| “A boycott is an attempt to persuade other people to have nothing to do with some particular person or firm,” Rothbard begins this chapter. And he finds that boycotts are universally legitimate. | 「ボイコットはある会社、又はある人のことに関わらないようの説得です」とロスバードがこの章を始める。そして、ボイコットが正当と説明する。 |
| There is a problem with picketing as we know it, however, because picketers generally don’t assemble on their own property. The property owner can demand they leave, and since the favored picketing locations are the protested location and the street in front of it, they likely would, and continuing the picket would then become a crime. | だが、ピケットが一般に参加者の所有地に起きないから問題になる。ピケットラインの場所の所有者が散らばることを要求できる。好まれたところがピケットされた者の所有地とその前の通りだから要求が出ることが多いと思われる。となると、ピケットを続けるのが犯罪になる。 |
| The street owner is only presumptively on the protested party’s side, though. It could happen that he favors the picketers, but cannot deny access to the property due to contractual obligations. He could, in that case, allow picketing on his street (without blocking access). | だが、通りの所有者がピケットされた者の見方じゃない可能性もある。契約の義務で通りを防げなくても通りに防がないようにピケットを許せる。 |
| In the free society, the boycott would be the only outlet for moral busybodies. One wonders if they would really have the drive to mount them effectively, though. So many of them are armchair activists or bureaucrats. Once the armchair activist must employ his own time and resources instead of simply voting for his favorite flavor of tyranny and the bureaucrats don’t receive a salary for enforcing the tyranny anymore, we may find that they were never so committed to their principles as they claimed. | 自由社会ではボイコットがお節介の唯一の捌け口でござる。効果的にできるのを疑えるけど。青白き運動家と背広組が多くて自分の努力と資源にしか頼れなくなったら本当に今言ってるように打ち込んでいないと見えるかも知らない。 |
Ethics of Liberty, Chapter 18: The Boycott
Bookmark the permalink.