In my opinion, there may be a number of reasons that a person may want to boycott, but regardless of the reason, I believe that boycotts in all their forms are good. First, a boycott may be motivated by the desire to incite change. A person may choose to not utilize a product or service, for example, with the intent that his or her non-utilization will have an influence on the provider(s) of that product or service. Of course, if such a boycott is to be effective, then either the extent of the boycott of a single person, or the combined boycotts of numerous people, must be sufficient to cause detriment in some form to the provider(s).
It seems to me that unless an individual is in a unique position of enormous power (perhaps as the distributor or manufacturer of a particular product that is necessary for the continued production of other goods), then boycotts of this nature are not likely to be terribly effective, at least as a means of inciting change. Especially considering the massive and complex world economy of today, my guess is that a huge number of boycotters would be necessary to impact any given product or service, unless it is one that is restricted to a rather small scale or a limited number of consumers.
Even so, there are other motivations to boycott besides the desire to incite change. For example, for several years, I have been boycotting all of the products owned, manufactured, financed, or otherwise economically supported by the large parent corporation Altria Group (formerly Philip Morris Companies, Inc.). The umbrella of this company includes quite a large number of other companies, including (but definitely not limited to) Marlboro, Miller, Kraft Foods, Nabisco, Planter’s, Post Cereals, Oscar Mayer, and Tombstone. (It should be noted in fairness that Altria Group owns less than 100% of its food subsidiaries and affiliates.) In boycotting Altria Group, I refuse to knowingly and willingly purchase any of the products made by these companies. I am well aware that my solitary boycott is likely to have no influence whatsoever on the sales of these items, on the profits generated by them, or on public opinion regarding them.
I am not boycotting Altria Group to incite change. The reason for my boycott is to fulfill a personal desire to remove myself from the chain of support. Although my actions will clearly not cause detriment to these companies, at least I can be happy with myself for not participating in their success. It is relevant also to address the reason I feel a boycott of Altria Group is justified at all. Namely, my reason is that Philip Morris is the largest distributor of tobacco in the United States and one of the largest in the world. My lengthy arguments against the sale of addictive products would be most appropriately addressed in another blog, so they will not be found here.
A common critique of my boycott is that there are many other companies that manufacture and distribute tobacco (and other addictive substances). Why, my critics ask, should I single out Altria Group without boycotting all of the other corporations? The type of boycott that I have undertaken is a “representative boycott.” This is to say that I have selected Altria Group as a representative of all of the tobacco distributors in the world. Some may argue that this is rather unfair, but my primary reason for doing so is that a completely inclusive boycott would be totally impractical. It is important for me to do something that I believe in, but I must do this within the realm of feasibility. The Altria Group boycott alone has forced me to exclude quite a few food products from my diet, and I have no interest in starving to death. Like most Americans, I am a consumer, and I will likely continue to consume, so I have limited my abstinence of support to the corporations that I feel carry the most weight (after all, no other company has invested more money in the lobbying of lawmakers in Washington).
In summary, I would like to say that I am not trying to recruit fellow Altria Group boycotters; if you choose to do so, it should be on your own accord. The ultimate point I want to make is that potential boycotters should not be discouraged by the prospect that their actions will not have any influence on the object(s) of their boycott, because in all likelihood, their actions probably will not have any influence. But regardless of the influence or lack thereof, a boycott can be personally satisfying, and I encourage anyone with the inclination to at least give it a try.
