With the United States’ current political climate, it seems that everything has been politicized, and people are questioning if this is with good reason. Several brands including Tesla, Starbucks, and even McDonald’s have faced public backlash and economic blows from political boycotts, which raises the question: how much impact do daily purchases have on the world?

With ubiquitously violent and cruel conflicts in foreign nations, and a surge in political extremism, many corporations have been facing backlash and protest through the form of boycotting for their political stances. According to the BBC, McDonald’s faced extreme controversy after Mr. Omri Padan, the owner of McDonald’s Israeli franchise at that time, offered to donate free food to the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) on October 7th, 2023. The backlash the brand faced led to McDonald’s global sales plummeting and them ultimately having to buy back all Israeli restaurants. As for Starbucks, the brand states that boycotts began after the company sued a workers union for posting “Solidarity with Palestine” on a social media platform. The backlash expanded into accusations of giving financial support to the Israeli Army. To this day, Starbucks denies these accusations, but still faced a decline in profit from boycotts. According to the New York Times, Tesla faced extreme backlash and boycotting after the company’s C.E.O., Elon Musk, began to express extremist ideologies and gained leadership in DOGE (the Department of Government Efficiency). Tesla experienced a major blow to sales, dropping 36% in the first quarter.

While it is evident that they can have an impact, many people often question the effectiveness and structural integrity of a political protest boycott, and viewing these small purchases as negligible can leave people feeling discouraged. “I feel like one person doing something doesn’t go a long way,” Junior Aarya Patel said, “but I feel like it helps keep me at a peace of mind that I’m not supporting a bad thing.” Sometimes trying to contribute to a cause like a boycott can feel like a one person job, but it’s important to keep in mind that not purchasing from a controversial brand is a part of a much bigger picture. “When boycotts like that are multiplied across everyone in the country, or like [hundreds of thousands] of people in the country are starting to boycott this one brand,” Junior Caroline Zhou said, “obviously then you are going to see effects.”

While our nation’s current focus is on more trending boycotts and the current political climate, it is important to remember how many political boycotts preceded current ones, and how they were performed. The reality is the the United States was born on boycotts. “Boycotts have been used, really, throughout American history, going back to the colonial era,” History Department Chairman Dr. James Foley said. “Probably some of the best known boycotts would have been the non importation agreements in response to the Stamp Act of 1765, the [boycott of] Townsend duties of 1767, and the non export agreements of the first Continental Congress in 1774-1775.” Looking back at these forms of protest and political action lets people learn their advantages and their mistakes. “I think the effectiveness of a boycott is directly tied to the amount of support that this boycott enjoys,” Foley said, “so the boycott has to be exceptionally well organized. You have to have strong leadership with a clear plan, a clear mission.”

It is very important to have financial responsibility when making ethical financial decisions. These political boycotts are essentially collective financial decisions among a large group, but even without realizing it, many people participate in their own miniature boycotts everyday. Foley says he tries to make conscientious decisions when purchasing things like a nice cup of hot chocolate or books, and he tries to avoid large chains and purchase things as locally as possible; however, many factors play into how people shop, like affordability and convenience. “It’s sort of a double edged sword,’ Foley said. “I love to be able to support a local bookstore, but at the same time, it’s more expensive to do.” Even as High School students, there is still financial ethicality tied into what students buy, which can be difficult for them. “Buying from ethical brands is obviously a better choice,” Zhou said, “but it makes things harder for consumers because of all the extra factors that play into it.”

However, it’s not just affordability and convenience that affect someone’s efforts to boycott brands that don’t align with their morals, there’s also a strange societal pressure that can change someone’s perception of boycotting. Zhou says that there’s also an aspect of conformity when it comes to these kinds of issues. “I think that in society,” Junior Caroline Zhou said, “people tend to gather in herd[s]. If a majority is boycotting this and they see you [not participating], that might be problematic. You might feel pressure to start boycotting in defense of yourself from being attacked by the masses.” This pressure of conformity can definitely stem from conversation about boycotting on social media. “I think once boycotts start to become social trends, people are more pressured to do it because they’re afraid of backlash,” Zhou said. However, it can also be because of a person’s moral beliefs.  “I feel like you can restrict yourself from buying a small drink or a McDonald’s fries for a better cause;” Junior Ria Patel said, “even though it’s one thing, it shows that you care a little bit about the world.”

A few students and faculty at St. Andrew’s feel like a boycott can be effective and work as a political protest superpower when properly executed, but there are many factors which can play into a person’s actual willingness to participate. This is why it is so important to inform students and others on these forms of protest, their historical significance, and how to execute them properly in order not to create even more political discontent. “I think boycotts, although they are effective and go to good causes,” Zhou said, “I think it’s also a thing that has caused even more polarization between people.”