FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

The Utility of Boycotts

As hit and miss as boycotts can be, some of them actually work.  By most accounts, it was the economic pressure exerted upon South Africa by the world community that was instrumental in convincing the regime to abandon its apartheid policy.

In 1977, the AFL-CIO launched a national boycott of Coors beer in response to the brewery’s anti-labor, anti-gay, anti-minority policies.  Was it successful?  Predictably, Coors declared it wasn’t.  Following the lead of companies that are shut down by strikes, but who claim, almost reflexively, that the strike, no matter how lengthy or debilitating, had no negative effect whatever, Coors pretended the boycott was harmless.

But there was ample evidence to the contrary.  While the boycott didn’t result in a miracle—turning Coors from a bigoted, reactionary company (it was Papa Joe Coors who provided the seed money for the right-wing Heritage Foundation) into an open-minded, progressive one—it did change some things.

Undeniably, the boycott resulted in loss of stature and revenue for the company.  In addition to hundreds of restaurants and bars refusing to serve Coors beer, Hollywood publicly threw its support behind the boycott.  Actor Paul Newman not only renounced Coors, he publicly declared that he was switching to Budweiser.  Ultimately, the boycott caused Coors to lower its profile and, in fact, to agree to adopt more enlightened policies regarding hiring policies.

Another example was the AWPPW’s (Assoc. of Western Pulp and Paper Workers) boycott of Scott Paper, spanning 1978-79.  Launched as part of a protracted labor dispute, the Scott boycott turned out to be very successful campaign, particularly on the West Coast.  Thirty years later people are still talking about it.

Indeed, the Scott boycott was so “successful,” a couple of the company’s paper mills were forced to shut down temporarily, resulting in hundreds of union workers losing their jobs.  (File that under the Law of Unintended Consequences.)

Boycotts that are too ambitious or all-encompassing usually don’t work.  For example, if the AFL-CIO, as part of its organizing drive, were to mount a boycott against Wal-Mart (asking people not to shop there), the effort would almost certainly fail.  Expecting people to stay out of Wal-Mart—to not set foot in the store until the boycott is lifted—is strategically sound, but tactically flawed.

However, if the AFL-CIO were to launch a boycott of the tires sold through Wal-Mart’s automotive division, the results might be different.  Arguably, the tire manufacturer, responding to a precipitous drop in sales, would exert enormous pressure on the giant retailer to get off the dime.

The same principle would apply to important product lines of virtually any large retailer.  The reason the Coors and Scott Paper boycotts succeeded was because they were narrowly focused campaigns:  one product, one target.  But in order to move a retailer, you don’t go after the retailer; you go after the influential venders of that retailer.

As to the efficacy of potential boycotts, union membership itself presents one of those classic glass-half-filled vs. glass-half-empty dilemmas.  Yes, union membership has shrunk dramatically; yes, union members don’t seem to be as “committed” as they once were (as in the 1930s); and, yes, solidarity isn’t as conspicuous as it once was.

But while we all lament the fact that union membership was once a mighty 35-percent, back in the 1950s, and now hovers at approximately one-third that (as of 2008, New York was highest, with 24.9-percent union membership; North Carolina was lowest, with 3.5-percent), comparative percentages can be misleading, especially for the purposes of national boycotts.

Consider:  In 1983, with national membership at 20.1-percent, there were 17.7 union members in the U.S.  Today, with membership at only 12.4-percent, there are 16.1 million union members.

Instead of dwelling on that 7+-percent drop, we should focus instead on those 16 million dues-paying members who are out there right now, with their shoulders to the wheel.  Shrinking numbers or not, 16 million of anything is formidable.

As modestly successful as those Coors and Scott boycotts were, there’s a remarkable new propaganda tool available today that wasn’t available back in the 1970s, one that could make all the difference in the world:  The Internet.

If even half of those 16 million union members got involved, think of the leverage they’d have in a boycott.  Think what 8 million engaged union members could do on the Internet, particularly if the boycott were focused, laser-like, on one product, one manufacturer, one small but significant portion of the market, rather than a scatter-gun approach.

Talk can take you only so far.  That’s because the distance talk can travel pales in comparison to the distance money can travel.  Discussion, debates, even threats, have built-in limitations that money doesn’t, which is one reason strikes are (or can be) so effective.  Unlike “talk,” a strike is the only thing that directly cuts into management’s ability to make a profit.

If organized labor wants to change the contour of the country, there’s only one way to do it:  by adding new union members to the rosters.  And to achieve that, labor needs to exert economic rather than ideological pressure.  One way of doing that is through boycotts.  Also, Big Labor probably needs to pare down—rather than load up—its national agenda.

Think of every cliché you ever heard:  a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, slow and steady wins the race, one step at a time, the journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step, etc., etc.  Weirdly, as corny and annoying as those aphorisms are, they’re all true.

DAVID MACARAY, a Los Angeles playwright (“Larva Boy,” “Americana”) and writer, was a former union rep.  He can be reached at dmacaray@earthlink.net

 

 

 

More articles by:

David Macaray is a playwright and author. His newest book is How To Win Friends and Avoid Sacred Cows.  He can be reached at dmacaray@gmail.com

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
April 07, 2020
Joel McCleary – Mark Medish
Paradigm Shift by Pandemic
Matt Smith
Amazon Retaliation: Workers Striking Back
Kenneth Surin
What The President Said (About The Plague)
Patrick Cockburn
The Chaotic Government Response to COVID-19 Resembles the Failures of 1914
Marshall Auerback
The Coronavirus Pandemic Has Opened the Curtains on the World’s Next Economic Model
Vijay Prashad, Paola Estrada, Ana Maldonado, and Zoe PC
Trump Sends Gun Boats to Venezuela While the World Partners to Fight a Deadly Pandemic
Jeremy Lent
Coronavirus Spells the End of the Neoliberal Era. What’s Next?
Dean Baker
The Big Hit: COVID-19 and the Economy
Nino Pagliccia
A Simple Democratic Transition Framework for Venezuela: End All “Sanctions”
Colin Todhunter
Locked Down and Locking in the New Global Order
Robert Fisk
Biden Says He ‘Doesn’t Have Enough Information’ on Iran to Have a Vew. How Odd, He Negotiated the Nuclear Deal
Wim Laven
GOP’s Achievement is Now on Display
Binoy Kampmark
Boastful Pay Cuts: the Coronavirus Incentive
Dave Lindorff
It’s Spring and I’ve Turned 71 in a Pandemic-Induced Recession
Steve Brown
FLASH! Trump Just Endorsed Bernie’s Medicare-For-All Health Plan
Marc Haggerty
Class and COVID-19: Those Who Can and Those Who Can’t
Manuel García, Jr.
A Reply to Jeffrey St. Clair’s “Strange Things Happening Every Day”
George Wuerthner
How Fuel Breaks Fuel Fires
Marshall Sahlins
Election 2020
April 06, 2020
Richard D. Wolff
COVID-19 and the Failures of Capitalism
W. T. Whitney
Donald Trump, Capitalism, and Letting Them Die
Cesar Chelala
Cuba’s Promising Approach to Cancer
David A. Schultz
Camus and Kübler-Ross in a Time of COVID-19 and Trump
Nomi Prins 
Wall Street Wins, Again: Bailouts in the Time of Coronavirus
Dean Baker
Getting to Medicare-for-All, Eventually
Dave Lindorff
Neither Pandemic Nor Economic Collapse is Going to Be a Short-Lived Crisis
Sonali Kolhatkar
Capitalism in America Has Dropped the Mask: Its Face is Cruel and Selfish
Ralph Nader
Trump’s 7 Pro-Contagion Reversals Increase the Coronavirus Toll
David Swanson
A Department of Actual Defense in a Time of Coronavirus
Ellen Brown
Was the Fed Just Nationalized?
Jeff Birkenstein
Postcards From Trump
Nick Licata
Authoritarian Leaders Rejected the Danger of a COVID-19 Pandemic Because It Challenged Their Image
Kathy Kelly
“He’s Got Eight Numbers, Just Like Everybody Else”
Graham Peebles
Change Love and the Need for Unity
Kim C. Domenico
Can We Transform Fear to Strength In A Time of Pandemic?
Mike Garrity
Alliance for the Wild Rockies Files Lawsuit to Stop Logging and Burning Project in Rocky Mountain Front Inventoried Roadless Area
Stephen Cooper
“The Soul Syndicate members dem, dem are all icons”: an Interview with Tony Chin
Weekend Edition
April 03, 2020
Friday - Sunday
Omar Shaban
Gaza’s New Conflict: COVID-19
Rob Urie
Work, Crisis and Pandemic
John Whitlow
Slumlord Capitalism v. Global Pandemic
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Strange Things Happening Every Day
Jonathan Cook
The Bigger Picture is Hiding Behind a Virus
Paul Street
Silver Linings Amidst the Capitalist Coronavirus Crisis
Evaggelos Vallianatos
The Control of Nature
Louis Proyect
COVID-19 and the “Just-in-Time” Supply Chain: Why Hospitals Ran Out of Ventilators and Grocery Stores Ran Out of Toilet Paper
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail