I have often heard, “conservative,” free market” advocates, decry the use of boycotts. It has never been clear to me why some people steadfastly cling to this idea. They seem to believe that in the support of free market, “capitalism,” we should recklessly commit commerce with anyone, regardless of their motivations, or inclinations. They believe that our only, or at least primary concern when contemplating commercial enterprise, is whether the price is right, and the product, or service meets with our approval.
Why is it that they fail to consider how the revenue generated by a transaction might be used? Shouldn’t it matter if those proceeds are used to finance the destruction of everything we hold dear in the physical realm?
More and more, people, or entities that possess the ability to market a popular product, or service, realize that they might massively improve their own fortunes by enlisting the power of federal regulations. They finance corruptible, or corrupted public officials, and collude with them to plunder the resources, and liberty of their fellow Americans. Examples are obvious, and plentiful.
How ignorant are we if we ignore these tendencies? Would it not be better to consider the honesty, and integrity of individuals, industries, or companies when deciding on which to do business with?
I submit that boycotts are the essence of the free market. By choosing who to do business with, or not, based on matters of principal, rather than consumerism, we enable the virtuous to prosper, and limit the prosperity of the wicked, (to the extent of our ability.)
God bless you, Dave