By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Calls for a boycott of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, co-hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico, are escalating on social media due to concerns over international relations and immigration fears. Critics point to the Trump administration’s recent actions, including threats against Mexico and Venezuela, as reasons for their stance. This echoes previous boycott efforts, such as those targeting the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. Despite these calls, the administration has introduced the “FIFA PASS” program to expedite visa interviews for ticket holders.
Read the original article here
US World Cup boycotts grow as Trump threatens Mexico, and the world is starting to take notice. It’s not just a few disgruntled fans; a growing chorus of voices is calling for a boycott of the upcoming World Cup, and it’s all tied to a toxic mix of political tensions and safety concerns. The sentiment is clear: why risk life and limb, or even just peace of mind, to attend a sporting event in a country perceived as increasingly hostile and dangerous?
The fear is palpable, and it stems from a confluence of factors, chiefly, the political climate. The specter of Donald Trump and his rhetoric, including his threats against Mexico, hangs heavy in the air. People are worried about the safety of international travelers, and it’s not just about the threat of political violence. There’s a concern about a perceived lack of security, given the prevalence of guns and the actions of certain authorities. Many feel the United States is not a safe place, for both Americans and visitors.
The potential for diplomatic incidents is also a major concern. Would any international traveler be safe, given the current political situation and potential biases? The idea of being targeted because of one’s nationality or political views is a chilling prospect. It’s a sentiment reinforced by prominent figures weighing in from around the world. These statements are fueling the boycott movement, suggesting the international community is ready to send a strong message.
Economic leverage is another key element. The call to boycott isn’t just about refusing to attend games; it’s about withholding tourism dollars, damaging American industries, and creating economic pressure. The hope is that such a move will resonate with the corporate interests and could influence change. It’s a calculated move designed to hit where it hurts most: the wallet. FIFA itself is also seen as a part of the problem, with its own history of controversy and perceived close ties to certain political figures.
The boycott extends beyond the World Cup itself. There’s a widespread call to boycott the Olympics, too. The feeling is that the international community shouldn’t reward a country perceived as acting in bad faith. The ultimate goal is to remove the United States as a venue for any major sporting event.
The core of the issue goes beyond mere political disagreements. It’s a crisis of confidence. Many people feel ashamed of their country’s direction and deeply concerned about its impact on the world. The invitation to boycott is seen as an act of solidarity. The hope is that the world will choose to stand with those who feel marginalized and threatened.
The economic implications of a large-scale boycott would be significant, and perhaps that’s exactly the point. It is believed that a financial blow is necessary to influence change and to send a message. The desire is to hurt the administration and the wealthy elite who are seen as benefiting from the status quo.
The sentiment expressed is not without self-awareness. Many understand that the boycott is a form of self-inflicted pain. But the belief is that it’s a necessary sacrifice. Many are saying: we are not worthy. We need to be held accountable.
The call for a boycott is a desperate cry for help, a plea for the international community to recognize the gravity of the situation. It’s a warning, a demand for change, and a statement of solidarity with those who feel under threat. The future of the World Cup, and perhaps even the United States’ place on the world stage, hangs in the balance.