Bad Boycotting
Why consumer protests falter without clear demands, disciplined strategy, and a moral compass.
By Z.M.D. McGregor
Boycotts are often seen as moral megaphones—guarding conscience by withholding dollars. We forget, in our age of social media fury and “call-outs,” that history offers us the blueprint for boycotts that work. They are not merely acts of rage. They are disciplined, strategic, morally serious efforts aimed at specific change. The most effective boycotts aren’t mere cries of outrage; they are disciplined, purpose-driven campaigns.
Let's recall three boycotts that reshaped our world:
Montgomery Bus Boycott (1955–56)
Prompted by Rosa Parks’ refusal to relinquish her seat, this boycott targeted bus segregation. Under the leadership of the Montgomery Improvement Association and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Black residents organized carpools, endured hardship, and pressed a single, clear demand: end segregation on city buses. Their campaign achieved its goal when the Supreme Court ruled segregation unconstitutional.
Delano Grape Boycott (1965–70)
What began as a strike by farmworkers led by Larry Itliong and César Chávez swiftly became a nationwide consumer boycott against grape growers. With strategic alliances spanning unions, churches, and activist groups, the campaign demanded fair contracts and humane working conditions—and delivered them.
South African Anti-Apartheid Boycott (1970s–80s)
Students, activists, and churches worldwide launched a concerted boycott of South Africa to pressure the apartheid regime. Their message was crystal clear: end apartheid or face economic isolation. With sustained and targeted pressure, the movement helped dismantle one of the most oppressive systems of racial segregation.
These three movements shared certain traits: a clear moral purpose, well-defined goals, disciplined leadership, and a readiness for sacrifice. They were not just about consumer choices, but about building coalitions and making change credible and necessary. Which brings us to the present.
Fast-forward to today’s Target Fast, led by Dr. Jamal Bryant—a 40-day campaign launched during Lent by over 100,000 participants in protest of Target’s rollback of its DEI commitments. Target had abandoned multi-year DEI goals, racial equity efforts, supplier diversity, and external equity surveys.
The movement’s impact is real: Target’s foot traffic has dropped for ten weeks straight, its stock lost about $12 billion in market value, and its CEO even met with leaders like Dr. Al Sharpton. Yet the core question remains: What is the specific goal?
Bryant demands restoration of DEI programs, reallocation of $2 billion into Black-owned businesses, investment in Black banks, and pipeline programs at Historically Black Colleges. But the public framing—and much of the media discussion—has emphasized emotion more than endgame. Has Target committed to relaunching DEI? Will they restore supplier partnerships? A timeline?
This ambiguity is dangerous. You can hurt a company—but unless you know exactly what you want them to do, you're merely venting. Below, scripture offers both a warrant and a restraint:
“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves… defend the rights of the poor and needy.” (Proverbs 31:8–9) — Yes, boycotts can be righteous.
“All things are lawful…but not all things are helpful… No one is seeking his own good but the good of his neighbor.”
(1 Corinthians 10:23–24) — But they must be rooted in constructive goals, not self‑righteousness.
What all successful boycotts share:
1. A single, measurable demand—not diffuse moral grievance.
2. Coalitions across diverse communities, not just ideological echo chambers.
3. Sacrificial commitment from leaders and participants.
4. Strategic discipline—regular updates, benchmarks, negotiation windows.
A challenge to future movements
Define your ask with clarity: What, exactly, must change? By when? Through what mechanism?
Publish clear benchmarks: By June 30, DEI program restored; by Q3, supplier agreements reinstated; by year’s end, measurable Black-business partnerships. Consult experts: Economists, diversity officers, negotiators.
Hold leadership accountable: Publish progress reports; name failures publicly; model magnanimity when demands are met.
We can—as in the past—use our consumer power not only to punish but to build. As Psalm 82:3 urges: “Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.”
Dr. Bryant’s Target Fast has shown that organized consumer action still bites. The real test now is whether it turns from hurt to healing—from protest to policy. That is the line between boycotts that make history and boycotts that merely make noise.
