When a Brand Turns into a Flag.

The dream of every brand is cultural reach, of seeing its logo walk through the world as a mark of belonging and influence in society. But what happens when that belonging turns up in the wrong crowd? When the same symbols that once represented innovation, rebellion, or creative confidence now appear on the shoulders of those who stand for division, hate, or exclusion?

In more recent years, we’ve seen luxury parkas on political stages, sportswear at extremist rallies, and subcultural uniforms appropriated by movements that have nothing to do with the spirit in which they were made or meant for. It’s a pretty confronting thought when the clothes designed to connect us can just as easily be used to divide.

Now I understand that this is not new. But it is a strong reminder that brands don’t own meaning, they only rent it.

Once that logo leaves the studio, it becomes public property and very much in the emotional sense. It’s no longer a piece of design but a symbol that can be easily reinterpreted, repurposed, and recharged with new energy by whoever wears it loudest.

The Psychology of Symbolic Drift

So every brand is built on an emotional code, it's that cluster of values, sensations, and beliefs that tell people who it’s for and how it feels to belong. But when those codes are very loosely defined or poorly maintained and managed, they become undefended and exposed.

Symbols with strong emotional charge especially when its things like masculinity, defiance, power, exclusivity always attract those seeking identity. Therefore when individuals or movements are searching for collective strength, a brand can become an easy way and shorthand for unity.

Just take the now-iconic compass of Stone Island, worn by musicians, football fans, and cultural outsiders for decades. Its military precision and subcultural heritage made it a badge of rebellion. But that same energy, ungoverned and checked is and has become magnetic to groups seeking visual power and status. When the wrong people start wearing a symbol, it’s rarely because they misunderstood it, it’s normally because it made them feel something they wanted to own.

This is what I call symbolic drift and it's when a brand’s emotional energy detaches from its intent and begins orbiting new ideologies.

And in the hyperconnected world we live in today, where imagery spreads faster than meaning, that symbolic drift can literally happen overnight.

When Emotion Outruns Ownership

Emotion is contagious and it's something all of us have experienced in our lives at some point. It moves faster than marketing, faster than messaging and unfortunately it moves faster than the truth. Today it only takes one image of the “wrong person” wearing your product and it will rewrite years of brand building in a single afternoon.

But what’s even more dangerous than misuse is ambiguity. When a brand’s ideology isn’t consistently reinforced through design, voice, and experience, the world around it starts filling in the blanks. The loudest emotional signal always wins and unfortunately even if it completely contradicts the brand’s intention.

Brands can and do spend millions on defining tone and typography, but too few invest in defining emotional authorship and it's the feeling that anchors every choice. Without it, the symbol just becomes a mirror for whatever energy the culture projects onto it.

A brand that stands for nothing emotionally will inevitably stand for whoever shouts loudest.

The Fragile Contract Between Brand and Culture

When a logo or product gets hijacked by movements that represent hate, the instinctive corporate reaction is normally to condemn, distance, and disassociate. But while that may protect optics in the short term, it does very little to restore meaning. The challenge is brands can’t reclaim a symbol through PR statements, they have to and can only reclaim it through presence, purpose, and consistency.

What that means returning to the emotional source code and the founding truth that made people care about it in the first place. For some, that might mean doubling down on creativity, unity, or rebellion. For others, it’s about showing that the brand’s soul has never been for sale, even if its clothes are.

When the British sportswear label Lonsdale found itself co-opted by extremists decades ago, it responded in a really smart way, it didn’t retreat and remained on the offensive. It responded with “Lonsdale Loves All Colours,” a super cool campaign that celebrated diversity and explicitly redefined its emotional narrative. It was bold, uncomfortable, and deeply human and as a result it worked.

That’s a best in class example of what emotional governance looks like. Not panic. Not silence. But clarity.

Symbols Don’t Become Dangerous on Their Own

A symbol doesn’t become corrupted just because of who wears it. It becomes corrupted because of what the brand fails to stand for and when meaning is left unattended, it can quickly become a tool for someone else’s story. When that emotion is not guided, it gets weaponised.

Fashion has always been a language of belonging and one of the many reasons I love it. Every logo, fabric, or cut is an opportunity to say something about who we are and more importantly who we are not. That’s its beauty and its risk.

The job of leadership today isn’t to police who wears the brand, but to ensure that the brand’s emotional truth is so well defined that it can’t ever be mistaken. Because once your values are clear along with the feeling you are selling, even misappropriation can’t rewrite them and even people who might borrow your aesthetic, they can’t hijack your intent.

The New Role of Brand Leadership

The reality is we are living in a time where ideology and images move and spread faster than ideas and what this means is leadership is no longer just about telling stories, but protecting the meaning that holds them together.

Leaders must ask:

• What emotion do we truly represent?

• Does that emotion bring people together or divide them?

• Have we designed our identity systems to be clear enough that no movement can reinterpret them?

These are not design questions. They are ethical, cultural, and human questions. Because design is just the vessel and emotion is the current. When we neglect the emotional architecture beneath their aesthetics, they leave their meaning valuable and exposed for misinterpretation and when that happens, someone else will always move in to claim it.

The Hard Truth

Look, you can’t choose who wears your brand. But what you can choose is what you stand for when they do. Symbols don’t lose power because of misuse, they lose power because of silence. I don’t think the world expects brands to control who buys their products, but I do think the world expects them to know what their products represent. Fashion will always mirror humanity’s need to belong and the question, now more than ever, is whether your brand teaches people to belong to something good. Because when meaning drifts, the soul of the symbol goes with it and once that’s gone, you’re not leading culture anymore, you’re going to be chasing it.