Opinion: BDS vs. Woolworths: Just stop it

[Nom Chompsky]

There are certain issues which, as a journalist, you should rather not touch if you want to come out intact. But sometimes you just can’t help yourself – you have to do your job.

As a journalist and lowly paid member of the commentariat, I am aware of certain 'third rail' issues that are usually not worth touching. That's why they are called 'third rail', as in the New York Subway: You touch, you die. The response will be personal, hateful, and usually completely irrational, augmented by the echo chamber that is today's social media. It will be directed at me personally, and not what I say. And at the end, no minds will be changed, and nothing productive will result.

Yet my job entails telling it the way I see it and not necessarily the way it would work best for me personally. So, here we go: the BDS campaign against Woolworths is at best misguided, wasteful and clouding the real issues. At worst, it is malicious, anti-Semitic and hurts the cause it purports to support. In any way, it is just plain wrong.

It is always easiest to navigate to the increasingly ugly mess that is the anti-Woolworths campaign by refusing to be drawn into it at all. From the news media side it works like this: reporters report, then we source comments from both sides and by the time the segment/article/report is over, we can continue happily to other issues, where we don't run a daily risk of losing our best friends.

But the refusal to engage with this argument can sometimes mean that actors in a part of our national debate are then not properly interrogated. And that also means that we, the media, are simply not doing our job.

And that is why I feel the need to write this column.

Let me state my belief upfront:

Israel’s actions during its campaigns against the Palestinians, and its policies, do need to be condemned. The way Israel behaves with its airstrikes is morally wrong. While it may believe the threat posed by Hamas and other groups operating from Palestinian territory justifies its response, the thousand of lives lost on both sides don’t justify its argument.

It is perfectly within Palestinian rights to try to change Israel's behaviour through a worldwide campaign.

But I also believe the Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions Campaign (against Israel) to boycott Woolworths is misguided, and possibly motivated by another agenda. There are much better ways to get Israel to change its policies.

The stated aim of the BDS movement with this campaign is to force Woolworths to stop its trade with Israel. In other words, they want to hurt Israel through Woolworths. Woolworths responds by saying that a fraction of one percent of its products come from Israel. What BDS really wants to do, presumably, is to get Israel to change its behaviour and its policies, with the net result being that the position of the Palestinian people is improved.

Why, then, is BDS trying to get people to stop shopping at an entire chain of stores, rather than just targeting the products made in Israel? During the anti-Apartheid campaign in the UK and other countries, the aim was exactly the same as the aim of BDS here. They wanted the government of Apartheid South Africa to change its behaviour and its policies. They targeted South African oranges and grapefruit and wine. The product itself was targeted, not the store selling them. This resulted in labelling laws that made it compulsory to indicate where products were from.

As a result, people could decide for themselves on a product-by-product basis whether to buy those products or not at the entire, rather arbitrarily chosen chain.

Why does BDS believe we should be denied that choice here? The last time I heard, the South African Constitution guarantees us the very fundamental right of making up our own minds. And the last time I heard, South African government, while using tough top language, is still happily doing day-to-day business with Israel. Why, then, would BDS assume the right to isolate, inconvenience and shame Woolworths customers over, say, Pick 'n Pay, Checkers, Dis-Chem and others, all of which actually have their own collaborations with Israel? Who gives them that deeply unconstitutional right?

Could it be that the social fabric of our society has become intertwined with this? Is it because Woolworths is where the assumption is that the rich white people shop, and that is motivating part of this campaign? What emerged out of the anti-Woolworths campaign is a combo of anti-Israel, anti-semitic, anti-rich, anti-white moves.

Continue reading: http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2014-12-01-bds-vs.-woolworths-just-stop-it/#.VHw_c9LQpQt

 

[The_Assimilator]

"anti-Israel, anti-semitic, anti-rich, anti-white moves"

Just another day in Religion of Peace land.

 

[Greylor]

I am aware of certain 'third rail' issues that are usually not worth touching. That's why they are called 'third rail', as in the New York Subway: You touch, you die. The response will be personal, hateful, and usually completely irrational, augmented by the echo chamber that is today's social media. It will be directed at me personally, and not what I say. And at the end, no minds will be changed, and nothing productive will result.

Learned a new term today! "Third rail thread."

E.g. every thread about Israel/Hamas ever

 

[Rusty0]

Continue reading: http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2014-12-01-bds-vs.-woolworths-just-stop-it/#.VHw_c9LQpQt

Obviously ignorant idiot journo.
If muslims contributed so little to WW, like the "rich" whites do (That in itself is a joke, WW is not at all a "rich white foodstore") why do they have so many halal meat sections? WW do know there muslims customers are very high compared to other socio economic demographics.

 

[Rusty0]

Written by Stephen Grootes? Thought he was good. Guess hes just another idiot journo.

 

[The_Assimilator]

why do they have so many halal meat sections?

Because if they didn't, adherents of the Religion of Peace would be crying discrimination.

 

[Rusty0]

Because if they didn't, adherents of the Religion of Peace would be crying discrimination.

Nope, they dont need a halal section at all. WW chose to have it.

 

[d0b33]

WW sells halaal hot cross buns so they're trying to accommodate all.

But buying Israeli produce is silly, support local and organic, more power to BDS.

 

[ISP cash cow]

Obviously ignorant idiot journo.
If muslims contributed so little to WW, like the "rich" whites do (That in itself is a joke, WW is not at all a "rich white foodstore") why do they have so many halal meat sections? WW do know there muslims customers are very high compared to other socio economic demographics.

Not "ignorant jouno" material. It has basically hit the nail on the head and what everyone has been mentioning in all the other threads. Woolworths is there to bring the best quality product they can from all over the world to there customers who want those products. Every other retail store supply products from Israel however BDS has only targeted Woolworths with regards to their "Boycott Woolworths" campaign.

I agree with the journalist, why boycott the whole store who supply products from all parts of the world? why not start a boycott and market it to people to try and get them to boycott products made in israel from all the retails stores.

There is definitely another agenda in the background of why Woolworths was picked for the BDS campaign.

 

[d0b33]

There is definitely another agenda in the background of why Woolworths was picked for the BDS campaign.

Yes Picknpay, they're behind it.

 

[Greylor]

Nope, they dont need a halal section at all. WW chose to have it.

Because South Africa has a Muslim population large enough to make having a Halaal section profitable.

Not doing so would just be more money going to competitors who do have Halaal sections. It's the same reason that all the major fast-food joins and chain restaurants are Halaal as well.

Not quite sure where the presence of WW Halaal sections fits into what the author is talking about though.

In essence, his point is that targeting WW is by far one of the least efficient and least effective ways that they could go about trying to boycott Israel. To the point where it suggests an ulterior motive.

Are you disagreeing that the BDS campaign is failing to utilise its resources in a way that will obtain optimal results?

 

[Rusty0]

Not "ignorant jouno" material. It has basically hit the nail on the head and what everyone has been mentioning in all the other threads. Woolworths is there to bring the best quality product they can from all over the world to there customers who want those products. Every other retail store supply products from Israel however BDS has only targeted Woolworths with regards to their "Boycott Woolworths" campaign.

I agree with the journalist, why boycott the whole store who supply products from all parts of the world? why not start a boycott and market it to people to try and get them to boycott products made in israel from all the retails stores.

There is definitely another agenda in the background of why Woolworths was picked for the BDS campaign.

Perhaps there is, but the point he raised are definitely not true or even close.
WW only brings in the out of season fruit and veg from Israel. Its only R12 mill pa worth of stock sourced from Israel.
Perhaps BDS sensed its a small accomplishment and something they can make an impact on.

 

[saturnz]

Because if they didn't, adherents of the Religion of Peace would be crying discrimination.

no, they would just go to their local butcher

 

[ISP cash cow]

Perhaps there is, but the point he raised are definitely not true or even close.
WW only brings in the out of season fruit and veg from Israel. Its only R12 mill pa worth of stock sourced from Israel.
Perhaps BDS sensed its a small accomplishment and something they can make an impact on.

What points that the journalist raise that you claim not to be true?

Ok so let me see if I get this right - what you are saying is that because Woolworths brings in only 12 Million rand per year of products from Israel ( a drop in the ocean compared to their total sales of R27 701 Million rand {Woolworths financial report for 2013} equaling a whole 0.04% albeit the sales are probably higher for this year), so BDS feels it is better to go for the company with a small percentage of activity with Israel so they can feel a sense of "accomplishment" and maybe win? If BDS did not think they could win against any retailer not even just Woolworths, then they should have really thought through their strategy of trying to get people to boycott the store they buy from.

Their strategy is retarded and will not win.

 

[Rusty0]

What points that the journalist raise that you claim not to be true?

Ok so let me see if I get this right - what you are saying is that because Woolworths brings in only 12 Million rand per year of products from Israel ( a drop in the ocean compared to their total sales of R27 701 Million rand {Woolworths financial report for 2013} equaling a whole 0.04% albeit the sales are probably higher for this year), so BDS feels it is better to go for the company with a small percentage of activity with Israel so they can feel a sense of "accomplishment" and maybe win? If BDS did not think they could win against any retailer not even just Woolworths, then they should have really thought through their strategy of trying to get people to boycott the store they buy from.

Their strategy is retarded and will not win.

Perhaps, but win I do think they can.
There was a catylist that I think we all missed, more so the ignorant journo. The BDS campaign only started during the latest Israel offensive, something happened, im not sure what, I expect the journos to find out and not suck things out of their thumb.

 

[Nerfherder]

Obviously ignorant idiot journo.
If muslims contributed so little to WW, like the "rich" whites do (That in itself is a joke, WW is not at all a "rich white foodstore") why do they have so many halal meat sections? WW do know there muslims customers are very high compared to other socio economic demographics.

Because they pander to the needs of the few.

is that all you got from the article?

 

[Compton_effect]

Learned a new term today! "Third rail thread."

E.g. every thread about Israel/Hamas ever

Third rail is a railway term. In most subway systems there is a third rail set in between the normal rails.
This rail is electrified and the train uses it to get power. If you step on this rail you short it out - the current goes up the one leg, through your groin :wtf: and down the other leg. Pretty apt phrase for a topic that that does the same in a metaphorical sense.

 

[Stokstert]

Off to WW to get some more figs and olives from Israel.

 

[Greylor]

Third rail is a railway term. In most subway systems there is a third rail set in between the normal rails.
This rail is electrified and the train uses it to get power. If you step on this rail you short it out - the current goes up the one leg, through your groin :wtf: and down the other leg. Pretty apt phrase for a topic that that does the same in a metaphorical sense.

I know what the third rail is in reality. What I got from this is a term to call those threads that are always a no-win scenario because nobody is going to change their mind...and it will almost inevitably break down the same way as discussions about that topic always break down (usually with personal attacks...often with Hitler references).

Like Israel vs Hamas threads...or getting anywhere near a roaming group of Atheists looking for a reason to attack religion. There's nothing you can do that will have any effect on anyone or anything, so as tempting as it is to get involved, nothing constructive will come out of it.