Yes, if the owners and officials of Coors actively pursue an agenda I find abhorrent, one having nothing to do with the brewing and sale of beer-flavored Rocky Mountain spring water, I should not support them with my hard-earned money
( ... )
What if they did leave their prejudices at home. What if you drove past their house and discovered yard signs for a Neo-Nazi skinhead candidate who espouses a way of life last considered normal 100 years ago.
What if you bring it up and they confess all their income from this job is going to that candidate's campaign since he is so far behind in the polls.
Should you - for the sake of the world - make sure that bozo has no money to promote his disturbing beliefs?
What if they didn't advocate openly for their preferred candidate, but you discovered when researching that your (say) accountant donated to a candidate you find reprehensible. They don't flaunt it openly, but they are nonetheless guilty of believing Wrong Things. Would you (should you?) drop them?
Also, would you out them to your friends so you could all bully them until they stop believing that Wrong Thing?
Edited to add: "bully" is the wrong term. But the same question: would you make sure that Good People knew that this employee of theirs or vendor they might use thought this Wrong Thing secretly?
Can we be specific about what kind of Wrong Thing we're talking about, here? Is it a danger to my society? If so, then absolutely yes. Are they unlikely to have an effect on the liberties of others? No.
What are these people doing with their wrong opinions? Because I'm not sure how seriously to take some of them. Some of the people in line with me in the supermarket believe, at some level, that I should be stoned to death for my sins. None of them so far are doing it. When you used the example of someone donating money to a candidate who might remove my right to marry, or someone else's to have an abortion, then I was ready to shout it from the rooftops. So to each of these beliefs I have to ask, how far are they willing to go in support of those beliefs? There's pie in the sky and there's real life. Someone hiring me might want to know, if it were true, that I believed in anarchy, the overthrow of the government. But wouldn't they also want to know if I just think this would be awesome, like some kind of teenager, or whether I belong to a cell that's fundraising to overthrow the government? I think that's fair.
It seems to me that you are neglecting the fact that people have other means by which to promulgate their beliefs. Freedom of speech only requires a soapbox upon which to broadcast one's ideas; freedom of the press, in the Information/Internet Age, is nearly as cheap as that. A person need not own a domain or even pay for an Internet connection: wireless & service hosts make it simple for someone to announce whatever blessed or biased ideas s/he holds dear.
So the deprivation of funds has nothing to do with eliminating someone's access to the intellectual marketplace. It may have an influence, yes--we all know that monied interests have greater access to those who have the power to effect change on the national stage--but it would not keep someone from promoting their own beliefs.
So even if we determine that it's aspirational to call out when someone believes Wrong Things so we can make sure they don't profit from our business, it might backfire? Because if it's their IDEAS we don't want promulgating then calling a boycott just promulgated them?
LOL.
I think you're right.
I've not really been able to put a really firm finger on why I am so unhappy about boycotting businesses for trollish behavior. My principle concern is the basic lesson of Shoah: you have to stand up for the odd duck who believes differently than you do (and even practices weird behaviors like circumcision) because OTHERWISE the majority will end up doing unspeakable things. Either diversity is welcome or it is not. Economic persecution as a weapon strikes a little too close to my heart and it scares me.
But, yeah, "don't feed the trolls" are words to live by, too.
It's not that simple, no, because one person's jerk is another person's hero, when it comes to many issues. Barilla might be a jerk to people who support gay marriage. But people who don't support it then Barilla's a hero. So how would Barilla Not Be a Jerk?
Q. "Signor Barilla, you feature families in your advertising. Will you put gay couples in your ads?"
A. "Everyone loves Barilla pasta."
Q. "With respect, Signor Barilla, you haven't answered my question."
A. "I'll talk to my marketing department and get back to you. Next question?" And the silver-tongued PR team can take it from there.
Barilla is in the business of making and selling pasta. Full stop. Whatever its management and employees might believe is irrelevant. Chairman Barilla has a fiduciary responsibility to his stakeholders to sell as much pasta as possible. Taking sides on a controversial social issue does not further that goal.
I'm perfectly within my rights to make and sell White Christian Nation brand pasta (white durum flour only, no whole wheat, with a picture of a barefoot and pregnant woman cooking on the box). You are perfectly within your rights to not buy it and encourage others not to buy it. What I don't have a right to is your dollar.
I didn't want to get into this, because it's not central to my point, but I think there very likely WAS a marketing decision to a.) get eyeballs and b.) get ACLU types like me to stand up for the bullied and c.) win over their target demographics - poor uneducated people who might still be brand-name shoppers for pasta. It worked pretty sweet for Chik-fil-A, a man who was long-since known for instilling a Christian culture in his company. (There were SIGNS on kiosks in airports stating he held to the sabbath, for example.)
I'm very disquieted by the response of "get the bastard!" that I hear. I think a more appropriate response would be to act like he just farted in the grocery store. Ewww. Humans are so yucky.
Gwen, we've been 'round and 'round this too many times. I don't give a rat's patoot if Guido Barilla loathes gay people with every fiber of his being. I don't care if that foolish bakery couple gritted their teeth every time a divorced Jewish lesbian atheist came in to buy an eclair. The point is simply that if you're in business to sell goods and services to the general public, show a little professionalism and keep your private opinions to yourself.
There is, our mothers taught us, a time and a place for everything. The marketplace is not the soap box or the pulpit.
Reply
What if you bring it up and they confess all their income from this job is going to that candidate's campaign since he is so far behind in the polls.
Should you - for the sake of the world - make sure that bozo has no money to promote his disturbing beliefs?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Edited to add: "bully" is the wrong term. But the same question: would you make sure that Good People knew that this employee of theirs or vendor they might use thought this Wrong Thing secretly?
Reply
Reply
1.) Marriage should be limited to one man and one woman
2.) The disciple of Mohammed who needs to be followed as his legitimate heir is his son-in-law
3.) When a woman aborts a fetus it is a crime against that fetus
People who believe these things and advocate for adoption of policies in line with their beliefs are Wrong.
How should a civil society with multi-cultural attributes BEST deal with the fact that they hold Incorrect Opinions?
Reply
Reply
So the deprivation of funds has nothing to do with eliminating someone's access to the intellectual marketplace. It may have an influence, yes--we all know that monied interests have greater access to those who have the power to effect change on the national stage--but it would not keep someone from promoting their own beliefs.
Reply
LOL.
I think you're right.
I've not really been able to put a really firm finger on why I am so unhappy about boycotting businesses for trollish behavior. My principle concern is the basic lesson of Shoah: you have to stand up for the odd duck who believes differently than you do (and even practices weird behaviors like circumcision) because OTHERWISE the majority will end up doing unspeakable things. Either diversity is welcome or it is not. Economic persecution as a weapon strikes a little too close to my heart and it scares me.
But, yeah, "don't feed the trolls" are words to live by, too.
Reply
Reply
Q. "Signor Barilla, you feature families in your advertising. Will you put gay couples in your ads?"
A. "Everyone loves Barilla pasta."
Q. "With respect, Signor Barilla, you haven't answered my question."
A. "I'll talk to my marketing department and get back to you. Next question?" And the silver-tongued PR team can take it from there.
Barilla is in the business of making and selling pasta. Full stop. Whatever its management and employees might believe is irrelevant. Chairman Barilla has a fiduciary responsibility to his stakeholders to sell as much pasta as possible. Taking sides on a controversial social issue does not further that goal.
I'm perfectly within my rights to make and sell White Christian Nation brand pasta (white durum flour only, no whole wheat, with a picture of a barefoot and pregnant woman cooking on the box). You are perfectly within your rights to not buy it and encourage others not to buy it. What I don't have a right to is your dollar.
Reply
I'm very disquieted by the response of "get the bastard!" that I hear. I think a more appropriate response would be to act like he just farted in the grocery store. Ewww. Humans are so yucky.
Reply
I don't think it was a marketing decision. It's far more likely that Guido Barilla was simply expressing the sentiments of his family and community.. Have you seen this blog entry? http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2013/09/27/barilla_pasta_boycott_in_italy_italian_lgbt_life_and_homophobia.html
Reply
Reply
There is, our mothers taught us, a time and a place for everything. The marketplace is not the soap box or the pulpit.
Reply
Leave a comment