How to respond to a boycott threat

With the spate of recent boycott threats lead by left wing organisations like the Greens party and its associated entity GetUp.org:
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/call-to-boycott-carbon-tax-foes-20110721-1hqxh.html

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/getups-carbon-tax-boycott-threat/story-e6frea6u-1226090198258

I thought it appropriate to suggest seome responses to these types of threats.

So if you have recently been blackmailed by a left wing boycotter, then here are a couple of suggested responses:
First the polite way of telling them that you won't be capitulating under duress of their threats:

"Dear Sir/Madam,

We thank you for your recently letter expressing your concern regarding our [advertising/involvement] with [insert thing connected to boycott].

We understand that consumers have a variety of views in regard to [insert thing connected to boycott] and we wish to advise you that our [advertising/involvement] is not an expression of agreement or disagreement with one view or another regarding [insert thing connected to boycott]. Our company conducts [advertising/involvement] with [insert thing connected to boycott] for the purpose of reaching a wide audience of consumers of our [products/services]. The fact that you have identified our company through our [advertising/involvement] confirms that it is effective in achieving consumer recognition of our [products/services]. If you have mistakenly taken our [advertising/involvement] as being some form of agreement or disagreement with one view or another regarding [insert thing connected to boycott] then this is regrettable. 
Our company supports the right of all individuals to make an informed decision on where they stand personally on matters regarding [insert thing connected to boycott].

Upon consideration of your concerns, we believe that if our company were to withdraw our [advertising/involvement] with [insert thing connected to boycott] then it may be considered by other consumers that we were taking sides or trying to coerce others into taking a particular position pertaining thereto.
Therefore with respect to your concerns we express our understanding and respect for your position regarding [insert thing connected to boycott], however in the interest of fairness and neutrality to the broad spectrum of our consumers we believe that decisions made by our company in regard to [advertising/involvement] with [insert thing connected to boycott] should be based solely upon its potential to reaching a wide audience of consumers of our [products/services]. We believe that currently this is being achieved however this will always be subject to our normal business review processes.

We trust that as one of our valued consumers, you appreciate the great quality of our [products/services], and we hope that you will continue to enjoy our [products/services] into the future. 

We thank you again for your letter.

Yours sincerely,

[insert name]"

Now if receiving a blackmail letter from a crazy left wing organization has left you feeling uninclined to be curteous in reply then you may prefer the following suggestion:

"Dear Sir/Madam,

We have recieved your recently letter attempting to coerce us into altering or ceasing our [advertising/involvement] with [insert thing connected to boycott].

As a company that beleives in the operation of law and freedom of individuals and companies to go about their business without threat of attacks against their person or reputation, via acts of vilification, slander or defamation, we take seriously any threat that may harm the public standing, good will and potential earnings of our business.

We advise you that we view your letter to be an act of blackmail. Accordinlgy a copy of your threatening letter has been sent to our solicitors, and to the police, and if you do not issue us with an immediate retraction then we may seek injunctive relief with an application for damages to prevent you from completing the threats that you have made against us, and criminal prosecution.
Any threatened actions that you do take against us shall be cause for us to pursue criminal charges, damages, or equitable remedy by law.

Sincerely,

[insert name]"

Important Note: The proposed letters contained herein are for entertainment purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. If you are threatened by any form of boycott or blackmail we suggest you obtain professional legal advice on how to deal with the matter.

GET LOST "GetUp"

I noticed some news articles recently warning that GetUp.org planned on starting a boycott of any company that did not support the carbon tax proposed by the Australian Labor/Greens government.

Here are some such articles:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/getup-plans-grocery-boycott/story-fn59niix-1226089992769

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/boycott-call-by-lobby-group-getup-is-nothing-but-blackmail/story-e6frfifx-1226090950761

I thought to myself this is a step too far; who are these people to go making threats against honest citizens who disagree with a bad and economically crippling tax.
I thought I should dig in to find out who is behind this GetUp.org because they appear to have some twisted agenda.

So obviously I went straight to their website and looked at their "About GetUp" page.
http://www.getup.org.au/about/about-getup
Here is what it says:

They represent themselves as being independent and essentially non-partisan, yet it seemed to me that any organisation that is organising boycotts against those who fail to support a government initiative can hardly be considered independent or non-partisan.

One work colleague of mine said it best "As soon as a group starts organising rallys and campaigns they are political."

But I still wanted to know who was behind it all, so once again I searched the GetUp website.
On the donations disclosure page I found the following statement:
http://www.getup.org.au/about/disclosure
"Like all advocacy organisations, GetUp is required by law to disclose to the Australian Electoral Commission the identity of any donors who give over $11,200 in a financial year."

Hold on a second what does the law say about GetUp's activities, and are they really an advocacy group or are they and entity associated with a political party or parties?

The Australian Electoral Commission refers to advocacy groups as "Third parties" which it defines as "people or organisations (other than registered political parties, candidates and Federal government agencies) who incur political expenditure under one or more of the five categories defined in the Act."
Here is an example of some recognized advocacy groups.
http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/Reports_On_Federal_Electoral_Events/1998/appendix3.htm
You will note that they typically have specific concerns based on particular interests of a small group, such as gun owners, sporting groups, community groups, etc. Each of these people and groups are typically active in supporting a particular interest and are not aligned to party political interests.

There is another type of organisation however called Associated Entities.
Under the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, an "associated entity" is defined in section 287 of the Act as an entity that:
■ is controlled by one or more registered political parties, or
■ operates wholly or to a significant extent for the benefit of one or more registered political parties,

So if GetUp are a specific interest third party then they would have specific non-party oriented interests and supporters, however if they are an Associated Entity then they would have broad agendas that typically align with the interests of one or more political parties.

Lets look again at what GetUp says about itself on the "About GetUp" page:

Allow me to translate the political jargon;
"progressive" means "left leaning" aka Labor/Greens;
"economic fairness" means "socialist" aka Labor/Greens;
"social justice" means "left leaning social morals" aka Labor/Greens;
"environmental sustainability" means "anti-industry" aka Greens;

The GetUp.org history of campaigns clearly demonstrates that they do not have a particular narrow set of concerns as would be expected by a third party, rather they appear to merely launch campaigns about issues that are already in the political arena and their campaigns are "to a significant extent for the benefit of one or more political parties" (Labor/Greens).
It would seem quite clear to any unbiased observer that GetUp.org is an Associated Entity of the Labor/Greens parties.
Not insignificantly the Labor and Greens party are working in a power sharing alliance within their minority government.
It is clear that Labor and Greens parties are significantly aligned and that GetUp.org is operating for the benefit of this Labor/Greens government.

The Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (as amended) states:
"If a donation is made to an Associated Entity with the intention of benefiting a particular political party, it is considered to be made to that political party."

Remember that I wanted to know who was behind it all, now look at what I found on their website.
On the donations disclosure page I found the following:
http://www.getup.org.au/about/disclosure

Yes, believe your eyes, the same unions that for years have been the major backers of the Labour and Greens parties are also backing GetUp.org.
And yes your eyes do not deceive you, that is a $1.12 million dollar donation from the CFMEU.

So was that money used for non-partisan specific causes? No not at all. It was used to run a campaign specifically attacking the Liberal party leader Tony Abbott.








Here are some news articles speaking on that very topic.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/union-gave-12m-to-getup/story-e6frg6nf-1225953474319

http://www.smh.com.au/national/get-up-funded-antiabbott-ad-with-unions-1m-gift-20101112-17r7j.html

In fact GetUp.org have a history of specifically attacking Liberal party leaders and policies.
The first television campaign that GetUp ever lauched was in effect to announce that GetUp was going to act as a pseudo-opposition party to hold the incumbent Liberal party accountable.
http://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/now-you-answer-to-us

Ever since their launch GetUp have specifically attacked Liberal party members and their policies, and called for public support of policies proposed by the Greens and Labor parties, spewing out a relentless trail of left wing propoganda.

If specifically biased attacks against conservative politicians was not enough GetUp sunk to new lows during the 2007 elections when it lauched a website called http://www.howshouldivote.com.au/ that claimed to give people impartial advice on which party best matched their responses to 20 questions.
However the response provided by the website questionaire was essentially rigged and no matter how you answered the questions the website apparently always claimed that the Liberal and other conservative parties least matched your response to the questionaire, and advising you to vote Greens/Labor.
How do I know this? Simple. Because the Australian Electoral Commission issued a warning to GetUp.org for their deceptive practices.
Here is an article about it.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/getup-warned-on-howtovote-site-20110225-1b8e7.html

It seems clear to any reasonably minded person that GetUp.org are an Associated Entity of the Labor and Greens parties.

I would encourage all Australians to petition the Australian Electoral Commission to classify GetUp.org as an Associated Entity of the Labor and Greens coalition parties.

Let's stop GetUp.org from any more dishonest misrepresentations.
Let's force them out of the closet, and expose them as the left wing front group for the Labor and Greens parties that they quite clearly are.

Let's get GetUp out of politics!     Go on, GET LOST GetUp!