Rushing to click "like" might be counterproductive.
As much as I am dismayed by the disaster, as much I don't think a boycott is a sensible solution for fixing the problem. BP is responsible for the spill (but not alone, there is Haliburton etc...) no doubt about that, and consequently will be the entity paying the enormous costs for the cleaning up the mess. A boycott will reduce their capacity to do that.
BP has 100 000 people working for them, who bear absolutely no responsibility for what had happened. Punishing them for something they couldn't have prevented in any way (when perhaps only a dozen of people in the chain of responsibilities are the culprits), and putting thousands jobs at stake will not help the hundreds of thousands of people of the Gulf of Mexico directly affected by the spill, on the contrary.
Furthermore, with the continued use of fossil and nuclear energies, the statistical odds are that it will come at a immense cost to our environment. What happened could happen (and will; it's only a matter of time) to any oil company. Just check the safety records of the other major companies. Amoco has certainly learnt the lesson from their catastrophe. BP will too and change their safety policies accordingly to improve safety, there is no doubt about that, but the risk will never vanish.
Finally, I'd be very hesitant to join a movement who might have a hidden agenda. Who's behind the idea? Who will it benefit ultimately? Those are questions that require answers before calling the movement genuine and join the shouting crowds.
[ view entry ] ( 6360 views ) | permalink