Should beer consumers care about the political affiliations of the people who make their favourite quaff? What should they do when they discover that they might differ in political perspectives from their local brewery? These are questions I have been thinking about recently given certain events.

To be truthful I have been thinking about it for quite a long time. It is just recent events have spurred me to write about it.

The trigger was the revelations on the eve of the Edmonton municipal election that Greg Zeschuk, owner of Blind Enthusiasm and Biera, donated $5000 to Mike Nickel, the controversial right-wing populist candidate for mayor (who lost to new mayor Amarjeet Sohi). Biera and Zeschuk were inundated with phone calls, social media posts and messages decrying his decision. Many pledged to never spend another dollar for his products. A few became abusive to Biera staff.

The news came as a shock to many, as Zeschuk has generally been regarded as a person with progressive social and political views. It was an unusual situation. I don’t have to explain it to you because Zeschuk, in a rare example of public accountability posted an honest, human personal account of the context of the donation and what his values are. You can find that statement here.

That event was the trigger, but it is only the latest of many situations where brewery owners in the province faced an onslaught of criticism, vitriol and general ugliness because of becoming associated with one political position or another. It has troubled me and I have been trying to process it.

Mostly it has been issues of partisanship, which has become intensely polarized in recent years, but more than that it seems the air politically is electrically charged these days.

Other examples. A little over a year ago, Troubled Monk was the recipient of a torrent of denouncements, boycott threats, and insults because Premier Kenney posted a video from their brewery after a tour. People were quick to accuse the Bredo brothers of being UCP supporters and vowed to never buy their beer again. The fact is Troubled Monk had no prior warning of the video and were unclear what the purpose of the video was (I spoke to Charlie Bredo about this). The Premier’s Office called to ask for a tour and a discussion about the beer industry. They agreed. In addition, the video is not particularly political, discussing Troubled Monk’s origins, its products and the challenges of brewing beer in Alberta. For the record a couple of years earlier they hosted then-Premier Rachel Notley for a similar tour and talk. She chose to keep it a private event where she could learn more about the industry and how the government could help. Charlie is clear he will host any politician who wants to learn more about the beer industry. But people jumped to the conclusion he was a partisan for letting the Premier enter his facility and make a video.

It is not just reactions from those on the left. Christina Owczarek, owner of the contract brewery Xhale Brewing, came across many accounts who refused to carry her first release, Impeachable, because of its explicit critique of then-President Donald Trump. I saw social media posts criticizing her for daring to show her progressive politics. In addition I remember during the Notley government ministers were enthusiastic to do photo-ops with breweries and often the result for the brewery was people vowing boycotts. Unlike Bredo and Zeschuk, Owczarek acknowledges she intentionally places her politics front and centre and expects response as a result. However, from my perspective that intentionality does not alter the dynamics of online and personal attacks.

The reactions speak to a disturbing intensification of politics in Alberta. (I use that word intentionally as I don’t consider polarization in terms of policy as necessarily bad; it is the increased ugliness and personalization I struggle with). It goes well beyond beer; threats of physical violence against public figures have become commonplace, the personal derision of politicians with whom people disagree is increasingly ugly. COVID-19 and its associated challenges are making things worse.

But my beat here is beer.

On one hand, I completely understand and agree with consumer activism. Consumers have a right to choose how to spend their money and should consider the ethical, social and political implications of their purchases. I engage in that kind of decision-making often. There are many businesses I go out of my way to support for reasons other than I like their product/service. There are also businesses – including breweries – that I choose not to patronize. Usually, for me, it is about their employment practices and their actions as a business but I can’t say I am completely immune from quietly avoiding places where the owners’ political views were distasteful for me.

Yet, in all the examples I cited (and others) the offense being taken wasn’t about how good an employer the person was or whether their business was acting ethically or in the community’s interest. It was about their association with (or opposition to) a political personality or party. And often the loudest voices knew the least about the people they were denouncing.

There is a camp (likely a very large one) that argues breweries (and other businesses) should just stay out of politics. First, it is bad for business – why turn off a portion of your potential customer-base? And some think it isn’t the appropriate role for a brewery – just brew good beer and leave politics to others. I am not in that camp. Breweries and their owners are community leaders, and community leaders have an obligation to engage in the life of their community, including the politics, and use their privileged voice to help make change happen. Plus why should owning a brewery disqualify you from participating in something we all have a right to do?

For me, in the end, I think the problem is that vitriol, chest-pounding and posturing has replaced engagement, debate and discussion. We don’t try to understand opposing views anymore. We reject and retreat to our echo chambers. We vilify and villainize those who disagree with us, content in our mirrored room where we only see what looks like us.

Sit down and have a chat with Zeschuk, Bredo or Owczarek and you will quickly learn that are all decent, thoughtful people who, like all of us, have complex views, make imperfect decisions and sometimes find themselves in situations not of their making. But some, instead of trying to understand the whole story, much prefer jumping to conclusions and passing final judgement. That makes no sense to me.

I want to be clear about something. There are certain views and actions that should never be tolerated and are fully deserving of being condemned and called out. Racism, misogyny, homophobia and extreme anti-social views have no place in beer (or the community). Sometimes social ostracism is the only appropriate response to those views. AND the beer industry is not immune to any of those issues and collectively we need to tackle them and hold breweries accountable for it.

But donating money to a candidate you oppose, or allowing the Premier to tour their facility does not reach that threshold. Being right wing or left wing is not disqualifying from being treated with respect. If you don’t want to buy their beer anymore because of it, that is your right. But maybe next time try to understand the context behind the tweet you read before retweeting it.