Personal Boycotts (Divest This!)

During a decade and a half of helping fight the BDS “movement,” I’ve been asked many times if I have ever personally boycotted any person, institution or product for political reasons.  Looking back, I can’t think of a single instance when I practiced or participated in any boycott of any kind. 

Previous to my battles with anti-Israel boycotters, it actually never occurred to me to make boycotting part of my political life.  But once I saw how the boycott weapon was being misused as a bludgeon to attack Israel, it definitely became a personal decision to avoid using that weapon myself, despite many understandable requests to do so in hope of taking the fight to Israel’s foes.

The choice not to fight fire with my own boycotts directed at Israel’s enemies is definitely a personal one, and not the only reasonable option.  For example, many years ago a commenter left a story about his decision to boycott Arab shops in Jerusalem as a statement against BDS targeting Israel.  And while he and I (or he and anyone else) are free to agree or disagree with that decision, it must be pointed out that his decision was personal and thus profoundly different than the choices BDS is asking others to make.

That’s because this person chose to deprive himself of the goods he might have bought at the prices he might have received.  He also chose to announce clearly that he made the economic decision he did for political reasons.  Finally, he was willing to accept the consequences of the choice he’s made.  Those consequences might be good (word getting out that boycotts go both ways) or bad (increased hostility between Israeli Arabs and Jews).   They can also be internal (from feelings of satisfaction to discomfort regarding the targets he chose for his boycott action).  But they are consequences that he was prepared to bear.

Contrast that with the BDS “movement” that is all about getting other people to choose boycott and divestment and (although rarely mentioned by BDS advocates) bear the consequences. 

Think about it.  If a college’s branch of Students for Justice in Palestine sent out a press release saying that their members were divesting from Israel, that announcement would, at best, lead to a blog entry asking what they were divestment beyond their allowances.  But if they can claim their school has joined some perceived divestment bandwagon, well now that’s news.  Which is why they’ve worked so hard to get the school to do so and, when failing to succeed, worked even harder to get others to join them in pretending that it did.

In terms of consequences, BDS leaves that to others as well.  If their activity rubs ethnic and religious tension raw or puts intuitions in legal jeopardy, what do they care?  All they want is the “brand” of a well-known organizations associated with their squalid little political program.  And if a community is turned into a war zone or a company or other organization gets sued over the position the boycotters manipulated or bullied them to take, it’s the institution (not the BDSers) who have to deal with the wreckage.

Considering the pose the divestment cru routinely strikes with regard to their supposed courage and boldness, just once I’d like to see them put anything of their own on the line.  I recall a film where a father blasted some young people for playing at Third World radicalism with the statement “poverty is fine if you’ve got a return-trip ticket.”  But if I were to craft a similar message for BDS it would be “boycotting is easy, so long as it’s others that pay the price.”