Boycott Bud Light, regardless of Trump’s statements
On Tuesday, former President Donald Trump took to his social media platform Truth Social to make a bold statement: it’s time to end the boycott of Anheuser-Busch and Bud Light. Speculation is swirling about Trump’s motives, with rumors of a fundraiser hosted by an Anheuser-Busch lobbyist next month. In his post, Trump listed several reasons for ending the boycott, but none of them hold water.
He argued that Anheuser-Busch employs many people, including veterans, but this is hardly unique for a company of its size. Any large corporation will inevitably have veterans on its payroll and make charitable donations. Trump also claimed that Anheuser-Busch is not a “woke” company, despite their exploitation of a mentally ill transgender activist and their celebration of his affinity for women’s clothing, showing a complete lack of respect for decency, truth, and their customers’ values. Anheuser-Busch never even acknowledged their wrongdoing. If that’s not a “woke” company, then what is?
Trump pointed out that there are other companies with even more egregious examples of corporate wokeness. While he’s not wrong, the existence of worse offenders doesn’t excuse Anheuser-Busch’s actions. If we followed this line of thinking, we would only boycott the absolute worst company, leaving all the others off the hook. That would be a misguided approach, to say the least.
Abandoning the Bud Light boycott would be a grave mistake in the culture war. When boycotts are announced, their chances of success are always uncertain. However, the Bud Light boycott has a unique advantage: conservatives can easily live without this product. In my opinion, the success of a boycott can be predicted by the effort required to maintain it. With Bud Light, the bar is set low – this should be an easy win for conservatives.
I may not be a beer connoisseur, but Bud Light is far from a top-shelf brew. Moreover, the market is flooded with countless other nearly identical beers. If this boycott fails, it’s safe to assume that most future corporate boycotts will also fail. We need to choose our battles wisely. It’s challenging to boycott companies that provide essential services or products for modern life (such as banks and credit card companies). Given the pervasiveness of leftism, the only way to boycott every leftist company would be to live primitively in the wilderness, completely off the grid.
The Bud Light boycott serves as a litmus test. If conservatives can’t maintain a boycott that requires minimal effort, the influence of corporate leftism will continue to grow. Corporations and politicians are watching closely to see what conservatives do next. Whether this boycott continues will depend on our determination and commitment to the truth.
If Anheuser-Busch wants this boycott to end, the solution is simple: issue a public statement acknowledging that men cannot become women. The fact that any company hesitates to do this shows how corporate leftism threatens even the most basic truths. Now is not the time to surrender, and Trump needs to understand this more than anyone.
B.L Hahn is a freelance writer covering culture, politics, and economics.
Why is it important to judge each company on its own actions and values rather than comparing them to others when deciding whether to end a boycott
Boycott relies heavily on the commitment and sacrifice of its supporters. By continuing the boycott, conservatives send a clear message to corporations like Anheuser-Busch that they will not support companies that disrespect their values and engage in actions that undermine decency and truth.
Moreover, Trump’s claim that ending the boycott would benefit workers, including veterans, is shortsighted. While it is true that Anheuser-Busch employs many individuals, ending the boycott would signal to the company that their unethical practices are acceptable, potentially perpetuating a culture of exploitation and disrespect. It is essential to hold companies accountable for their actions, regardless of the number of employees they have or the charitable donations they make.
The argument that there are other companies with worse examples of corporate wokeness is not a valid justification for ending the boycott. Each company should be judged on its own actions and the values it upholds. Accepting the actions of one company because others have committed worse offenses sets a dangerous precedent and undermines the principles that boycotts seek to uphold.
The culture war we find ourselves in requires a steadfast commitment to fighting for decency, truth, and the preservation of our values. The Bud Light boycott serves as a symbol of resistance against corporate practices that undermine these principles. By standing firm in our boycott, we show corporations that we will not waver in our commitment to preserving decency and truth.
In conclusion, the arguments put forth by Donald Trump in favor of ending the boycott of Anheuser-Busch and Bud Light do not hold water. We must continue the boycott to send a strong message to corporations that their actions have consequences and that we will not support companies that engage in unethical practices. Only by standing firm in our commitment can we preserve the values that are at the core of the culture war we find ourselves in.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
