You Gideon Eshet want to have the exclusive right to boycott. This is what bothers you and why you wrote the article to deny the other side the right to boycott you and withdraw public funds that belong to citizens you boycott from supporting any of your activities.

Boycotts are fine with your own money. If this was a private theater group then fine. But since you use state money you have to dance to the state's tune.

Boycotts are a tool and can be used for good or evil. For instance, one of the first organized anti-Jewish act of the Nazis was enforcing boycotts against Jewish businesses. Tax funded performers and academics have no right to initiate any form of boycott against Israelis, whether they agree with them or not. The vast majority of Israelis know the anti-Ariel boycott is despicable. If non tax funded actors wish to boycott Ariel, they have a right to do so. They should realize that a great many Israelis, such as myself, would never hire or patronize them.

The public theater is supported by tax payers money. People unwilling to play by the rules and perform for all citizens should be forced out of the system and fund themselves by other means.

Please boycott, but if you boycott do it without taxpayer support. Otherwise you are a narcissitic parasite.

This is precisely the rationale for the international boycott of Israeli cultural institutions. Note: not a boycott of individual Israeli or Jewish cultural workers. But those institutions (including theaters) that, because of state funding or other affiliation are required to "dance to the state's tune" are legitimate targets of a cultural boycott in solidarity with the Palestinians oppressed by the State of Israel. Thus, if Israeli cultural workers are denied the right to boycott settler institutions, the international BDS campaign will take over and organize international solidarity action against the oppressors of Palestine

what about their integrity? they should voluntarily stop accepting salaries from the citizens of israel. depend upon ticket sales or private lessons. other wise are a bunch of whining hypocrites who are anti-democratic.

ok so if I boycott Arab police officers, Arab municipality workers, and if I get elected (and run for office) boycott Arab schools, religious institutions, and places that employ such people I can count on your typewriter to write something in my support. Thanks

The right of the individual to boycott anything they wish is part of any democracy. When the state intervenes, and dictates what can or can't be boycotted, then that's totalitarianism.

How can you leave out the most important factor.... The Actors are funded by tax payer money!!!! Therefore, to use the tax payers money (Ariel has a lot of tax payers) against a Jewish City is illegal. By all means, they should use this democratic right as you say and quit their jobs with this government funded company, create their own company and then boycott Ariel and whomever else they would like...

Historically, boycotts and sanctions have been imposed by groups or governments to express displeasure with another's policies and to pressure them to change. The object of the boycott should be the government of Israel and those people that elected them and continue to support them. The residents of Ariel are not committing any crime by living there as long as governments of Israel continue to sanction their residence. If the protestors are correct, Egged should suspend service to the west bank and the various Kupot Cholim should terminate their services to its residents, but then we would have another "humanitarian crisis" like in Gaza, presenting our "feinschmekers" with another cause to protest.

If Israeli professors call for a boycott of the universities they work in, then fire those professors (heck, it's exactly what they are calling for). If actors want to boycott certain areas of Israeli society, then we can certainly pull their funding - it's perfectly legitimate.

If Israeli professors call for a boycott of the universities they work in, then fire those professors (heck, it's exactly what they are calling for). If actors want to boycott certain areas of Israeli society, then we can certainly pull their funding - it's perfectly legitimate.

Boycott is certainly legitimate. What smells badly is that the boycotters still insist on getting money from those they plan to boycott. Leave the theaters supported by the government, find sponsors to create a new one in which you are independent, and start the boycott. This will be both legitimate and honest. Likewise the right of my (really) favorite writers, Grossman and Oz, to express their support to anybody cannot be questioned. I only wonder how they will look into the eyes of Ariel inhabitants if the negotiations succeed and Ariel remains in Israel.

I am convinced, now let's boycott Moron Eshet! And all other leftist "journalists" and those who employ them!

we have a right to boycott them. You can't force anyone to work and you can't force anyone to accept services. That said, it is wholly inappropriate for the government to pay the salaries of employees who refuse to perform their work for a specific group of Israeli citizens. They don't have a right to public funding. If they want to refuse to perform for Israeli citizens in Judea and Samaria, then they should work for groups with private funding.

... that we choose non violent methods as BDS to make our point. And Jews are boycotting Zionism. Because I'm one of them

You don't get logic do you? You can boycott until tomorrow, everything and anything you want, but not the hand that feeds you! No professors who get money from their employer, no actors who live on tax payer's money, NO.

"Samaritans read and believe in the Torah, while largely discounting the rest of the Bible (which is very common among current-day haredim)" What do you mean by that? That "current day" haredim don't read the "New Testament"? Which part of the Torah the haredim discard? Please enlighten us with your knowledge.

I have NO idea what the article (headlined by YNET : < boycotts are legitimate >) is about or what the article is trying to say... because I BOYCOTTED it. If such boycotts are legitimate they certainly DON'T inform the boycotter ! There is some good to my action: I probably have saved some time reading a poorly prepared explanation. moshe

TAKE ALL MONEY AND USE THE BUILDINGS FOR OTHER THiINGS. One must be stupid to go, say, to habima other place. These places can be used for housing. Habima is worse than brodway shows and nobody goes to these places except for diabled turists. Let EU fully support this stuff.

Ah yes the European colonial powers are supporters of Arab colonists in our lands. What's a few international laws anyway? The Arabs have not a single legal claim to any of the lands west of the Jordan.

If boycotts are always legitimate, then why did the same author condemn the push to boycott BGU and TAU over their anti-Israel policies? Seems to the left, freedom of speech, democratic values, and a right to boycott are simply a one way street reserved only for them

The anti-Semitic writings of Ford's founder were reason enough not to patronize his products. But Henry Ford II repudiated that legacy and, in the face of the Arab boycott, started selling Fords in Israel. That's probably too subtle a history to inform Eshet's ridiculous thesis. Like most leftists, he's prepared to boycott Israeli institutions, and those abroad who boycott Israeli products, as long as such a boycott is relatively cost-free. Professors can call for boycotting even their own institutions, but don't expect them to resign or give up their overseas travel allowances. Their overseas counterparts will noisily boycott a few grocery items or hand creams, but they won't boycott Israel's medical or technology products. "Allow us to boycott those across the Green Line," they insist, "but keep subsidizing our art." They are, in short, hypocrites.

So stuff it, you useful pion idiot. Consider yourself lucky that our response to your ilk is not like that of the population you do support - or you might find yourself stoned.

of Ynet Readers. It is simplistic, trivial and, what's more, was a waste of my time. If boycotts are within the realm of legality and morality, so are counter-boycotts and suspension of funding by any body which sees fit.

You want to deny artists their funding in order to punish them for not working in a place they don't want to work in. So you want to turn artists into paid workers who must put in the shift and obey the rules for their money. Artists and shift workers are the same, for the Israeli Phillistines. Ahh....