Moroccans Launch Boycott Over Soaring Food Prices Amid Gaza Conflict Concerns

Mohssine Benzakour, a specialist in social psychology, quoted by Hespress, explains that this boycott is "a peaceful solution that imposes negotiating with the consumer who has gathered to put an end to an injustice that has affected his purchasing power," adding that "citizens no longer feel much trust in the justifications put forward by professionals in many sectors who have raised prices in an unacceptable manner."

For the specialist, this decision by Moroccans to boycott certain products is salutary, but he points out that "this action must be based on an objective foundation, because the boycott is not a destructive movement; it derives its legitimacy from the desire to change an unjust economic situation, and not to weaken the national economy." Benzakour cites the example of chicken, whose price has reached around 30 dirhams per kilo, which is currently the subject of a boycott campaign.

"The problem arises when it no longer responds to the conditions of fair competition, and price manipulation is done without objective criteria accompanied by statistics and evidence," he explains, adding that "this situation creates a form of mistrust that later becomes the fuel for the boycott, which has become for a part of Moroccans an effective behavior, especially after the famous 2018 boycott campaign that spread throughout the kingdom."

The specialist notes that Moroccans, as well as other Arab and Maghreb countries and beyond, "are jointly boycotting companies they consider allies of Israel" in the conflict in Gaza, indicating that "the boycott is the weapon of those who have no weapon, a protest that derives its legitimacy and validity from objective conditions that impose its use, far from any logic of provocation or blackmail."

And he concludes: "If these commodities are all far from the tables of the poor and underprivileged classes, the food system will be affected, which could cost the state much more if malnutrition-related diseases appear for example, leading to unnecessary additional costs due to unthought-out and irrational economic decisions, the impact of which could be mitigated by the boycott movement."