The public boycotts have been mounting, justifiably and encouragingly so, against organizations that insist on supporting immoral thought and behavior either directly or indirectly.
First it was Target, after they announced that their bathrooms and fitting rooms would be open to “transgender” persons. Then it was Shakespeare in the Park, depicting what a Trump assassination would look like if interpreted along the lines of Julius Caesar. It has culminated with the NFL and its insistence that players be allowed to disrespect our national anthem and Old Glory.
One would think that many commentators, particularly of the “conservative” brand, would be gleeful over the fact that much of the public has had enough of the incessant, sanctimonious lecturing and imposition of liberal “values” from elites in various industries and government circles. However, quite the opposite has occurred. Here’s a sampling:
“…if we all start boycotting products because we don’t like the views expressed by some of the people that the products are sponsoring, we could be in trouble in the political media in general.” – Ben Shapiro, discussing Shakespeare at the Park with Fox News host Martha McCallum
“I’m not a big fan of organized boycotts, for two reasons. One, they almost never work, and two, they give too much cachet to their targets. Better to just keep calling them out, and to make your own personal choices about the films.” – Ed Morrissey, Senior Editor of HotAir.com, discussing boycotts against Hollywood productions
“I hate to boycott things, especially entertainment. But I don’t blame people for doing it. These millionaires give each other awards and then stand up at the podium and rain hatred on Trump, thus insulting some 40 million audience members who earn one tenth of what the stars make for working ten times as hard.” – Andrew Klavan, screenwriter and host of a DailyWire.com podcast discussing Hollywood boycotts
Is it any wonder why leftists love to employ the word “reactionary” to describe conservatives? In truth, in many instances the euphemism isn’t in vain, due to the fact that these high-profile pundits are expert grumblers about all things governance and social issues but almost never offer practical solutions to resist the inclination towards Marxism, cultural and economic.
Adding salt to the proverbial wound, these rabble-rousers turn around and attempt to demoralize those that decide to do something by claiming that “it won’t work”. Yet, make no mistake, the reason they do so is because of self-interest.
Consider Mr. Shapiro’s words once again and focus on the end of the thought: “…if we all start boycotting products…we could be in trouble in the political media in general”. In others words, Shapiro and others like him dislike boycotts, not because they aren’t effective, but because it could hurt the commentator’s economic interests.
Andrew Klavan is particularly worthy of chastisement as well. This is the same man whom constantly laments the tide of immorality propagated by Hollywood but then admits that even though Harvey Weinstein’s predatory behavior was a known fact within film industry circles, he recently pitched Weinstein a script in his office before the sordid details of his exploits were widely reported on. (Relevant remarks begin at the 8:27 mark.) Isn’t this known as hypocrisy in Biblical circles?
The truth is that boycotts work. All one must do to find evidence of this is to look at the fact that Target is closing 13 of its stores nationwide (more than a few in conservative counties) and that the NFL is hemorrhaging attendees and a great portion of its television audience which is causing advertisers like Papa John’s great unease.
Historically speaking, if proper boycotts don’t work, how did the Boston Tea Party and subsequent Tea Parties incite the eventually successful American Revolution?
Moral of the story: Beware of many rabble-rousing commentators on the Right (although the Left lead the pack as it pertains to ulterior motivations). More than likely, they’re in the game to stoke your emotions in a negative manner, pointing out all kinds of social and political troubles, only to discourage you when you attempt to resolve the matter because it might deleteriously affect their own interests.