Boycotting (Some) Israeli Goods

Gene at Harry's Place highlights a post from a councillor for West Dunbartonshire Council which has decided to boycott Israeli products. The complaint made against him (and others) is that if he is boycotting Israeli goods that should apply to computers and other very useful and expensive things. Gene understood his response to be:

"We will boycott Israeli products except when it inconveniences us in any way."

That was pretty much my interpretation too (although instead of "in any way" put in "too much"). But the point is what's wrong with that position? It makes perfect sense to me. The boycotters believe that Israel is doing wrong and should be punished and that a boycott is that punishment. Does that mean they have to punish themselves? Sure their boycott is less effective if it doesn't include everything but it seems perfectly sensible to not boycott those things that you would suffer more for boycotting.

NOTE: I do not support the boycott. I think it is wrong for a number of reasons. But that is not the point here.

I've always found this particular anti-boycott argument to be rather rubbish. Haha, you can't boycott Jaffa oranges because then you have to boycott Microsoft Windows too! What kind of stupid argument is that? Of course the response is to point out that actually, no, someone is entirely able to not buy one product from Israel in protest and yet buy another because it's just too much to give up.

So what explains the reasoning behind the argument? The only thing that springs to mind at the moment is that those making it see the boycott in a different way to the boycotters. And if I'm right then it says a fair bit about the anti-boycotters. You see, I think the boycotters might believe that they want to punish Israel. Nothing more. Indeed, that is pretty much what the councillor said.

But anti-boycotters might believe that boycotters believe that it is immoral to have any benefit from Israel for whatever reason. If that is what boycotters believe then of course it is hypocritical to buy even one thing from Israel.

The difference is simple. One is based on the assumption that Israel is doing something wrong, the other on the assumption that Israel is wrong. Like I said, if the anti-boycotters believe that all boycotts are predicated on the belief that Israel is wrong then that tells us a bit about them. They see what they want to see, perhaps. And that cannot be good.

Of course, I could be wrong. If you think I am please use the comments to explain why the argument is valid or else why, even though invalid and nonsensical, apparently rational people make it. Cheers.