sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Trouble at Tesla and protests against Trump’s tariffs suggest consumer boycotts are starting to bite,  Erin O'Brien & Justine Coneybeer say

Public Policy / opinion
Trouble at Tesla and protests against Trump’s tariffs suggest consumer boycotts are starting to bite,  Erin O'Brien & Justine Coneybeer say
pic
Getty Images.

By Erin O'Brien & Justine Coneybeer*

When the United States starts a trade war with your country, how do you fight back? For individuals, one option is to wage a personal trade war and boycott products from the US.

President Donald Trump has said no nation will be exempt from his tariffs, and this includes both Australia and New Zealand. His tariffs on all steel and aluminium imports, in particular, could hurt the sector in Australia, while New Zealand’s meat and wine exports to the US could also feel the effect.

So far, political leaders have responded differently. Canada, Mexico and the European Union have imposed reciprocal tariffs on the US, while Australia has indicated it will not retaliate.

But whether governments choose to push back or not, citizens in those and other countries are making their own stands. This includes artists such as renowned pianist András Schiff, who has cancelled his upcoming US tour.

Most notably, collective outrage at the US president has led to a growing global boycott of Elon Musk’s Tesla due to his role in the Trump administration. Sales of new Tesla vehicles are down 72% in Australia and 76% in Germany. The share price has dropped by more than 50% since December 2024, with calls for Musk to step down as chief executive.

Some governments are even encouraging consumer boycotts. The Canadian government, for example, has urged citizens to “fight back against the unjustified US tariffs” by purchasing Canadian products and holidaying in Canada.

Canadians are clearly embracing this advice. Road trips to the US have dropped by more than 20% in the past month and US liquor brands have been removed from some Canadian stores altogether.

This rise in calls for boycotts of American brands and companies is unsurprising in the Trump 2.0 era, where the lines between government and corporate America have become increasingly blurred.

Political change by proxy

When people want to protest a government policy, but have no political leverage because they’re not citizens of that country, boycotting corporations or brands gives them a voice. These actions are sometimes called “surrogate” or “proxy” boycotts.

This form of “political consumerism”, where individuals align their consumption choices with their values, is now one of the most common forms of political participation in western liberal democracies.

When France opposed the war in Iraq in 2003, US supporters of the war aimed boycotts at French imports. Consumers in the US, United Kingdom and elsewhere have boycotted Russian goods over the invasion of Ukraine, and targeted Israel over its military action and policies in Gaza and the West Bank.

Most famously, protests against the apartheid regime in South Africa from the 1950s through to the 1990s helped isolate and eventually change its government.

The current boycotts are not just protesting Trump’s trade war, of course. They are also about the role of unelected leaders from the corporate world, such as Musk and the heads of the Big Tech and social media companies, and their perceived self-interest and influence.

Trump has responded angrily to consumer boycotts, calling the actions against Tesla “illegal”, which they are not. Indeed, political leaders like Trump often argue that consumer action, rather than government regulation, should be relied on to ensure corporations conform to social expectations.

Ukrainians demonstrate in front of the Lukoil headquarters in Belgium over European imports of Russian fossil fuels, 2022. Getty Images

How to wage a personal trade war

Consumer boycotts do create change under certain conditions – typically when there is a contained problem that the targeted corporation has the power to solve.

For example, consumer boycotts against Nestlé in the 1970s over false and dangerous marketing of powdered milk for infants led to changes in the firm’s marketing approaches. Boycotts of Nike products over sweatshop conditions for workers had a direct impact on the company’s bottom line and led to improvements.

Things may still need to improve at Nestlé and Nike, but these boycotts show consumer pressure can catalyse corporate action. However, it is much harder – though not impossible – for boycott campaigns to succeed when the target is a government.

Consumers boycotting American products can amplify the impact of their protest by also lobbying retailers. For example, if enough consumers stop buying a bottle of soft drink from the US, major supermarkets like Woolworths and Foodstuffs will stop buying thousands of bottles.

There are also other ways to “vote with your wallet”. People can engage in “political investorism” by using their power as a shareholder, bank customer or pension-fund member to express their political views.

After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, for example, investors sought to divest from Russian companies, and superannuation funds were pressured by their members to do the same.

As consumers and investors, individuals can wage a personal trade war, sending a clear message. Trump may not be willing to listen to the leaders of allied nations, but if consumer and investor pressure is sustained and spreads globally, he may yet hear the voice of corporate America.The Conversation


*Erin O'Brien, Associate Professor, School of Government and International Relations, Griffith University and Justine Coneybeer, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Government and International Relations, Griffith University.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

17 Comments

Are these genuine protests?

One of the things that DOGE uncovered was the US government paying for astro-turf political protest and lots of biased journalists.  DOGE stopped the payments, so unsurprisingly Musk is now facing political protest and much journalistic noise. 

It will be interesting to see how long protests can last without sustaining US taxpayer funds. 

Up
5

unaha-closp,

 'astro-turf political protest' Can you explain what that phrase means?

 

Up
4

A grassroots protest is where people turn up on the own time and do not get paid - this is considered the moral standard.  An astro-turf protest is where people are paid to turn up - this is considered less legitimate.  

To an outside observer both look exactly the same.

Up
6

One of the things that DOGE uncovered was the US government paying for astro-turf political protest and lots of biased journalists. 

And arguably interference by USAID in other countries' domestic affairs. Incidentally, the Western media has been reporting about the shutdown of programs addressing war consequences in Vietnam. On Friday, the Vietnamese govt said that "many cooperation projects between Việt Nam and US in this field are still actively being conducted or have been recently resumed, including projects pertaining to the removal of unexploded ordnance (UXO) and the cleanup at Agent Orange-contaminated Biên Hoà airbase".

https://vietnamnews.vn/politics-laws/1694255/viet-nam-us-war-legacy-pro…

 

Up
4

Not sure I follow the logic. The government used to fund protests. This has now been stopped. Therefore these protests are funded by the government? Hasn't DOGE stopped that?

Edit: given the contents of the article, this makes even less sense. Do you think the US government is paying Germans to not buy Teslas, and Canadians not to buy Jack Daniels? 

Up
10

Musk at DOGE has antagonised people whose profession is to organise paid for protesters and journalistic support.  As such it was inevitable that protests would be organised and journalists would support the protests.  Someone will be paying for it, rich people opposed to Trump or non-American taxpayers or both. The withdrawal of US GOV cash just makes everything more expensive to the remaining backers.

Also since DOGE has detailed financial info on who has been paid.  How long until the Trump NSA ask forceful questions of these organisers to find out who is funding?  If foreign governments are amongst those organising protests against the US government how will the US respond?

Interesting times.  

Up
4

That could be part of it, but the anti-Musk sentiment did not start with DOGE. Those Nazi salutes were probably more of a causative factor, taken together with his posts and behaviour on, and running of, Twitter. 

The foreign boycotts, I think you can see the logic there pretty clearly. If Australia started calling Luxon the governor of the next Australian state, insulted him on the world stage, and put tariffs on our goods, I'd probably start boycotting Australian goods too. 

You're looking for a conspiracy where open antagonism is a more obvious cause. 

Up
12

You had me cheering there, I thought you were implying Luxon was moving to an Australian state to govern. Damn was so hopeful.

Up
6

Those Nazi salutes were probably more of a causative factor, taken together with his posts and behaviour on, and running of, Twitter. 

The following companies have direct historical association with Naz*s.

  1. Volkswagen

  2. Audi (as Auto Union)

  3. Bayer

  4. Chase National Bank (now JPM)

  5. Deutsche Bank

  6. Mercedes-Benz (as Daimler-Benz)

  7. Porsche

  8. IBM

  9. General Motors (through Opel)

  10. IT&T

  11. Hugo Boss

  12. Dr. Oetker

Up
2

How many of those associations continue into 2025?

Up
6

What evidence is there that Tesla supports similar Naz* ideology? That CNN suggested to you?

 

Up
5

Tesla? None. Musk, well, he did those Nazi salutes on national TV. 

If you don't want to associate with that kind of thing, not buying a Tesla is a great start given his stake in, and management of, the company. 

Up
8

Tesla? None. Musk, well, he did those Nazi salutes on national TV. 

No. Musk saluted. You and many others are inferring that it was related to or a tribute to Naz*sm. 

Up
2

Musk is pro freedom of speech, and freedom of thought right? I'm allowed to see his behaviour, decide I don't like it, and boycott his companies. Watching a section of the right complain about this is plain bizarre - do you want to force people to buy Teslas? 

I know there was enough ambiguity to give his apologists a few talking points, but I think it was a pretty clear dog-whistle action. You are welcome to disagree and buy as many Teslas as you want. 

Up
8

I'm allowed to see his behaviour, decide I don't like it, and boycott his companies.

100%. Some similarities with the boycott of Bud Light and the desired reaction to negatively impact AB InBev's sales. 

Only difference is that this boycott was directed at the company. Not an individual. 

The biggest losers here are those who bought Teslas to be more gentle on the planet, but are now driving around in a symbol of far right ideology. They are outcasts to the peer groups they want to identify with.  

Up
2

Yeah, it would suck to be one of those left behind in Musk's swerve to the right. Teslas are not known for their resale value, so you are either advertising for someone you dislike or taking a financial hit. I have some compassion for them. 

To some extent Tesla are collateral damage as Musk is the real target. But he is the largest stakeholder, and they are still letting him run the company, so there are some pretty close links there.

I'm sure you're aware many are also boycotting X, which is more direct. In that case, maybe counterbalanced by attracting more users from the right wing, but it remains to be seen whether the average MAGA voter is going to turn their back on years of believing EVs are woke and useless and pull out their wallets for a Tesla. 

Up
3

No one beats the market - the difference between profit and loss is a small margin as Scrooge neatly summed up.

A 10% drop in sales can be catastrophic for many and more importantly brand destruction can be very hard to repair.

Up
3