FACTOID # 59: People might eat oats when they're hungry, but people from Hungary don't eat oats.
 
 Home   Encyclopedia   Statistics   Countries A-Z   Flags   Maps   Education   Forum   FAQ   About 
 
 
 
WHAT'S NEW
RECENT ARTICLES
More Recent Articles »
 

SEARCH ALL

FACTS & STATISTICS    Advanced view

Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

 

 

(* = Graphable)

 

 


Encyclopedia > Boycot
This page is about boycott as a form of protest. For other uses of the word boycott see Boycott (disambiguation).

A boycott is a refusal to buy, sell, or otherwise trade with an individual or business who is generally believed by the participants in the boycott to be doing something morally wrong.


This wrong can be stated in any terms, and is not always one that is widespread. A boycott may be oriented towards shaming offenders rather than punishing them economically, depending on its duration and scope. When long-term and widespread, a boycott is just one of many tactics in moral purchasing.


The word boycott is derived from Captain Charles Cunningham Boycott, an English evicting land agent in Ireland who was subject to a boycott organized by the Irish Land League in 1880. Boycott, an agent of Lord Erne in County Mayo, was unable to hire anyone to harvest his crops (until royalist Protestants in Ulster volunteered) and at one point needed 7,000 men to protect him. He eventually was forced to temporarily withdraw from Ireland.


Although the term itself was not coined until 1880, the practice dates back to at least 1830, when the National Negro Convention encouraged a boycott of slave-produced goods. Other instances of boycotts are their use by African Americans during the US civil rights movement; the United Farm Workers union grape and lettuce boycotts; the American boycott of British goods at the time of the American Revolution; the Indian boycott of British goods organized by Mohandas Gandhi; and the Arab League boycott of United States (under President Jimmy Carter) to participate in the 1980 Summer Olympics, held in Moscow that year (to protest the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan), the retaliatory boycott of the 1984 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles by most of the Eastern bloc, and the movement that advocated "disinvestment" in South Africa during the 1980s in opposition to that country's apartheid regime.


A boycott is normally considered a one-time affair designed to correct an outstanding single wrong. When extended for a long period of time, or as part of an overall program of awareness-raising or reforms to laws or regimes, a boycott is part of moral purchasing, and those economic or political terms are to be preferred.


Most organized consumer boycotts today are focused on long-term change of buying habits, and so fit into part of a larger political program, with many techniques that require a longer structural commitment, e.g. reform to commodity markets, or government commitment to moral purchasing, e.g. the longstanding boycott of South African businesses to protest apartheid. These stretch the meaning of a 'boycott'.


Another form of consumer boycotting is substitution for an equivalent product; for example Mecca Cola or Qibla Cola.


Today a prime target of boycotts is consumerism itself, e.g. "International Buy Nothing Day" celebrated globally on the Friday after United States.


See also

External links

  • A short discussion of what a boycott is at boycott.org (http://www.boycott.org/boycott/)
  • Baby Milk Action, the secretariat for the International Nestlé Boycott Committee (http://www.babymilkaction.org/)



  Results from FactBites:
 
Boycotting (1387 words)
In 1902 boycotting was practically destroyed in Ireland, when a number of defendants were convicted in a civil action and damages to the amont of £20,000 were given against them by a jury presided over by Chief Baron Pallas.
The lawlessness and outrages which accompanied boycotting in Ireland in the eighties seem to have impressed it with certain features which distinguish it from other forms of social ostracism, and these features coupled with the condemnation by the Holy Office have caused boycotting to be regarded as affected with a moral taint.
Since, therefore, we cannot declare off-hand that boycotting is either moral or immoral, and since moreover different instances of boycotting will be found to present very different moral considerations, in practice each case will have to be decided strictly on its merits according to the ordinary moral principles that are applicable to it.
The boycotting of Ulster Protestants (10939 words)
It can be seen therefore that boycotting in nineteenth century Ireland was part of a revolutionary struggle in which a parliamentary faction always talked peace and advocated peaceful methods while secretly allied to fanatical agrarian elements who enforced boycotts by the most cruel and outrageous of methods.
Boycotting and the larger issue of ethnic cleansing are part and parcel of the same war of attrition; the ground is being cut from under the British and Protestant population in Ulster.
A further reason for asserting that the abuse, boycotting and murder of Ulster's Protestants is in reality religious persecution, turns on the political and constitutional gains which self-proclaimed moderate and constitutional Irish nationalists have made at the expense of the Protestant victims of Provisional IRA terror.
  More results at FactBites »


 
 

COMMENTARY     


Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here
Your name
Your comments

Want to know more?
Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

 


Lesson Plans | Student Area | Student FAQ | Reviews | Press Releases |  Feeds | Contact
The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL.
Images may be subject to relevant owners' copyright.
All other elements are (c) copyright NationMaster.com 2003-5. All Rights Reserved.
Usage implies agreement with terms, 1022, m