Boycott embargo and citizen vs government

A boycott is when individuals each make a common decision regarding their own behavior. An embargo is when a government makes such a decision for its citizens. Bruce Walker notes this difference in describing San Francisco’s Unconstitutional Arizona ‘Boycott’.

If state and city governments begin to exercise an extra-constitutional power to obstruct interstate commerce by imposing political filters, then there is no logical ending point to a feud between politicians from one part of the country and those in another part of the country. State and local governments throughout the nation have duties to each other. Apolitical and open trade is one of those duties.

The danger of substituting brute state force for persuaded consumer opinion is that there is no end to the cycle of action and reaction — and no resolution to any of the underlying problems.

In other words when some California community board gets together to parade its indignation about some political views it does not like, it us putting on a face that is symbolism without substance. Rather than trust those it represents to take the proper action, it tells them what action should be taken. These are the sort of folks who talk about Limbaugh’s “mind numbed robots.”

Comments are closed.