Whole Foods Boycott Turns Politics into Personal Attack

As you may already know, the CEO of Whole Foods, John Mackey’s opinion piece on Wall Street Journal has spawned a Facebook Group to boycott Whole Foods. And, according to the article on Mashable, the damage the group has caused is now real. Personally, I do not believe that boycotting a business for the political opinions expressed by its CEO is a proper way to resolve political differences. In fact, I believe it’s ultimately harmful for us all, particularly for this healthcare debate.

Let’s face it, there is no perfect solution for our healthcare problem. Every solution will have its own shares of pros and cons. Everyone will have to make compromises, so it’s only fair that we listen to different views, opinions, and ideas. It’s not a game where we try to win by any means necessary.

You can boycott Whole Foods for their business practice, but not for the CEO expressing his opinions. Doing so is like your boss firing you because you voted for someone he doesn’t like. When we face someone who is far more powerful than we are, we tend to become blind to our own abuse of power because it is very small in comparison. Individual consumers do also have power. It is true that the CEO of Whole Foods is far more powerful than we are, but this is a matter of principle. For instance, even in a fight with someone much bigger and stronger than you, the fact that you are much weaker does not justify the use of violence. This is why Gandhi’s strategy worked because he refused to resort to the same dirty strategy that the British empire was using.

“Abuse of power comes as no surprise” because when we have it, we don’t realize that we have it, because we only look at the people who are more powerful than we are. Power is of course a matter of degree. Boycotting a business is certainly an expression of our power. The only difference is the degree.

Would you fire your employee for expressing his political opinions? Most of us would say no. If so, why “fire” Whole Foods for the CEO expressing his political opinions? I would “fire” Whole Foods if their actual business practice bothered me, but not for the CEO expressing his political opinions.

My power to “fire” Whole Foods is tiny, but to me, it is the same exercise of power as firing my employees just at a much smaller scale. So, if I do not believe in firing someone for his political positions, I would not do that to a business, even if they are much more powerful than I am.

A company that I once did some consulting work for, lost one of their big clients one year. After a little research about the client, they discovered that one of their executives saw Planned Parenthood listed as a client on the company’s website, and that prompted them to end their business relationship. It was a financial retaliation over political differences. This type of hostile strategies to fight our political opponents can only divide us further. Do we ultimately want to get along with one another or do we want to divide ourselves further? If we want to get along, why couldn’t we see this type of situation as an opportunity to get to know one another and to see the point of view of the other?

Now that the damage of the boycott is real, the fight has become personal. If John Mackey is angry enough, he could stop hiring people who express any support for Obama’s healthcare reform, although I really doubt that Mackey would do such a thing. If this is a proper way to do politics, then why stop at Whole Foods? Why don’t the Democrats boycott all businesses whose CEOs are Republican, and the Republicans boycott all businesses run by Democratic CEOs? Why should we boycott only the businesses whose CEOs expressed their opinions publicly? How about the quiet ones? They are saved just because they are quiet?

It’s easy to see how this type of strategy can escalate to a point where both sides simply become more resolute about their own opinions, unwilling to consider any other ideas or solutions. It becomes a matter of winning, not of finding the best compromises. The American politics is already too personal and hurtful. Do we need to make it any worse?

—posted by Dyske   » Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook Page