisub, US Divers, and SeaQuest)
AXA Advisors
Bank of the West - Owned by BNP Paribas
Beneteau (boats)
BF Goodrich - Owned by Michelin
BIC (Razors, Pens & Lighters) - Started in 1945 by Marcel Bich. Originally based just outside of Paris. Began trading on the Paris Stock Exchange in 1972. 40.5% Publicly traded. Bich family still owns 33.5%.
Biotherm (Cosmetics)
Black Bush
Bollinger (Champagne)
Car & Driver Magazine
Cartier
Chanel
Chivas Regal (Scotch)
Christian Dior
Club Med (Vacations) - Owned in part by Paris based CDC (Caisse des Dépôts
et Consignations)
Culligan (owned by Vivendi)
Dannon (Yogurt & Dairy Foods)
DKNY - LVMH acquired 100% of Gabrielle Studio Inc., the privately owned licenser of Donna Karan trademarks back in 2001.
Dom Perignon
Durand Crystal
Elle Magazine
Essilor Optical Products
Evian
Fina Oil - Billions invested in Iraqi Oil fields
First Hawaiian Bank
George Magazine
Givenchy
Hennessy
Houghton Mifflin (books)
International Herald Tribune - 181 ave Charles-de-Gaulle - F-92521 Neuilly - FRSource:World Business Council for Sustainable Development '00 [Domain Registration], [Corporate Profile]
Jacobs Creek - Owned by Pernod Ricard since 1989
Jameson (wiskey)
Jerry Springer (talk show)
Krups (coffee and cappaccino makers)
Lancome
Le Creuset (Cookware)
L'Oreal (Health & Beauty Products)
Louis Vuitton
Marie Claire
Martel Cognac
Maybelline
Méphisto (Footwear & Apparel)
Michelin (Tires & Auto Parts) - Their phone number is: (33) 1 45 66 15 53 in France
Mikasa Crystal and Glass (purchased by ARC int'l in 2001)
Moet (Champagne)
Motel 6 - 33, Avenue du Maine- 75755 Paris Cedex 15 France
Motown Records
MP3.com
Mumms (Champagne)
Nissan (Cars) - Majority owned by Renault
Nivea
Normany Butter
Parents Magazine
Peugeot (Automobiles) - Pronounced "Pooh Joe", must be French
Pierre Cardin
Playstation Magazine
ProScan - Owned by Thomson Electronics, France
Publicis Group (Including: Saatchi & Saatchi Advertising) - Here's a French connection that'll tick ya off--a couple years ago Publicis bought the Leo Burnett Advertising agency and that agency does the "Go Army" campaign. Sickening ain't it?

RCA (televisions & electronics) - Owned by Thomson Electronics, France
Red Magazine
Red Roof Inns - Owned by the Accor group based in France
Renault (Automobiles)
Road & Track Magazine
Roquefort Cheese - All Roquefort cheese is made in France
Rowenta (Toasters, Irons, Coffee makers, etc)
Royal Canadian
Salomon (Skis)
Seagram's Gin
Sierra Software and Computer Games
Smart & Final
Sofitel (Hotels) - Owned by the Accor group based in France
Sparkletts (Water) - Owned by Danone, based in France
Spencer Gifts
Sundance Channel
Taylor Made (Golf)
Technicolor
T-Fal (Kitchenware)
The Glenlivet (Scotch
Total Gas Stations
UbiSoft (Computer Games)
Uniroyal
Uniroyal Tires - Owned by Michelin
Universal Studios (Music, Movies & Theme Parks) - Universal Studios is owned by Vivendi-Universal, headquartered in Paris France
USFilter
Veritas Group
Veuve Clicquot Champagne
Vittel
Vivendi - Vivendi Headquarters, Paris France
Wild Turkey (bourbon)
Woman's Day Magazine
Yoplait - France-based Sodiaal owns a 50% stake of Yoplait
Yves Saint Laurent
Yema watches
Zodiac Inflatable Boats
Hutchinson Tires (bicycle) www.hutchinson.fr
Mavic (bicycle) rims www.mavic.com
Zefal (bicycle accessories) www.zefal.com

Please add to the list and email to your like-minded friends.

[Pikachu_Dad]

BOSH. The pols have no say in what we boycott. Grow up.

[pupdog]

Please add to the list and email to your like-minded friends.

So you're encouraging anyone who gets this to add whatever else they personally feel fits here before forwarding it on, with no evidence demanded, and yet I'm supposed to trust its authenticity?

Tell me: can you go down this list, one by one, and tell us exactly why every single item here is listed there, without looking it up? If you can't, then what are you going to tell someone who asks you why you chose that company to boycott? Because you heard on the internet that the French owned them, and that was enough proof for you? And you want others to do the same?

Please see what I wrote in post #7. I have (I'll probably have to say this many more times) no problem with boycotts. None. But is there any reason they have to be done this haphazardly?

[billbears]

Take the current anti-French boycott, for example. Not only are private organizations urging Americans not to purchase French products, but politicians are also introducing legislation either to ban or heavily tax goods that happen to have originated from France

If laws such as these are even introduced then yes, politicians are having a say in what 'we' boycott. In effect, we are no different from liberals. We are just choosing to use the machine known as the federal government to our means instead of theirs. And I thought the general purpose of being a conservative was to limit the government's intrusion into personal lives. Silly me. It's just two sides of the same coin now

Look, you have the right to boycott what you want. Boycott 'till the cows come home for all I care. But I don't 'buy American' just because it's 'American'. I buy the best product, even if it's been priced higher to protect industries that either refuse to make a better product because of costs or industries that are affected because of unions. I could care less where it comes from. That's what capitalism is all about. To produce the best product and gain the most market share. Or at least I thought.

As to your call to grow up, I suggest that I have. I'm not the one calling on politicians to join on a boycott of an entire nation's products of their private industries just because the nation's government has made decisions that I do disagree with. Your aspect, while admirable at the personal level, is no less despicable than Jesse Jackson's when at the federal level. Boycott the live long day, but when federal, even state, politicians call for boycotts to be passed into law, a conservative would remind them that they have no place in doing so. To allow them to do that would limit our freedom of choice. To boycott or not boycott

[sheltonmac]

In such a society, every choice—and I mean every—is examined not from the perspective of the individual, but rather from the collectivist viewpoint.

Double BUMP!

[sheltonmac]

Uh, schaketo, you forgot to add the Statue of Liberty to your list of French products to boycott. And don't forget milk. Milk is pasteurized, and we all know where Louis Pasteur was from.

Please. This whole boycott thing is getting a little too...oh, what's the word...stupide.

[Texas Eagle]

Wow! I've been boycotting 99% of that list and didn't even know it! Talk about being ahead of the curve. I'm going right out tomorrow and trading in my Michelins for a good ol' set of Goodyears.

And just for good measure I am going to do what I can do to reduce the French food supply by tossing some extra snail bait into my flowerbeds.

[Nick Danger]

the author has a point. When it comes to the point that politicians are intruding on my choice then it is limiting the freedom we hold dear

That's exactly what the author wants you to think. This is a typical diatribe from the The Ludwig von Mises Institute. I'm about ready to organize a boycott of them. Here's their shtick, and I see it in every article posted from their web site:

• A few introductory paragraphs leading you to believe that they are reasonable people who know what they are talking about.
• A sudden leap into something very bad and scary, which concerns a parallel, but fundamentally unrelated phenomenon. In this case it's that grandstanding politicians have been playing to anti-French sentiments by proposing "tough sanctions" that will go nowhere in the legislature but are red meat for a screaming mob.
• A few paragraphs of sesquipedalian tergiversation that so mix up the two phenomena in an avalanche of jargon and bulls**t that unless you're careful, the Von Mises Boys will convince you that they are one and the same, or even causally related.
• The conclusion: Item B is bad. Therefore unrelated Item A is bad. In this case, politicians using law to coerce behavior is bad, therefore voluntary boycotts undertaken by citizens that involve no coercion whatsoever are bad.

I don't know what the deal is over at the Von Mises Institute, but the stuff I see posted here from their site is not just poorly reasoned crap, it's deliberately misleading crap, and quite often it sells a leftist agenda while claiming to be doing just the opposite.

I don't think those guys are what they say they are.

[RabidBartender]

They're convincing to the easily misled, it would appear.

[Pikachu_Dad]

Wrong.

The sanctions on IRAQ were essentially an enforced boycott. That was a good enforced boycott.

The same goes for the Frogs.

[Dat]

So what about trade restrictions on goods from Nazi Germany? Supposedly they made lampshades from concentration camp victims. Would not allowing goods from there be unethical?