LukefromDC on Nostr: Starbucks is an interesting case. We have attacked Starbucks generation after ...
Starbucks is an interesting case. We have attacked Starbucks generation after generation now.
It all began at Seattle WTO 1999, not long after a major battle involving anarchists in (you guessed it) Eugene, Oregon. Cops planning for the WTO even used the term "Eugene Anarchists" as I recall!
At the Battle of Seattle, the black bloc only engaged six targets, each with a specific and publicized rationale behind it. McDonalds obviously, but what about Starbucks? At that time, Starbucks had a faux progressive reputation. This concealed an ugly reality: Starbucks contributed to and continued to contribute for at least another 15 more years to hunger in East Timor!
They seem to dominate the market for the country's coffee crop at rock-bottom prices, often not even enough to replace food crops that could have been grown instead of coffee beans.
As late as 2013, E Timorese coffee farmers found their money running out about 4 months before the next harvest, leading to an annual time of hunger. THIS is why the black bloc at N30 smashed out the windows at a Starbucks. All reports I can find indicate that East Timor is still a "coffee republic" with Starbucks in the role of United Fruit.
Here is a report published in 2013 (14 years after N30) about the effect of Starbucks on hunger in East Timor in a year when coffee prices hit a four year low.
https://world.time.com/2013/10/25/the-east-timorese-are-selling-tons-of-great-organic-coffee-but-they-still-starve/
Meanwhile, Starbucks kept right on selling all that cheap coffee to yuppies for $5 a cup! This while Starbucks would spend more money if they bought their coffee from Maxwell House or even McDonald's. See that Starbucks, smash that window!
There are many other problems with Starbucks, starting with a union-busting campaign that went all the way to the US Supreme Court before labor defeated it. This is considered a major breaktrough for labor, unions at Starbucks will hopefully pave the way for unions broadly in the restaurant industry.
This of course still doesn't address the role of Starbucks in gentrification,or the closely related locking of toilets against unhoused people at times when it is deemed politically safe to do so.
It all began at Seattle WTO 1999, not long after a major battle involving anarchists in (you guessed it) Eugene, Oregon. Cops planning for the WTO even used the term "Eugene Anarchists" as I recall!
At the Battle of Seattle, the black bloc only engaged six targets, each with a specific and publicized rationale behind it. McDonalds obviously, but what about Starbucks? At that time, Starbucks had a faux progressive reputation. This concealed an ugly reality: Starbucks contributed to and continued to contribute for at least another 15 more years to hunger in East Timor!
They seem to dominate the market for the country's coffee crop at rock-bottom prices, often not even enough to replace food crops that could have been grown instead of coffee beans.
As late as 2013, E Timorese coffee farmers found their money running out about 4 months before the next harvest, leading to an annual time of hunger. THIS is why the black bloc at N30 smashed out the windows at a Starbucks. All reports I can find indicate that East Timor is still a "coffee republic" with Starbucks in the role of United Fruit.
Here is a report published in 2013 (14 years after N30) about the effect of Starbucks on hunger in East Timor in a year when coffee prices hit a four year low.
https://world.time.com/2013/10/25/the-east-timorese-are-selling-tons-of-great-organic-coffee-but-they-still-starve/
Meanwhile, Starbucks kept right on selling all that cheap coffee to yuppies for $5 a cup! This while Starbucks would spend more money if they bought their coffee from Maxwell House or even McDonald's. See that Starbucks, smash that window!
There are many other problems with Starbucks, starting with a union-busting campaign that went all the way to the US Supreme Court before labor defeated it. This is considered a major breaktrough for labor, unions at Starbucks will hopefully pave the way for unions broadly in the restaurant industry.
This of course still doesn't address the role of Starbucks in gentrification,or the closely related locking of toilets against unhoused people at times when it is deemed politically safe to do so.