This is a blacklist, not just a "boycott"
(If there were any ambiguity about this at all--which there is not--the fact that individual Israeli academics are offered an exemption if they actively express satisfactory political views should make the reality clear to anyone.)
I put the matter as follows while corresponding about the MESA anti-blacklist statement with David Hirsh & Jon Pike, the two British academics who run the website "Engage" website.
I think one of the most important things about this excellent MESA statement--aside from the fact that it exists, which is already huge--is that it twice explicitly uses the word "blacklist" (as I do in my petition). I would advise you and everyone else to emphasize that word, too, now that MESA has publicly legitimated it. It cuts through the euphemisms of "boycott," and brings out the reality of the situation.The term "boycott" is used to create a spurious mental association with apartheid-era South Africa, and to convey the impression that these measures are somehow targeting only institutions (not people). "Blacklist" should serve the useful purpose of reminding people of McCarthyism (to which the NY Academy of Sciences statement referred explicitly), which is the more accurate analogy, while making it clear this action targets individual academics & their academic freedom (& livelihoods).
Geertz long ago explained how all this works in "Ideology as a Cultural System," and Lakoff has been hammering home the same point more recently ... but it's something that every political & marketing consultant knows, too. That is, it's crucial to frame the issue your way--and it helps if this way of framing it is also more accurate and illuminating, as I believe is the case when one calls this blacklist a blacklist.
Yours in struggle,