Economic boycott isn’t the answer
Published 5:31 pm Tuesday, February 28, 2017
In the past few days, the NAACP issued a charge to businesses, organizations and performers, asking that they boycott North Carolina in response to the legislature’s recent conservative laws, including House Bill 2.
In March 2016, the North Carolina General Assembly passed House Bill 2, or “the bathroom bill,” limiting a person’s bathroom use to biological sex, instead of one’s gender identity. HB2 also instated a prohibition of discrimination lawsuits at the state level and prohibits counties and municipalities from passing their own ordinance against LGBT discrimination, as well as any ordinance that would raise minimum wage above the state standard.
It is the bathroom part, however, that has and continues to raise questions with many and has led to ongoing backlash on a national level.
“Right now in the state of North Carolina we have children — Dear God, children! — who are being imperiled, who face the prospect of being bullied as a consequence of politicians using them as political pawns while we talk about bathrooms,” NAACP national president Cornell Brooks said, as reported by The Associated Press.
This economic boycott is not the appropriate way to go about protesting HB2. Sure, the NAACP is looking to deal a blow to the state because of the law, but it is effectively dealing a blow to supporters and non-supporters alike.
As people have seen in the last year, attempts to sabotage the state and HB2 only serve to make legislators dig in their heels all the more. In the meantime, the state and its communities — which happen to include LGBT people — lose millions of dollars.
HB2 is a North Carolina law, and it’s not appropriate for the national-level NAACP to stick its hands in the pot. Speaking out against the law may be warranted, but attempting to sabotage the state is out of line.
North Carolina has plenty of factions battling over this law, and out of dissent comes clarity and resolution. This issue will eventually be resolved, but national organizations need to step back and allow the state’s democratic process to work as it was designed.