Boycott as a "Stance of Existence"

" A Mocking Smile at the face of Titans"

Ever since I saw that image—a young Palestinian kid standing defiantly in front of an Israeli tank, hurling stones—I've been haunted by thoughts of freedom and independence. Just think about it: a stone against a tank, a kid against a trained soldier. It gives me goosebumps.

This image stirs up all kinds of respect and admiration within me. It's my go-to mental image whenever I'm feeling down or defeated. Feeling beaten is a choice, and so is the desire to resist—even if it's just with stones against a tank. But the latter? That's the choice of a winner, the choice of someone who's achieved a deep sense of independence and imposed it on the world.

Fast forward to now, and you see how this generation that once threw stones at their enemy has grown up to shake the very existence of Israel occupation of Palestine, making even the highest Israeli officials tremble as they speak at press conferences. That is the real power of choice.

I've always wished I could tap into that kind of power and impose my will on the world just like they did. How could I lend a hand in their awe-inspiring resistance against occupation and the desecration of Islamic holy sites? The answer has always been crystal clear: Boycott.

Economic boycott of anything and everything that supports this distasteful Zionist presence in our Arab lands. But here's the kicker: a lot of people question what a boycott can actually achieve. They downplay its importance and dismiss it as inconsequential.

That's why I decided it's time to give this topic the attention it deserves. I mean, if a kid with a stone could make waves, imagine what a whole community could do with a focused plan of action.

What does boycotting mean?

Let's go back a bit and see what we're saying we want to boycott. We want to boycott foreign companies that offer their products and services on Egyptian and Arab lands, because they support and endorse positions that harm Arab interests. Now, directly and abruptly, these companies are showing and declaring their financial support for the Zionist entity in their killing of our people in Gaza and Palestine.

These companies are what we used to call transnational corporations back in the 90s, but the term has become less used as these companies have become ubiquitous around us.

What's the tale behind these corporations?

Transnational corporations didn't really start in the 90s or even the 50s, but much earlier, around the late Middle Ages and the onset of the European Renaissance. Their main role was to sell the modern European lifestyle in exchange for the wealth of other nations. And as we know, economics has a significant political side; a political leader can hardly function without a businessman serving his interest. Let's delve into the story from the beginning...

 

Titan Corporations

One of the earliest transcontinental corporations was the Hudson's Bay Company, established in 1670. Yes, that’s right, over 350 years ago. It was involved in fur trade between newly discovered North America and the indigenous people, who are the Native Americans.

Hudson's Bay Company would buy fur from Native Americans and sell them European goods like clothing, fabrics, blankets, glassware, knives, saws, axes, dishes, pots, and even alcohol. Know what else? They sold them weapons. (Does that ring any bells?) All these things were products that Native Americans couldn’t produce themselves, so they traded fur for them.

Now, where would they get a lot of fur to exchange for weapons and other goods to improve themselves? Exactly, they hunted more and more animals. But these animals were essentially their food source. As they hunted them at a rate higher than their reproduction, the animals began to disappear, impacting their primary food source.

With a lack of nutrition, diseases began to spread among them. Their environment, social, cultural, and economic patterns changed, making them dependent on European products, which became a fundamental part of their traditional and natural lifestyle. This led to increased differences and tensions between Native Americans and Europeans, revealing the real deal with the weapons they traded for fur.

Imagine!!  just the exchange of fur for some alcohol, pots, and weapons caused disasters to Native Americans!!

Here’s a last tidbit. About 368 treaties were signed between Native Americans and colonizers, whether European or US, all of which were broken. Consequently, this nation nearly vanished from history.

 

Colonial Knowledge Formation:

In 1672, another significant corporation emerged - the Royal African Company. Their agenda was clear cut... slave trading. They’d snatch slaves from Jamaica and ship them to North America. Even the high and mighties in Jamaica and other African nations were down with the slave trade.

Slave trade was very profitable for the African nations. Initially, the colonizing countries, primarily Britain, supported and established infrastructure like ports, roads, and bridges to ease transportation of course. But the country was being developed. The money paid for slaves also helped in providing resources, expanding agricultural production, and extending trade networks between Europe and African countries, hence flourishing the economy.

So, the topic is old, commit any disaster and say it's for economic development and country's progress, people will follow you.

 

The reality is, slave trade led to accumulation of wealth for rulers and leaders at the expense of the poor and marginalized. This is known.

Later, in 1711, another very important company, The South Sea Company, was established. Its clear and explicit goal was to finance British debts through slave trade. Slaves and goods were transported between Europe, America, and Africa. Though it lasted about 10 years before collapsing, the slave trade itself continued through other giant companies that took over, like the Dutch West India Company and the East India Company.

 

Economy, Epistemology, and Politics in Shaping the World:

About a year ago, Cambridge University declared the benefits it had from slave trade and the financial support it received from companies like the East India and Royal African. It had been established and continued with direct support from these companies.

Currently, it launched a two-year research initiative to investigate its archives to see if the slave trade was what gave it its scientific strength and status.

The funny and strange thing is, this initiative is actually questioning whether the university contributed to shaping racist political opinion and supporting racist beliefs that led to the flourishing of the slave trade. Professor Martin Millett, the head of the research team for the initiative, said one of their goals is to understand how scholars at the university helped shape public political opinion during that time.

 

Aside from the human rights hurly-burly

Now let’s see how the slave trade affected African countries and destroyed them. First, it reduced the population in African countries and changed the population structure itself. The slaves being kidnapped or sold were in their prime, from youth to their forties or fifties, hence leaving behind only children and the elderly, leading to a labor force deficit.

Therefore, the number of people capable of farming and manufacturing drastically decreased, and consequently, local industry and agriculture were destroyed. The leaders, rulers, and upper classes with financial resources became highly dependent on imports even for basic goods to live, thus completely relying on Europe for supplying their basic needs.

The social destruction from slave trade and its impact on African countries was much larger. It led to the destruction of families losing their loved ones, hence completely disintegrating the social structure. This led to increased skirmishes and conflicts between tribes in their search for food and sustenance, especially with the spread of poverty. These conflicts resulted in the capture of some individuals, who were then sold to get money to buy European goods to survive.

So, a continuous outflow of real resources from the country in exchange for a bunch of temporary consumer products.

 Do you see the role of these Titans, transcontinental corporations in draining a country's resources for their benefit? Leaving the countries where they operate not only in severe poverty but also altering their consumption patterns and economic and social structures to remain dependent on them continually.

 

A New Generation of Corporate Colonialism

After that, a new breed of corporations started to emerge, corporates that directly and openly extracting resources from countries, and others were providing a modern, sophisticated consumer product that was hard for the importing countries to manufacture.

The first kind were corporations like Standard Oil, founded in 1870 by John Davison Rockefeller (sound familiar?). Their main business was exploring for oil in colonies. This company is considered the real forefather of multinational corporations as we know them in the 20th century. There were other companies like British Petroleum and Royal Dutch Shell, starting to explore and extract oil from Nigeria, Indonesia, Niger, etc. The second kind kicked off with Ford Motor Company in the early 20th century, specifically in 1903, establishing factories worldwide with the goal of selling the posh American product in global markets.

Gradually, the narrative shifted from brutal colonization and destruction, like what happened with Native Americans and Africans, to seemingly fair and normal trade. But, in fact, it introduced a specific consumer pattern that you can’t emulate, along with certain behaviors and a culture that continually depends on it, in exchange providing them with economic resources. So, the idea is the same and the business model hasn’t changed much, just got a bit disguised.

Local Economies and the Titans

How does this affect you?

Legend says these big Titan corporations provide job opportunities for the youth. But the truth is completely different. Let’s take a slow and steady look at the matter.

Firstly, offering products or services at competitive prices destroys local industries and services. This is because these corporation follows the principle of mass production, meaning (put simply) its production costs are spread across a very large production volume, thus the cost per product is low, making the price much lower than the local product whose production is spread across fewer items hence a higher cost per unit.

This puts local industries under constant pressure to compete with the cheaper imported product, often failing and disappearing. Here, the foreign company monopolizes the market and raises its prices as it pleases.

Moreover, the financial power of these companies, along with their advanced advertising techniques, directs the consumption pattern in the society as they wish.

Their long-term presence allows them to control the community's resources, whether labor, natural resources, or money, and they can not only control the local market but also economic policies, the way that benefits their interests.

This automatically leads to the transfer of the community's wealth abroad, meaning all resources and money move out of the community to the countries owning these companies.

In short, these companies act like giant pipette. Think of it as a huge straw, but on a very large scale.

 

The Myth of Youth Jobs

Now, let’s address the legend of providing job opportunities for the youth...

The truth is, it destroyed the youth’s job opportunities, as it eliminated competition within the market. Instead of having three, or thirteen companies competing within the community, it's just one company dominating the labor market. They hire whoever they want, determine wage levels as they wish, and lay off employees whenever they want without the young people having an alternative or a competing company to work for.

Of course, we haven't talked about the cultural impact and how these companies determine social behaviors, changing values and priorities in the society.

 

The Revelation Moment:

Now it's clear to us that the role of these companies is a covert colonial role, eventually promoting European and American values, and controlling global markets. Here comes a very important revelation moment when it endorses the Israeli occupation, even supporting it by providing meals and financial support to the occupying army.

There’s no middle ground taken. No “all lives are sacred” Mo Salah’s kind of shit. No... It's a clear endorsement. And it shows us that it supports those who support its interests. And that it’s with the enemy on one side, with one common interest.

These companies come and blatantly tell you that they support our enemy who kills our people and desecrates our sanctities. And you still buy from them, letting them operate, continue, and prosper. And you're okay with continuing to be a cog in the machine that's destroying you from both ends: economically through these companies themselves, and militarily, politically, and religiously as they mock, desecrate your religious sanctities, and destroy your people in Palestine.

It's exactly like you're killing yourself or committing suicide... spending your money to buy a knife to stab yourself with.

Do you see the big picture now?

Do you now understand what these companies are doing and what their impact is on me, on you, and on all of us? Did you see these images? Do you like them?

Now come, let’s imagine a fictional world, after everyone actually boycotted these products and services, and see what this world would look like.

Let's Fantasize.

Imaginary World:

First off, all these Titan corporations would shut down. Why? Because they bear huge operational costs without any revenue or income, meaning a constantly losing resources. If they stay open, they’ll be paying for electricity, water, labor, etc., within the country, all from their own resources.

Now, if they close.

It’s all good. The people and society are still here, with their needs. And since necessity is the mother of invention, other alternatives will pop up. We've already seen this happening with local and national companies stepping up with alternative products.

With the people’s support in boycotting these big companies, which will act as positive externalities in economic terms, the national economy will slowly flourish. More companies meeting the community’s needs will emerge. More companies offering similar products will arise as they operate in the same market, with prices at a similar level.

Prices will gradually reach a real equilibrium point where both the producer and consumer reach an optimal economic state and maximized their surpluses.

Job opportunities for the youth will increase, products will diversify to meet the actual needs of the people. Production methods will evolve, and local industries will slowly strengthen; the community will produce its own innovations reflecting its true needs.

Consequently, the real identity of the society will emerge, with its own products, production and consumption patterns, evolving and diversifying the culture.

Moreover, this will train national companies to improve production methods, reduce costs and thereby prices, increasing the likelihood of exporting national industries. With reduced imports, the country’s trade balance will improve, strengthening the national currency, and elevating the value of the pound against the dollar. The market will be controlled by multiple national industries, not by a foreign corporation representing the colonizer, and dictating the market as it pleases.

See the impact of the boycott you underestimate?

 

Boycott as a Lifestyle:

Here, I must say, our view of boycotts should change from being an economic punishment for a political action. Meaning, it shouldn’t only come up when we want to punish a company or country for an offensive political or religious act, it should be a lifestyle. A lifestyle ensuring, we step out of the cycle of someone offending us, boycotting their products for a while, then going back to using them again. No... It gradually transforms us into a rising power, a competitor that these countries will gradually fear and think twice before offending.

 

The Real Choice:

Now you have both pictures in front of you…

It’s left for you to believe that your simple individual action can lead to all these huge changes, and it will be the first step in a long journey with a far better ending than the current situation.

If you are one who likes to criticize the surroundings and you don’t like the conditions in the country, here’s the one thing that can change everything in the country if you actually do it on an individual and simple level.

And always remember, a child with a stone had choices…

What’s your choice?