Liberals’ fundamental argument against religious images is that you should not be allowed to get away with your personal, and possibly horrible, beliefs about humanity or social order, just because they coincide with your interpretation of religion. Religion can be used as a weapon, not just a shield.
The principle appears to be logically consistent. It is this principle that gives rise to the argument against one state-affiliated religion, because even within a single religion, there are many denominations. If European history has taught us anything, things can get quite tense.
It is interesting to note that the same liberal principle can be applied in reverse – against liberalism.
You might, for example, believe that there are only a few genders. You may believe that there is a need to update the concept of original sin and salvation, and have a holy Pride Month with your own rituals. Flags and images might be displayed on every building in America. In this world there are consequences to forcing these beliefs down someone else’s throat. Technically, it is still a free nation, as its original design intended.
Two giants, Bud Light & Target, have recently suffered the same consequences. Bud Light, an average beer targeted at working-class Americans had a social media influencer who was transgender prancing in high heels. After a massive boycott, the beer’s sales plummeted. Target, a high-priced department shop for middle-class women with aspirations, displayed a Pride display that included satanic symbols and transgender clothes, including garments for breast-binding, “tucking”, and other practices.
Target’s stock fell five times faster after a similar period of boycott than Bud Light. Newsweek reported “In the first nine of the Bud Light boycott Anheuser-Busch’s stock fell 2.42 percent.” The stock price of the company fell by 13.5 percent from May 17 to 26, which is the same time period as the Target boycott.
Conservatives do not have a natural activist inclination. Most conservatives have only recently learned about mass boycotts and targeted economic attacks. Our enlightened sophisticates are now increasingly referring to “normal” things as “far right”. Unfortunately, for left-wingers, the majority of Americans are still “normal”, and they instinctively oppose radicalism in LGBT. This is in direct conflict with the activist leaderships of all large businesses who are pushing social liberalism and LGBT politics. They were bound to collide sooner or later.
The Napier principle is at play here, but it’s not the most important thing.
Subscribe Now
Receive weekly emails to your inbox
The British General Sir Charles James Napier is said to have been walking through colonial India when a group lower-caste Hindus approached him and asked if they could immolate the widows on a funeral pyre as this was “customary”. Napier responded that it was their right to do so, but that the British-Indian garrison would erect a gallows next to the pyre as it was both British law and custom to hang people who kill others.
The markets don’t self-correct. They’re forced to. Target and Bud Light, as well as the majority of normal people and conservatives are slowly realizing this. Shareholders of the company should be held responsible for losses and breach of fiduciary duty.
Other American companies will realize eventually that promoting LGBT politics among normal Americans will provoke a powerful reaction. It is imperative that power be balanced.
