Would you join in a tourism boycott?
Mar 15th, 2006, 07:20 AM
#41
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, by that thinking you would need to boycott most of the world over human rights' issues.
My thinking is that you should work locally in our states' system. You can do more if you are active, then if you practice negative behavior, like boycotts. Boycotts seldom hurt the focus of the target behavior group, nor do they effect law change needed in a direct manner, as lobbying etc. does. If that issue is more "resolved" in your state, work on one that isn't.
The number of people who feel strongly about this that would boycott, aren't the same people who are treking to S. Dakota much anyway. LOL! Your numbers are just not "there".
My thinking is that you should work locally in our states' system. You can do more if you are active, then if you practice negative behavior, like boycotts. Boycotts seldom hurt the focus of the target behavior group, nor do they effect law change needed in a direct manner, as lobbying etc. does. If that issue is more "resolved" in your state, work on one that isn't.
The number of people who feel strongly about this that would boycott, aren't the same people who are treking to S. Dakota much anyway. LOL! Your numbers are just not "there".
Mar 15th, 2006, 07:33 AM
#43
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I purchase goods and services, I often try and maintain a sense of social consciousness.
There are a few states that I purposefully haven't spent money in (that I know of) in quite some time and I try to buy goods made in countries with fair trade and fair labor practices. That can be difficult with so much coming in from China but I do always check labels and try to find an alternative even if it costs more.
There are a few states that I purposefully haven't spent money in (that I know of) in quite some time and I try to buy goods made in countries with fair trade and fair labor practices. That can be difficult with so much coming in from China but I do always check labels and try to find an alternative even if it costs more.
Mar 15th, 2006, 07:58 AM
#44
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boycotts almost never work. Witness the American boycott of Cuba, which has served to galvanize Castro's hold over that island's population. The contempt many on the American Right shower on France and the French people is not only pointless and embarrasing but has had no effect on tourism to France. As South Dakota has but one well-known tourist site, Mount Rushmore, threats by those angered by South Dakota's change of abortion law are making an empty gesture when they hint at boycotting the state. They only make themselves look absurd. No, I would never join in a tourism boycott.
Mar 15th, 2006, 08:22 AM
#45
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, I would not boycott a state, whether or not I like what its legislature does.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that the South Dakota legislature bans Santa Claus... every child in the state will be told, when entering first grade, that there is no Santa Claus.
Now further assume that the rest of the nation is so appalled that the SD tourism industry is cut in half.
Now that would be a perfect opportunity for me to visit Mt Rushmore and the Black Hills... prices would probably be slashed, nothing would be crowded, etc.
What if I am appalled by the anti-Santa law? Well, the crippling boycott has alrady spread the message... whatever happens will happen whether I stay or go... so I might as well go and enjoy myself, the legislature already got the message, and one tourist, more or less makes no difference.
What if everybody had the same idea? Then there would be no boycott at all, and the only one hurt would be me.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that the South Dakota legislature bans Santa Claus... every child in the state will be told, when entering first grade, that there is no Santa Claus.
Now further assume that the rest of the nation is so appalled that the SD tourism industry is cut in half.
Now that would be a perfect opportunity for me to visit Mt Rushmore and the Black Hills... prices would probably be slashed, nothing would be crowded, etc.
What if I am appalled by the anti-Santa law? Well, the crippling boycott has alrady spread the message... whatever happens will happen whether I stay or go... so I might as well go and enjoy myself, the legislature already got the message, and one tourist, more or less makes no difference.
What if everybody had the same idea? Then there would be no boycott at all, and the only one hurt would be me.
Mar 15th, 2006, 08:23 AM
#46
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 16,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
South Dakota has WAY more than Rushmore--the Badlands, all the caves (Jewel national monument and Wind national park), Custer state park, etc. I bet a boycott would have an effect on the economy of SD, but not on the minds of the lawmakers.
Mar 15th, 2006, 08:30 AM
#48
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There may be individual areas that would feel the lost of the tourist dollar, but the State as a whole, probably would not be impacted much. If fact, in some areas, they may even rejoice that they don't have those gawking tourists all over the place.
And if the Legislators did change their minds because of a boycott, then, wouldn't they be putting Money ahead of a baby's life? Do you really think they would see that dollars were more important than what they feel is moral?
And if the Legislators did change their minds because of a boycott, then, wouldn't they be putting Money ahead of a baby's life? Do you really think they would see that dollars were more important than what they feel is moral?
Mar 15th, 2006, 08:36 AM
#49
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More thoughts... let's say the Santa Claus boycott fizzles out... the loss in business by a pro-Santa boycott is exactly cancelled out by supporters of the Santa boycott showing their support... the state would suffer no net loss... the only ones inconvenienced would be the boycotters...
Besides, Mount Rushmore doesn't care if I visit or not, nor does Mt Rushmore influence politics in the state... in fact, Mount Rushmore doesn't have political opinions and cannot be argued with.
Besides, Mount Rushmore doesn't care if I visit or not, nor does Mt Rushmore influence politics in the state... in fact, Mount Rushmore doesn't have political opinions and cannot be argued with.
Mar 15th, 2006, 08:38 AM
#50
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<<By the way, we don't "boycott" Cuba--we're threatened with arrest by our own government if we chose to visit!>>>
Technically, no... you just can't spend dollars there, but it's not illegal to stand on Cuban soil.
>>>
Technically, no... you just can't spend dollars there, but it's not illegal to stand on Cuban soil.
>>>
Mar 15th, 2006, 08:43 AM
#51
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<< I bet a boycott would have an effect on the economy of SD, but not on the minds of the lawmakers.>>>
It would affect the state economy only if it were sizable... many people who disagree with a political decision of the legislature would not personally inconvenience themselves... by avoiding what they otherwise would want to visit.
People don't necessarily shun each other because of political differences of opinion... if we did that, we wouldn't have any friends at all...
By the same logic, we don't avoid a state full of people because we disagree with some of them over their politics or their religion.
It would affect the state economy only if it were sizable... many people who disagree with a political decision of the legislature would not personally inconvenience themselves... by avoiding what they otherwise would want to visit.
People don't necessarily shun each other because of political differences of opinion... if we did that, we wouldn't have any friends at all...
By the same logic, we don't avoid a state full of people because we disagree with some of them over their politics or their religion.
Mar 15th, 2006, 08:46 AM
#52
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not a big "joiner," but if I don't like the politics or practices of anything, whether a corporation, private business,or a charity, they'll get very little of my hard-earned money if I can help it. And yes, if I like what they are doing, I'm willing to spend with them first.
Mar 15th, 2006, 08:51 AM
#53
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's another side of the question...
Let's say you strongly oppose the anti-Santa law, but you swallow your disgust and visit Mount Rushmore anyway.
You still maintain, however, that you have a legitimate right to boycott if you disapprove... you just don't exercise it in this particular case.
Now, do gas stations have a right to refuse to serve you if they don't like your politics? Can hotels throw you out for your views? Restaurants force you to declare your opinions? Is that legitimate social behavior? Or is it abnormal?
Let's say you strongly oppose the anti-Santa law, but you swallow your disgust and visit Mount Rushmore anyway.
You still maintain, however, that you have a legitimate right to boycott if you disapprove... you just don't exercise it in this particular case.
Now, do gas stations have a right to refuse to serve you if they don't like your politics? Can hotels throw you out for your views? Restaurants force you to declare your opinions? Is that legitimate social behavior? Or is it abnormal?
Mar 15th, 2006, 08:57 AM
#54
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<<I'm not a big "joiner," but if I don't like the politics or practices of anything, whether a corporation, private business,or a charity, they'll get very little of my hard-earned money>>>
The problem is that life, and organizations, are usually not that absolute. There are things about Microsoft I don't like, and other things I do like. Some policies of the Methodist Church I question, others I approve of. The Democrat party does certain good things, and other things that are stupid, in my opinion. Very few social institutions are either perfect or damned.
Besides, I don't buy a computer to express my approval of Bill Gates, but to further my best interests.
The problem is that life, and organizations, are usually not that absolute. There are things about Microsoft I don't like, and other things I do like. Some policies of the Methodist Church I question, others I approve of. The Democrat party does certain good things, and other things that are stupid, in my opinion. Very few social institutions are either perfect or damned.
Besides, I don't buy a computer to express my approval of Bill Gates, but to further my best interests.
Mar 15th, 2006, 09:11 AM
#55
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, something like this has been in the cards to happen for some time. So it can go back to the Supreme Court & the whole 'when does life start ?' v. 'the right to life' v. 'the womens right to choose' debate can be revisited. I seldom let politics (which is what this is, pure & simple)influence a lot of personal decisions I make on the whole. (Speaking from my seldom used PoliSci degreed background). lol
Mar 15th, 2006, 09:16 AM
#56
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<< I seldom let politics (which is what this is, pure & simple)influence a lot of personal decisions I make on the whole.>>>
Very practical of you... otherwise, you would have to boycott much of the American economy... at great inconvenience to yourself, but with a trivial impact on society.
Very practical of you... otherwise, you would have to boycott much of the American economy... at great inconvenience to yourself, but with a trivial impact on society.
Mar 15th, 2006, 09:30 AM
#58
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am pro choice but I would absolutely not support a boycott of SD. Why ruin individual's tourism based businesses because of a few right wingers?
I also will not support a boycott of Aruba. I teen went missing who has not been found. How many people in Mrs. Holloway's state of Alabama have went missing and have never been found? Should we boycott Alabama?
I will also not boycott southern states which display the confederate flag on buildings such as thier state house. The lack of tourism and convention income will end up hurting the most to people who seem to end up on the lower end of the money chain. Black people!
Hmmm. lets pick out a seemingly nice safe state. OK, Oklahoma. Most of the state use to be owned by native American families. Not so long ago white people use to adopt native American children in OK to get the deed to their family property. Am I going to boycott OK? No way. I would have to boycott every state in America, all the provinces in Canada and most of Mexico because they have done similar things to native Americans.
If every state did something that someone thought needed boycotting there would be no interstate travel and no tourism beyond your own state.
Their is a word for this boycott stuff. Its called passive agressivness. That is when you do not like something but you deal with it in a round about way instead of dealing with it Directly. Sort of like getting back at your husband because of the way he treated you last night by maxing out the credit card the next day instead of confronting him directly about how you were treated and solving the actual problem.
I also will not support a boycott of Aruba. I teen went missing who has not been found. How many people in Mrs. Holloway's state of Alabama have went missing and have never been found? Should we boycott Alabama?
I will also not boycott southern states which display the confederate flag on buildings such as thier state house. The lack of tourism and convention income will end up hurting the most to people who seem to end up on the lower end of the money chain. Black people!
Hmmm. lets pick out a seemingly nice safe state. OK, Oklahoma. Most of the state use to be owned by native American families. Not so long ago white people use to adopt native American children in OK to get the deed to their family property. Am I going to boycott OK? No way. I would have to boycott every state in America, all the provinces in Canada and most of Mexico because they have done similar things to native Americans.
If every state did something that someone thought needed boycotting there would be no interstate travel and no tourism beyond your own state.
Their is a word for this boycott stuff. Its called passive agressivness. That is when you do not like something but you deal with it in a round about way instead of dealing with it Directly. Sort of like getting back at your husband because of the way he treated you last night by maxing out the credit card the next day instead of confronting him directly about how you were treated and solving the actual problem.
Mar 15th, 2006, 09:35 AM
#59
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your logical problem... the anti-Santa law was not unanimously passed, but was voted in by a slim majority (I get to tailor the hypothetical for the sake of argument).
Now, assume you punish the state by issuing an executive order... no more highway funds for South Dakota (hypothetically, you are the US President).
The question... who exactly are you punishing? Just one political faction? Or both sides?
It's like having two puppies at home, where one of them goes on the newspapers, and the other on the rug, only you don't know which one did which.
You can't whip them both, otherwise the one who went on the newspapers will change his behavior and go on the rug.
Now, assume you punish the state by issuing an executive order... no more highway funds for South Dakota (hypothetically, you are the US President).
The question... who exactly are you punishing? Just one political faction? Or both sides?
It's like having two puppies at home, where one of them goes on the newspapers, and the other on the rug, only you don't know which one did which.
You can't whip them both, otherwise the one who went on the newspapers will change his behavior and go on the rug.
Mar 15th, 2006, 09:38 AM
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
""Now, do gas stations have a right to refuse to serve you if they don't like your politics? Can hotels throw you out for your views? Restaurants force you to declare your opinions? Is that legitimate social behavior? Or is it abnormal? """
Absolutely you can be refused service anywhere for any reason and it is perfectly legal. Not sound business advice but it happens all the time.
Absolutely you can be refused service anywhere for any reason and it is perfectly legal. Not sound business advice but it happens all the time.
