Is Starbucks Racist?

[GMDino]

(04-18-2018, 10:27 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I agree that Starbucks should come forward and take ownership of their policy decision, rather than staging some companywide re-teaching effort for show.  I highly doubt that the directive itself was intended to be racist, but intended to keep loiterers in general from choking out business in those areas.  The fact that people are making an issue of the people involved being black is what is ironic.  If it were white people that refused to leave, no one would likely bat an eye.  They were asked to leave, they refused to go.  At that point, they are lawbreakers.  Why the sympathy and "outrage", simply because of the offender's race?  

Is Starbucks supposed to ignore the fact that they are loitering, because they are black, and that makes it OK? 

If only white people were being asked to leave you can bet your sweet bitty that it would be on the news.

But, again, it is because black people have a history with being singled out.  So when it happens (again) then tend to get upset about it.

I agree that the easiest answer would be the company saying they had a policy to try and weed out loiterers and they need to train employees to better handle the situations as they arise before the police get involved and a scene is made.  The fact that they did NOT say that makes me wonder if this was a regional thing rather than a countrywide thing.

That might come out in the wash too.