Updated: 7/7/2020 | July 7th, 2020 (Original post 4/28/16)
Years ago, Mississippi and North Carolina passed anti-LGBT laws and lots of tourists, bloggers, and celebrities immediately said, “As a sign of protest, I won’t check out because I don’t want to support a state whose laws I uenig med!”
This reminded me of when people refused to go to Myanmar because of the junta, declined to check out the united states when George Bush was president, or refused to check out Cuba because of Fidel Castro. (There are dozens of examples of people boycotting destinations because of the government’s politics that could be listed.)
While people have the ideal to do whatever they want and take any personal stance they want, I think tourism-based economic protests are a mistake because they hit the wrong target, they aren’t effective, and that travel and human interaction can bring about a lot more and deeper change than a reflective boycott.
Here’s why.
Boycotts hit the wrong People
Governments can and do change: laws are passed and repealed, voters eject politicians and vote in new ones, and revolutions and sanctions topple dictators.
We might not agree with certain laws or a current government, but if traveling abroad and defending the united states during the Bush years has taught me anything, it is that people are not their governments, lumping everyone together is misguided, and you end up hurting the people who you agree with.
In fact, you might even weaken your allies by not showing support.
Like, for example, one of the bookstores I spoke at during my book tour.
This North Carolina store is suffering because authors are canceling the events this place needs in buy to stay in business. small independent bookstores are already suffering and this is just another nail in the coffin for this place. They are collateral damage to a law they do not agree with.
Governments don’t always reflect the will of all their people (or even a majority). but behind boycotts are real people and services who suffer. people struggling to put food on the table and meet payroll. They might not support their government or certain controversial laws yet we lump everyone together as if everyone in the destination is what we despise.
And, in doing so, those we agree with and want to support become collateral damage. We create pain for the people at the bottom, the people with the most to lose and, usually, the least say in things.
And, though the shouts of travel boycotters often add to the pressure on elected officials, I’ve yet to see one country or state reverse course simply because of this reason no matter how strong the plea.
I used to say, “I’m never going to Myanmar because I hate the government” and because I wanted to take a stand.
But, when I started traveling, I found it silly that people said, “I don’t like Bush, so I refuse to go to the United States,” as if this was enough to pressure Bush to change or that we were all die-hard Bushites.
It made me realize that a lot of citizens of Myanmar didn’t choose to live under a military dictatorship any a lot more than I chose Bush as President.
And all my protest was doing was denying people the money they needed to survive and the global perspective that could have added fuel to their desire for change.
They Don’t Do Enough
What caused Myanmar to change, Iran to open up, or South Africa to end apartheid? It wasn’t a drop in vacationer numbers. It was governmental and corporate sanctions on a enormous scale.
Indiana softened its anti-LGBT law when corporations and conferences pulled out en masse. The Apartheid government in South Arica collapsed when governments, major banks, and other corporations stopped doing service with it and loaning it money. Iran finally yielded under the weight of sanctions that drove it toward bankruptcy.
Those changes were a combination of domestic activism and international pressure not travel boycotts.
I think it’s foolish to think that somewhere there’s a government official enjoying reports of vacationer boycotts and declaring, “Tourist numbers are down 10%! We need to change!” If they cared about that, they would have done something different in the first place.
Governments care about big business, tax revenue, and those at the top. When you cause pain there, you cause change.
Travel CAN Bring Change
If you really want to do good, you can’t shut off people from the world — you need to embrace them and show them a better way. The way we affect change is by traveling and educating people about the broader world to change their minds.
Staying home isn’t going to effect change. It simply hurts those who might not have control over their government. travel opens people to new ideas, cultures, and ways of thinking. If you really want to bring about change, go there and kill them with kindness.
I indicate don’t we travel to see the world, learn, and help foster cultural understoging? Du kan ikke gjøre det ved å være hjemme. Du kan bare gjøre det ved å gå til destinasjonen.
Som Maya Angelou sa: “Kanskje reiser ikke kan stoppe bigotry, men ved å demonstrere at alle folkeslag gråter, ler, spiser, bekymrer og dør, kan det introdusere ideen om at hvis vi prøver å forstå hverandre, kan vi til og med bli venner.”
***
Jeg støtter ikke lovene som er vedtatt av disse to statene. Jeg støtter ikke Castro -regimet. Jeg støttet absolutt ikke Bush.
Jeg støtter heller ikke de nåværende regjeringene i Thailand eller Egypt eller sensurlover i Kina.
Er jeg enig i behandlingen av kvinner i mange arabiske land eller Japans politikk om å “glemme” folkemordet i Kina under andre verdenskrig? Nei.
Men jeg tror boikotter reiser til land på grunn av en lov eller dets nåværende valg av leder er feil. Hvis vi skulle sammenstille en liste over steder med en policy eller leder som vi ikke er enige i, ville vi aldri dra noe sted. Det vil alltid være en rød linje som holder oss hjem.
Mange boikott handler om å signalisere hvem vi er som mennesker og hva verdiene våre er. De signaliserer til gruppen vår at jeg tror dette og at jeg er med deg.
Imidlertid, hvis du virkelig vil endre oppførselen til landet ditt, lobbyer lokale tjenester og valgt å gjøre en endring. Forsikre deg om at pengene dine går til folket at mye trenger det.
Hvis du føler behov for å “ta et standpunkt”, kan du huske at folk ikke alltid er deres nåværende regjeringens politikk. Jeg tror det er mye bedre å engasjere folk på bakken, endre meninger og presse din egen regjering eller selskaper til å iverksette tiltak.
Vi vil skape større endringer på den måten enn om vi bare sitter hjemme.
Hvordan reise verden rundt på $ 50 om dagen
My New York Times bestselgende pocketbok guide til verdensreiser vil vise deg hvordan du kan mestre kunsten å reise slik at du kommer fra allfarvei, sparer penger og har en dypere reiseopplevelse. Det er din A til Z -planleggingsguide at BBC kalte “Bibelen for budsjettreisende.”
Klikk her for å lære mye mer og begynn å lese den i dag!
Bestill turen: Logistiske ideer og triks
Bestill flyet ditt
Finn en rimelig flytur ved å bruke Skyscanner. Det er min favoritt søkemotor fordi den søker på nettsteder og flyselskaper over hele kloden, slik at du alltid vet at ingen stein er igjen.
Bestill innkvarteringen din
Du kan bestille vandrerhjemmet ditt med Hostelworld. Hvis du vil bo et annet sted enn et herberge, kan du bruke booking.com, da de konsekvent returnerer de billigste prisene for gjestehus og hotell.
Ikke glem reiseforsikring
Reiseforsikring vil sikre deg mot sykdom, skade, tyveri og kanselleringer. Det er detaljert beskyttelse i tilfelle noe går galt. Jeg drar aldri på tur uten det, da jeg har måttet bruke det mange ganger i det siste. Mine favorittbedrifter som tilbyr den beste servicen og verdien er:
Safetywing (best for alle)
Forsikre turen min (for de over 70)
MedJet (for ytterligere evakueringsdekning)
Klar til å bestille turen?
Sjekk ut ressurssiden min for de beste selskapene å bruke når du reiser. Jeg lister opp alle de jeg bruker når jeg reiser. De er de beste i klassen, og du kan ikke gå galt ved å bruke dem på turen.