LETTER | Boycott is a potent emotional decision

LETTER | A growing trend in conscious consumerism has been observed in the world market in recent years, where people are choosing to match their values with the products they buy.

A potent example of this phenomenon is the boycott, a tactic that goes beyond conventional market dynamics to express social and political sentiment.

When it comes to the Palestinian cause, choosing to boycott particular goods, businesses or services is usually a deeply emotional decision motivated by a desire to show support for the suffering of the Palestinian people rather than just being an economic one.

Opponents of the boycott movement contend that reason should prevail over emotion in this endeavour.

What the opponents fail to mention is that, as of Dec 21, the most recent estimates from the global partnership for the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) indicate that over 20,000 people have died and that the entire population of the Gaza Strip is at imminent risk of starvation.

Maybe because they are biased against those who support Palestine, the sceptics believe that the boycott targets are chosen merely on the basis of their opinions and presumptions.

Fundamentally, a boycott is an emotional reaction to a perceived injustice. The Palestinian cause evokes strong feelings in people due to a protracted history of conflict, displacement and human rights abuses.

The decision to boycott is motivated by an emotional connection to the cause, which transforms it into a concrete manifestation of solidarity and a peaceful form of resistance.

Furthermore, studies have proven that consumers' purchase decisions are usually emotionally driven rather than rational. Every rational person with strong human values will decide to stand in solidarity with the oppressed Palestinians at this desperate time. It is perfectly human to be emotional.

Boycotts are an example of consumer activism, which is a potent force that can affect business practices and laws.

In addition to voicing their disapproval, people who choose to boycott goods or businesses linked to alleged violations of human rights are also actively contributing to the change movement.

This type of activism is based on the idea that moral shifts can result from economic pressure, forcing businesses to re-evaluate their procedures and guidelines.

The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement has gained significant international attention, with numerous activists supporting the Palestinian cause.

Applying financial pressure

Boycotting goods or businesses associated with Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory is viewed as a means of applying financial pressure to businesses known to be involved or supported by Israel.

The boycott gains more traction because of the emotional attachment to the cause, which transforms it into a symbolic act of resistance against injustice.

As consumers become increasingly socially conscious, corporations are compelled to re-evaluate their business practices and social responsibilities.

The emotional dimension of the boycott places added pressure on companies to demonstrate ethical behaviour and alignment with values that resonate with their customer base.

This shift in consumer expectations is reshaping corporate landscapes, forcing companies to prioritise not only profit but also principles.

Boycotting, especially in the context of the Palestinian cause, is far more than a simple economic decision. It is the least of what we, the consumers, can do to make it to the Palestinians.

In an era where consumers seek to align their purchasing power with their values, the impact of such emotional decisions reverberates beyond individual choices, influencing corporate behaviour and global narratives.

Since neutrality is just another term for endorsing the oppressor, we must take a stand in support of the oppressed.

The boycott, rooted in passion and principles, stands as a testament to the power of individuals to effect change and advocate for a more just world.

Writer is a committee member of the Malaysian Association of Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Researchers (Salam) and a lecturer at Universiti Malaysia Perlis.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.