Daniel Ellsberg Says Boycott Amazon

Open letter to Amazon.com Customer Service:

December 2, 2010

I’m disgusted by Amazon’s cowardice and servility in abruptly terminating today its hosting of the Wikileaks website, in the face of threats from Senator Joe Lieberman and other Congressional right-wingers. I want no further association with any company that encourages legislative and executive officials to aspire to China’s control of information and deterrence of whistle-blowing.

For the last several years, I’ve been spending over $100 a month on new and used books from Amazon. That’s over. I ask Amazon to terminate immediately my membership in Amazon Prime and my Amazon credit card and account, to delete my contact and credit information from their files and to send me no more notices.

I understand that many other regular customers feel as I do and are responding the same way. Good: the broader and more immediate the boycott, the better. I hope that these others encourage their contact lists to do likewise and to let Amazon know exactly why they’re shifting their business. I’ve asked friends today to suggest alternatives, and I’ll be exploring service from Powell’s Books, Half-Price Books, Biblio and others.

So far Amazon has spared itself the further embarrassment of trying to explain its action openly. This would be a good time for Amazon insiders who know and perhaps can document the political pressures that were brought to bear–and the details of the hasty kowtowing by their bosses–to leak that information. They can send it to Wikileaks (now on servers outside the US), to mainstream journalists or bloggers, or perhaps to sites like antiwar.com that have now appropriately ended their book-purchasing association with Amazon.

Yours (no longer),
Daniel Ellsberg

29 thoughts on “Daniel Ellsberg Says Boycott Amazon”

  1. Pingback: Excessive Swearing » Blog Archive » Terms of Service v WikiLeaks.org

  6. I've boycotted Amazon across the board and Paypal too. I guess this means no more ebay, but I can go without it if it means that the government does not remained unchecked. Whistle blowing used to be an important part of the process. Now it's deemed terrorism.

    We as people need to remember that the government works for US, the people and it's time they remembered it too. Every cookie Michelle Obama puts in her mouth, every plane ride that some Congressmen takes with money passed to him under the table by a lobbyist, every thing is paid for by the hard work of the American people. We paid for the ostentatious Christmas tree in the White House, but how many of us will go without our own?

    I for one am thankful that Cablegate has happened. I think it's time to remember that We, the People are supposed to have the power and that the system of checks and balances hasn't worked in a long time. This is the only way to check the government now and it's time to get angry. Really angry at what the government is doing to us and on our dime.

  7. Paypal and Amazon account closed. No more money from me.____I dont want anything to do with a company which supports US goverment handling things like that …. Country of Freedom ? what a joke!

  8. Closed my Paypal account today.

    Paypal turns out to be the corrupt company many made it out to be back when it started.

    1. Heck, why not do two lynchings, instead of your one weekly KY "date"?
      Kentucky is full of redneck dumb ideologically stunted sheep.
      I feel sorry for the handful of you sane people in that Klan rally of a state.

  13. Pingback: The disclosure of secret information always carries risk - Loss of Privacy

  14. Just canceled my account! And this close to Christmas – this did cost them more than just a few €uros ;)

    Greetings from Germany!

  19. Bob Murphy makes some interesting points on this

    "Many opponents of the U.S. empire are calling for a boycott against Amazon, after its capitulation to Sen. Joe Lieberman’s calls for it to stop hosting WikiLeaks on its servers. This is a controversial issue, with even LRC bloggers taking nuanced positions (e.g. here and here). Although it’s possible someone could give me a compelling argument for boycotting Amazon, I am not yet convinced. Furthermore, there are several concerns that I haven’t seen the proponents of a boycott address.

    Of Course You Have a Right To Boycott Amazon

    Before I dive in, let me defuse one objection. I have seen many boycotters argue, "Hey, it’s my money and I have the right to do what I want with it." Well of course you do; nobody is denying that. By the same token, I have the right to send $10,000 to Jonah Goldberg because I’m outraged at what just happened. It doesn’t mean that my action would make a whole lot of sense, though.

    So in the rest of this article, we take it for granted that this isn’t a discussion about libertarian or antiwar principles per se; nobody is a criminal for either using Amazon, or for boycotting it. I am just trying to clarify some of the issues involved, to make sure the boycotters have thought this through.

    Why Single Out Amazon?

    My first concern is that Amazon is being targeted only because it initially hosted WikiLeaks. That’s the only reason this is even an issue. If Amazon is "censoring" WikiLeaks because it won’t host it, then the same is true for every other company that owns servers in the world, except for the one in Sweden (Bahnhof AB) that currently hosts WikiLeaks.

    Now the boycotter could respond that this is just silly, and that there are plenty of principled owners of server space out there, who would be glad to host WikiLeaks. OK fine, then that shows in the grand scheme, Amazon didn’t really "hurt the cause." And in actual fact, WikiLeaks was down for less than a day. Anyone who wants to sift through the secret material still has it all at his disposal; Amazon’s decision in no way will protect the government from embarrassment.

    I am sure the average boycotter will think I am being incredibly obtuse: Why, the whole point is that some companies – like the one in Sweden – need to be brave and stand up to the U.S. government, rather than fold at the first sign of trouble, as Amazon did.

    Yet if this is the argument, then still I have to ask: Why single out Amazon for the boycott? To repeat, at least Amazon initially hosted WikiLeaks; this actually surprised me when I heard it, since I thought major corporations wouldn’t want to touch Assange’s website with a ten-foot pole in this environment.

    If we are to boycott Amazon because it supported WikiLeaks, but then abandoned it when things started to heat up, then surely we should also boycott those corporations which we know would never have supported WikiLeaks in the first place. For example, we should never buy another GE appliance, because of the pro-empire spin of its media outlets.

    And for a really tough one: Are we still allowed to watch Judge Napolitano’s show? After all, he’s associated with FOX, some of whose personalities have not been entirely supportive of Assange. If the answer is, "Yes, we can watch Napolitano because he’s good on civil liberties," then why can’t we buy Thoreau books from Amazon?

    My concern on singling out Amazon is best summed up by the declaration from many boycotters that they would take their business to Barnes & Noble. But why? Did Barnes & Noble host WikiLeaks? How did they suddenly become the corporate heroes who laugh at profits and go to the barricades for liberty?

    The boycotters seem quite sure that this episode will send a signal to major corporations that they shouldn’t leave critics of the government high and dry. But this might actually backfire, and be akin to raising the minimum wage, thinking it helps unskilled workers. Specifically, the lesson to major corporations might be: "Whoa, let’s not get ourselves involved with any dubious groups or individuals, in case the government cracks down and makes us look like the bad guys."

  20. continued

    How Long Will the Boycott Last?

    I have another question: How long is the boycott supposed to last? Until Amazon once again hosts WikiLeaks? Until the War on Terror is over? Are the boycotters really never going to use Amazon again?

    As with the invasion of Iraq after 9/11, I am concerned that some of the boycotters are lashing out in rage because they don’t like what just happened, even though they haven’t carefully thought through what their actual objectives are, and what their "exit strategy" is.

    The Real Enemy

    Let’s not lose sight of the fact that it was Joe Lieberman, representing the might of the U.S. federal government, who caused Amazon to drop WikiLeaks as a customer. I have read some boycotters arguing that Amazon should have put up more of a fight, at least waiting for a court order.

    This strikes me as very naïve. The government has all sorts of tools at its disposal. The IRS could’ve hit Amazon with an audit. The company could have lost its sales tax exemption. OSHA could’ve discovered all sorts of safety violations at its offices. If Amazon had wanted to acquire another company, the government could’ve held up approval.

    Look at how effortlessly Assange was demonized the world over, when he crossed these people. This is the same group that is currently using robots to blow people up, and claims the authority to unilaterally kill U.S. citizens with no due process. So Amazon executives were supposed to tell Lieberman to beat it, then lawyer-up and be immune from government retaliation?

    It’s ironic to think through exactly why Amazon ended up being the target of the boycott, when even the boycotters would all quickly admit that it was Lieberman who was more culpable than the Amazon executives. Consider: If a would-be boycotter wanted to cause economic pain because of the silencing of WikiLeaks, then the obvious move would be to stop sending more money to the very government that is waging wars and harassing Assange.

    Yet the boycotters aren’t saying, "Hey everyone, let’s stop sending our money to D.C." Why? Because they are afraid of what the government would do to them. In other words, they are behaving exactly like the Amazon executives.

    Let us not forget that all of us, to the extent we pay taxes, are funding the very organization that is carrying out operations that WikiLeaks is trying to stop. In that light, it’s odd to become indignant over Amazon for merely withdrawing its support from WikiLeaks, when the boycotters themselves continue to send their money to the organization actively trying to shut down WikiLeaks.

    Conclusion: To Each His Own

    I hope this essay is not construed as an attack on those who urge a boycott of Amazon. Especially after Amazon’s weasely press release, I completely understand the disgust with large corporations that "play nice" with the government.

    Judging from the debates on this topic that I have seen, it seems the boycotters and non-boycotters are content to go their separate ways in peace. Nobody, for example, is suggesting that the boycotters be boycotted for their unfair "disruption of commerce"; that would be silly. And by the same token, I haven’t seen any boycotters threatening to disassociate from someone for crossing the picket line and ordering Christmas presents from Amazon.

    Yet it is this very attitude of tolerance that makes me reluctant to punish Amazon. I’m not going to stop doing business with somebody, just because he boycotts Amazon. Why then would I stop doing business with Amazon, just because they boycotted WikiLeaks?

    As I said in the beginning of this essay, these are not matters of property rights, but rather ones of strategy for gaining one’s ultimate objectives. I do not condone the current U.S. apparatus of worldwide military occupation and police state surveillance, and am going to use whatever peaceful methods I can, to persuade as many people as possible that there is another way to live.

    Along the way, I have made decisions, such as refusing to work for the government in any capacity, including as a professor at a State-funded school. That doesn’t mean I condemn people who teach at State schools as "sell-outs," it just means it was a decision I made for myself. On the other hand, I pay my taxes in accordance with the law, even though I know there are some extreme libertarians who would condemn me for "feeding the beast" and perpetuating the very system I claim to oppose.

    It’s very hard to live a principled life, and the rapacious State makes it that much harder. If someone wants to boycott Amazon because it dropped WikiLeaks, I understand the motivation. I would just hope the boycotter has thought it through."

    1. I totally agree with you on this. I believe that there are other ways to deal with this rather than just going so extreme. It would be like saying to a friend or co worker "I am not going to associate with you because you believe in something that I don't". Of course, to each their own. I just know that I have plenty of friends that are totally different in their beliefs than what I have….and that is ok. And I know they totally respect me in what I believe.

      I would just like to add one more thing. I think that this whole thing of how America has pretty much got caught with their pants down, is really nothing surprising to me. If you really believe that any government is not capable of doing such a thing that the U.S. has done, then I think that we are all in denial of what the world's governments are doing behind our backs already.

    2. Geez get over it.

      Amazon is not being singled out. There is PayPal and will probably be more.

      Really I for one, don't care if Amazon goes out of business – there will always be another to fill the vacuum, this applies to PayPal also.

      I admire and respect those who have taken to action to boycott or send thier business to others, that is one right you still retain.

  23. Dear anonymous,

    amazon did not act upon a court order. There hasn’t been a trial – not even an accusal so far.
    They merely acted in anticipatory obedience which I personally find: false and disgusting.

  27. I have also closed my account with Amazon and told them Amazon is either with Wikileaks and the people or with tyranny.

  28. 1st Amendment, what a bunch of brainwashed fools that think our GOVERNMENT is looking out for them. The American People Can't Handle the Truth.

  32. It is not about Amazon.com and all the other companies that need to obey the political rules they operate in. It is not their fight, it is ours. Avoiding Amazon & Co is fine to me, but do not blame them that they do not fight for what is important to us (it is their – opportunistic – not to do so).

  33. I have just closed my Amazon account. I can’t do business with people not supporting freedom.

  35. Can someone from antiwar.org please remove the Amazon banner from the page that says "Boycott Amazon." It's extremely embarrassing and a bit hypocritical of this website. I tried to locate their email but couldn't find it.

  36. The anger against Amazon is misplaced. I believe we should support businesses that are victims of government bullying. Instead, go after the bullies: the U.S. government in general and Lieberman in particular. Find every possible way of reducing your tax bill. Contribute the maximum amount to retirement funds, charities,and so on. Buy a good book on taxes and claim every deduction possible. Most importantly, work to defeat Lieberman. It almost happened in 2006.Make it happen in 2012.

  37. my goodness gracious! So many little righteous patriots. I'M going to show Amazon! I'M canceling my Amazon account. THEY'LL be sorry! Well duh. How about all the companies that do business with Amazon? Why don't you boycott them also. You all act like a bunch of villagers with your little pitchforks and torches running in circles waiting for someone equally as dumb as you all to say something that he will do so you can all yell YEA LET'S GETTEM and pound the handles on the ground. Please don't hurt Amazon like this. This poor company may go out of business lol. What a bunch of sheep!

  38. here's my letter to amazon.com:

    I regret to inform you that I will no longer be doing business with Amazon.com. Please cancel my account effective immediately. I have been a loyal customer for many years, and have greatly appreciated your services – however, I strongly oppose your decision to bar WikiLeaks from your servers. WikiLeaks has BROKEN NO LAWS – fair due process would make Wikileaks innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Our first amendment right is designed protect our freedom of speech and press – no government should be enabled to suppress its people's right to information. As the world's largest bookseller, Amazon.com had an opportunity to take a historic stand in favor of free speech and freedom of information, and chose instead to align itself with a government-backed McCarthy-style witch hunt. I will be taking my business elsewhere.

  42. For years I've tended to boycott any news service–or any other service–that veers from the linear path of Reality.

    Thanks, Dan

  43. Just closed my Amazon account. Wow, that felt really good. Rule of law in the USA is a farce.

  46. I haven't went through all the posts here to see if it has been commented yet, but why is there so much against Amazon and yet on the page of this article, there is an Amazon Product Ad for their Services? Kind of new to the site as I just received this link through Twitter, but I was just curious to see if anyone knew if the site was associated with the letter directly or is run independently. I would think that if the site is on board with anti Amazon tactics, that it would request to remove the ad. Of course, maybe the Ad changes every once in awhile to something different, but it is there.

    Just a thought.

    1. Law,

      Good question. I have been reading and supporting AWC for a number of years now. It was only a few years ago that they started accepting advertising. I don't know exactly how the advertising works, but I would guess that AWC, after contracting with an ad agency, doesn't have a lot of say about what ads come up on the website. It seems obvious that a lot of times the ads are driven by the subject of the article being viewed. Articles about Iran often have ads about how to meet Iranian beauties.

      As for Amazon, it looks like the link that allowed AWC readers to go Amazon and make a purchase with AWC receiving a portion of the purchase amount is gone. The Amazon ad is no doubt part of the package deal with the ad agency.

      For some thoughts on the boycott matter, I encourage you to take a look at Bob Murphy's article "Some Concerns With the Amazon Boycott" on lewrockwell.com.
      http://www.lewrockwell.com/murphy/murphy171.html

      Hope you will keep visiting this great website.

  47. Amazon bending to political pressure, they didn't when they published how to books on how to sexually molest kiddies, why start banning material now? Joe Lieberman needs a kick up the anal tract and send him to Israel where he belongs.

  49. Apparently Amazon forgot that this is America, land of the free, not Nazi Germany.

    THEY LOST MY BUSINESS!

  50. I am NEVER buying anything from Amazon ever again. And I am telling everyone I know to do the same. Amazon is a DISGRACE.

Comments are closed.

viewpoint highlights
breaking news
© 2024 Antiwar.com. All rights reserved.
Antiwar.com Blog Stock Photos provided by our partner Depositphotos