Here’s your overpriced pretentious specialty coffee drink, and would you like to check your white privilege with that? Apparently, Starbucks is not content with being the home to douchey hipsters pretending to be writers; they also want to be the destination for uncomfortable racial confrontations. The coffee giant is encouraging its employees to give customers crap about racism.
Beginning on Monday, Starbucks baristas will have the option as they serve customers to hand cups on which they’ve handwritten the words “Race Together” and start a discussion about race. This Friday, each copy of USA Today – which has a daily print circulation of almost 2 million and is a partner of Starbucks in this initiative – will have the first of a series of insert with information about race relations, including a variety of perspectives on race. Starbucks coffee shops will also stock the insert.
As for that “variety of perspectives,” we should look no further than Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz to see what the company thinks about race relations in this country:
The initiative follows several months of consultations with employees that started in December, in part as a result of protests that roiled several U.S. cities after grand juries declined to indict white police officers in the killings of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., near St. Louis, and 43-year-old Eric Garner in Staten Island, N.Y.
Schultz has met with almost 2,000 Starbucks employees since then in cities hit most directly by racial tension and anti-police brutality protests in the last year, including Oakland, St. Louis, Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Seattle, where Starbucks is based.
In other words, Schultz comes from a perspective that white people are racists, that cops victimize black people, and that our entire society unfairly places non-whites in a position of disadvantage. So when he says he wants Starbucks employees to engage customers in discussions on race, clearly he wants to push his guilty liberal position of “blame whitey” for everything.
I don’t drink coffee, but if I did, I sure as sh*t wouldn’t get it from Starbucks. But let’s just say that I was getting a burrito at Chipotle and the tortilla guy started in with me about my white privilege. My response would be to tell him to go to hell and I would never buy food from that company again. People simply don’t want to take crap from some minimum wage dork.
Even Fortune acknowledges this is a bad move:
The potential exists for arguments to break out (not for nothing this topic is the third rail of U.S. politics), and some may fairly question any move that could potentially slow in-store service.
I don’t doubt that a good portion of Starbucks customers are liberals that will love this, but sooner rather than later, a barista is going to pick a racism fight with the wrong person. Especially considering how cranky some people are before they have their morning coffee.
CEO Schultz has already alienated gun owners by bowing to pressure from Moms Demand Action and proving he doesn’t respect the 2nd Amendment. Now he seems intent on narrowing his customer base to persons of color and those who admit to their white privilege. Under this business model, pretty soon you won’t be able to get a cup of coffee unless you believe in man-made global warming.
Banks continued to say that she hates “everything about this country,” specifically “fat white Americans. All the people who are crunched into the middle of America, the real fat and meat of America, are these racist conservative white people who live on their farms.”
The New York City native said she doesn’t need to explain herself to fans.
“I get annoyed with the fact that I’m even asked to explain myself,” she said. “Why do I have to explain this to y’all? My little white fans will be like, ‘Why do you want reparations for work you didn’t do?’ Well, you got handed down your grandfather’s estate and you got to keep your grandmother’s diamonds and pearls and s–t.”
Azealia, if America is sooo RAAAAACIST, how did you make it?
On November 24, 2014, at least 18 Ferguson businesses were torched to the ground and several more were looted and vandalized after a jury announced it would not indict Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of robber Michael Brown.
Thanks to the non-stop protests, the violence, the arson, the looting property values in Ferguson have dropped nearly fifty percent in the last seven months.
The average selling price of a home in the city has been on a steady decline since the shooting of Brown last August, according to housing data compiled from MARIS, an information and statistics service for real estate agents. Prior to Brown’s death, the average home sold in 2014 was selling for $66,764. For the last three and a half months of the year, the average home sold for $36,168, a 46 percent decrease.
The trend has continued on through this year, with the average home selling for only $22,951 so far in 2015. Another negative indicator: in the eight and a half months leading up to Brown’s death, the average residential square foot in 2014 was selling for $45.82. In the eight and a half months since Brown’s passing, the average residential square foot in the city has sold for $24.11. That’s about a 47 percent downtick in one of real estate’s core indicators.
“This is not normal for the region,” says Crista Patton, a local REMAX real estate agent who helped get these numbers for Fusion. “Last time I pulled up numbers like this for a neighborhood around here, we were seeing the market going up,” she says. “In St. Louis in general, the market is going up, and as a whole it’s almost completely recovered from the recession.”
The city admits that its finances are taking a hit, with no end in sight, due to the events since Brown’s death. “The[city’s] response to the unrest, as well as other related matters, has resulted in significant, unanticipated expenditures,” reads the city’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 2014. “The civil unrest also resulted in some lost revenues… At this time, the total impact of this event on the City’s revenues and expenses is not able to be estimated.”
Two police officers in Ferguson, MO were shot at a protest early Thursday against alleged racism in the department and the city itself. It was not enough that the chief of police had just resigned. It was not enough that a local judge had quit. It was not enough that the Department of Justice had exonerated former officer Darren Wilson. No – the mob, told by President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder that Ferguson was still guilty of racism, wanted “justice.”
The violence is the direct result of incitement by the federal government on the basis of trumped-up accusations, based on the faulty notion that a city that enforces traffic tickets vigorously as a means of raising revenue is inherently racist. (By that standard, my own ultra-progressive town of Santa Monica, California would be akin to a Ku Klux Klan headquarters.)
Racist emails discovered from a few employees implicated those individuals alone–but Obama and Holder wanted more. They, and serial inciter Al Sharpton, wanted the humiliation of the town, wanted the division of America, wanted it to be clear that white public officials could never represent a black population, wanted middle America to know that the federal government could nullify self-government at a whim.
On the basis of the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie, they let black businesses in Ferguson be torched and sewed rage across the country that took the lives of two police officers in New York.
Now the campaign of terror against police has come back to where the great lie started. Obama and Holder will not finish until they have destroyed Ferguson – destroyed it, in the oft-mocked parlance of the Vietnam era, in order to save it, razed it to rebuild it in the stylized image of Selma 1965, razed it in order to fit the delusions of an Attorney General who thinks we have made no progress since the era of Malcolm X and a President who once promised – incredibly! – to unite America.
How can anyone, with a clear conscience, hold up Trayvon Martin, who was killed while trying to murder an innocent man?
The relevant portion begins at 6:20 or so
It is really sad that the civil rights movement, which changed America for the better has been hijacked by race baiters.