Why do states criminalize boycotts? Because it hurts.

In Turkey, a consumer boycott led by the opposition is being treated as a threat to national security. We've seen similar reactions in other undemocratic states.

One of the basic insights of social movement theory is that meaningful political and social transformation often comes from actors excluded from formal institutional channels. Rather than working through official avenues, these actors deploy extra-institutional tactics—disruptive, subversive, and confrontational—to challenge authority and amplify grievances from the margins. They protest, they march, they occupy space. And they boycott.

Boycotts are disruptive by design. They strike in two places: the balance sheet and the brand image. In markets where identity is monetized, where logos are laden with meaning, a dent in reputation becomes a dent in pockets. The two effects feed each other: yani, market disruption draws attention; then attention intensifies market disruption.

Actress Aybüke Pusat was dropped from the TV series Teşkilat (The Organization), aired on the state broadcaster TRT, for supporting the boycott.

Turkey's ongoing boycott campaign made this dynamic painfully clear. A…