In the last couple of months, there have been widespread but random calls to boycott various retailers and other businesses in response to reports that they have changed their approach to DEI.
I get it. We feel like we should do something NOW and one thing we can do is use our economic power to protect and effect change.
These calls for boycotts often invoke the successful boycotts of the civil rights era and beyond – most notably, the 1955 Montgomery Bus Boycott, the United Farm Workers’ five-year Delano Grape Boycott, led by Cesar Chavez, that began in 1965, the anti-apartheid boycotts in the 70s and 80s.
But here’s the thing. Those boycotts were successful, not only because they were well-organized and skillfully carried out over months and years, but because they also had very limited, specific, and identifiable goals. They weren’t simply protests AGAINST something … They tactically pressured FOR something.
A boycott without a goal is just a protest. And just protesting is not a movement.
The bus boycott wasn’t just a protest against segregation in America or even in Alabama or Montgomery. Its stated goal was more limited: to desegregate the Montgomery city buses.
The grape boycott’s purpose was to obtain a collective bargaining agreement for thousands of farm workers. Again, very limited, but critically important.
The purpose of the anti-apartheid boycotts was to dismantle the apartheid system in South Africa. A somewhat larger goal than the other boycotts, but still very specific.
The aims of all three boycotts were clear, narrow and attainable. And they were explicitly stated from the beginning so that everyone, including the boycotts’ targets, knew what the purpose was and how they could make the boycotts stop when they became too much of a burden.
So, when folks call for boycotts against various retailers and businesses, my first question is “For what … And then what?”
I ask the question not to be dismissive or to suggest that such boycotts can’t be useful, but to encourage more thoughtful strategic thinking, planning, and action before embarking on them.
What is the point of the boycott? What exactly are you trying to get the company to do or stop doing? How will this be communicated to the company and public? How will the company know what steps it needs to take to meet the terms of the boycott? And how will the company and public and you know if and when you have succeeded?
Boycotts aimed simply at punishing a company for acts we don’t like are not useful.
Boycotting a business because of news reports that it rolled back its DEI activity is not effective activism.
There needs to be a stated ask and deliverable and an objective measure for determining whether the boycott has met its goal.
But first, we must carefully research what we’re actually calling into question: what were those policies, what were the impacts, what steps did the company take to roll them back, and what will be the real-world impact of that decision moving forward?
Next, and very important, we should ask what do we want them to do NOW? “Restore DEI” isn’t a thing. There needs to be defineable action steps and an expressly stated and measurable desired outcome specific to that company – and it must be something the company can actually do.
And, finally, the boycott must be carefully and narrowly tailored to apply pressure to the exact spot that will cause enough discomfort to the company that it will want/need to relieve that pain by taking the action the boycott demands.
When all of that happens, the boycott will have achieved its goal. And a boycott that achieves its goal is not only true progress, it is tremendously empowering, feeding the soul and steeling the movement for future action.
But to do this, we must know exactly what that prize is, carefully craft our words and actions to achieve it, and avoid the temptation to engage in performative acts that may feel good but won’t bring us the change we seek.
There are many lessons to be learned from the 20th century civil rights movement. One of the most important of those is the need to be clear-eyed and strategic, not reactionary, and to always keep our eyes on the prize.