Member-only story
Why making ourselves worse off feels so good — dissecting the boycott paradox
The latest Twexit wave (numerous users leaving the social media platform still known to many as Twitter) is, in essence, a form of boycotting. An evolutionary economics perspective might help explain this curious phenomenon
I remember, many decades ago, learning for the first time about the practice of ‘boycotting’. The Dutch anti-apartheid movement’s had started a campaign for consumers to shun South-African Outspan oranges, and this had been replicated in Belgium. I have no data on whether it was economically impactful, but with the memory still so vivid, it was definitely a success for me as an awareness raiser. Boycotting is alive and well, most recently in the shape of the latest exodus from the Twitter/X. Now, as then, the boycott is unrelated to the features or quality of the product itself. It concerns, in effect, the deliberate non-consumption of a perfectly adequate product. Even if a substitute (which necessarily has to be inferior) is bought, this logically implies a welfare loss. Boycotters deliberately take a hit. Isn’t that odd?