Living in a time where there are so many opinionated people and political disagreements, it is no surprise that people in America choose to use their First Amendment rights in many ways. One of these ways is through boycotting.
Dictionary.com defines boycotting as “abstaining from, or preventing dealings with, as a means of intimidation or coercion.” It is a way for people to express their beliefs and thoughts. It is a way to protest those with whom you disagree.
While I do not believe there is anything specifically wrong with boycotting, I think some people use this as a “cop out” that is used instead of trying to solve problems. People often decide to boycott an organization or business because they disagree with a policy or political stance. However, in my opinion, in most cases this is not the best solution. The only way that boycotting can truly be successful is if there is a large group with similar beliefs willing to boycott. For example, when African Americans boycotted the buses during the Civil Rights movement, they were successful because they remained united even when it was inconvenient to do so. They caused the city of Birmingham to lose a large amount of money.
Just recently, many proclaiming Christians made a big fuss about Starbucks removing Christmas symbols from their holiday cups. They claimed that Starbucks hated Jesus and boycotted buying their products. Although I believe they had the right to do this, I don’t think they should have. If we boycotted every organization we disagreed with, how would we as Americans even live? Where could we shop, eat and buy clothes? The main problem in our society is not boycotting, but the reasons behind the boycotting.
We argue and fuss over trivial things. We have gotten to a point where we get so personal in our disagreements that we can’t even respect the person with whom we disagree. This goes for both conservatives and liberals. Liberal is defined (by Google) as one who is “open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.” If this is the case, then why can’t many liberals of our day be open to the opposing opinions of conservatives? Being conservative is defined (again, by Google) as “holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation.” The point here is that conservatives are “cautious about change.” Conservatives should still be willing to listen to new views and respect those who present them. If we as a society can act civil and listen to others, maybe there is a chance that there will be fewer disagreements and therefore fewer reasons to boycott in the first place.
We live in a time of too much opposition. You turn on the news, and many people are arguing vigorously. There seems to never be a moment of solace. Often, it seems that people boycott just because they believe they have the right to do so. They want to make a statement of their own and stand out. You don’t have to do something just because you can. Boycott if you want, but do it because you feel that it is a last-ditch effort to stand up for something that you believe in. Do it in a way that will make a difference and truly change the world in which you live. I’m not saying that you shouldn’t speak your mind or even that you shouldn’t disagree with others. I’m just saying that we should learn to agree to disagree. We should make the world a better place in a kind loving way, not in a way that is going to hurt others.
If you have a problem so significant with someone or some organization, speak to them first. Get to know why they believe what they do. Everyone has a story and an opinion. We all come from different backgrounds and situations that have formed the way we think. Maybe if we get to know each other a little better, we can work through our disagreements in a more practical way.
Written by staff writer, Ethan Dial
