portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting portland metro

police / legal

Starbucks Vandalized

Police have taped off the New Starbucks in 7 Corners tonight after someone attempted to throw a molotov coctail through one of their windows. This is the fourth time a window has been smashed on the property since the development began. More info as it becomes available.
Police have taped off the New Starbucks in 7 Corners tonight after someone attempted to throw a molotov coctail through one of their windows. This is the fourth time a window has been smashed on the property since the development began. There has so far been no word from management or the owner as to whether Starbucks still plans to open tomorrow as previously announced. More info as it becomes available.

/ 05.May.2004 02:16

//

I'm glad to hear it was vandalized. If Starbuck's all around the country were vandalized constantly, maybe they would get the idea that their aggressive attitude of putting everyone else out of business is wrong.

Onthe 05.May.2004 02:17

Mark

Starbuck's is a cancer. Great that somebody is taking action against them.

yay for the nightworkers! 05.May.2004 02:28

neighbor

a person who biked by in the last hour said s/he saw "workmen" boarding a window up. awesome!

as a resident of SE Portland who seeks to be non-violent in the way i live my life (being vegetarian, expressing radical politics through gardening, etc.), i would like to say that i whole-heartedly support acts of property destruction against this Starbucks. starbucks is not wanted here. folks already tried working through the system (the neighborhood assn, city council, etc.) to stop this store and that didn't work. so now it's open season for other tactics. the u.s. fetishism with property rights at the expense of everything else (including human rights) is disgusting, and clouds debates over tactics by means of brainwashbullshit.

there is a time and a place for property destruction. that would be NOW and HERE when it comes to the new Starbucks in 7 Corners.

if you want to be legal and above-ground in your techniques (like i myself am choosing to be), come down to SE Division & 21st on wednesday between 2 and 6 for their open house to let them know what you think. be hostile (because they were hostile first by moving in) but make no physical or illegal threats. property damage -- as proven by tonight's excellent action -- will be carried out at other times by other people, bless 'em. in the meantime, the more people who go in there and say it like it is, the better.

yay for the night workers! and yay for the folks who do the above ground organizing. it all works together!!

are we sure it was a molotov cocktail? 05.May.2004 02:31

wonder boy

because that wouldn't make sense. a bottle is just going to break when it hits a window, and wouldn't have its intended purpose (unless the intended purpose was merely for people to see that someone uselessly threw a molotov cocktail). so is the original poster confused or were they led on? or is it purposeful disinfo?

grow up 05.May.2004 03:08

westsider

Yeah, like having a starbucks really hurts anything. Who gives a hell if there are starbucks around or not. If they are really affecting your life, you have bigger issues then this.

And no I'm not some bigtime Starbucks supporter. I don't drink caffeine and have only ever been in one maybe 3 times. But I'm rational.

arson 05.May.2004 06:06

n

fire truck arrived and put water on somthing just before 11:00pm

may the next one burn it down 05.May.2004 06:54

fan of whoever did it

Radical therapy for a neighborhood cancer. Yeh!

As for what's wrong with starbucks, the same thing that's wrong with walmart, or mcdonalds, or taco bell. And then some. They put local businesses out of business, which means the only jobs in town become cheap, unskilled, low wage shit jobs with no benefits and no local connection to ensure moral treatment of workers. It also means that the people have no choices: Travel across the country and see how many choices you have as you move through the thousands of miles of highway lined with taco bells, walmarts, mcdonalds, and yes, starbucks. It means more space on the planet devoted to useless pursuit of shit we don't need. Consumption of more crap that's not even good for us, and comes from friggin somewhere. From places in the third world plowed under to make room for more coffee plantations to feed the mindless habit of yuppie junkies.

Starbucks uses GMO beans, they patronize plantations that treat workers like slaves, and they spread like a cancer across the world. What's wrong with starbucks? Starbux sux.

Some "Neighbour" 05.May.2004 07:45

Another Neighbour

You said:

as a resident of SE Portland who seeks to be non-violent in the way i live my life (being vegetarian, expressing radical politics through gardening, etc.), i would like to say that i whole-heartedly support acts of property destruction against this Starbucks.

You promote yourself as non-violent, yet you supports acts of violence? what does that make you?

You also said:
be hostile (because they were hostile first by moving in) but make no physical or illegal threats. property damage -- as proven by tonight's excellent action -- will be carried out at other times by other people.

So instead of standing up for what you believe in, you want others to take the risk for you? commendable, cowardly but commendable I guess.

For a website that promotes non-violence, you all certainly seem to support it when it suits your particular cause or belief. You'd burn down a business and call it an act of demonstration. What's next, shooting the owner for not moving?

hard to tell the difference 05.May.2004 08:01

glassguy

While their business tactics are sufficiently loathsome to suggest that they were/are asking for it, my original rationale for a lifetime boycott of snarfbux is that their coffee is abominable. I've never roasted coffee beans with a molotov cocktail, but they couldn't be burned any worse than the incinerated crap that they regularly sell to persons with limited taste and discretion.
Now that they've taken both eastern corners of Ladd's, anyone care to speculate
when they'll go for the western corners and circle store?
I remember a tactic suggested for the 34th/Hawthorne/McDeath's fight:
Enter the business, ask for something they can't provide, like a "lesbian happy meal" or coffee that isn't burned to the approximate taste profile of a tire fire, then announce your intention to patronize the locally responsible alternative, and leave.
Boycott ALL starbux, not just this one.

poop on you "another neighbor" 05.May.2004 09:00

-

You grumpy wumpy pooh head. There is a considerble difference between acts of property destruction and violence. It seems like this shouldn't need explaination anymore these days. Breaking a window is not akin to shooting someone. WHO is injured when a window breaks? What kind of actual DAMAGE does it do to ayone? Absolutely none. Worst case, they have to pay to replace the window, and all that takes is money. Trust me, starbucks has plenty of that, and it's time they start 'paying,' if you will, for their disgusting business practices. And what is money, really, but a human construct, a way to objectify just about everything on this earth? The only way that property destruction could ever be considered violent is if one saw 'the system' as an entity in and of it's self. It's not, it is a machine, and maybe this is one tiny little screw that can be loosened. So, the moral of the story is, why the hell would you get so grumpy about a starbucks window being trashed. It's just some peoples way of helping add one more grain of sand into the gas tank, and my best wishes to them all.

The third window 05.May.2004 09:03

silly red

So last nights action took out three windows. WOW, that's just fuckin super! The time is now if we intend to raise the heat on this issue. Lets not only smash there windows but lets also stop all entery into the complex. No one should eneter this building and we as a community can make that happen. Thank you for being willing to take it to the next level.

clueless 05.May.2004 09:14

love starbucks

you people are so clueless. starbucks puts people out of business? on what evidence? seems to me that the starbucks in this town exist, and support, vital business areas. hawthorne, ne 23rd, sellwood. the list goes on and on.

you are just a small, vocal group of misanthropes who claim to speak for the "community." you ignore the many local businesspeople who have spoken *in favor* of Starbucks (incuding ClimbMax right next store).

You ignore that Starbucks does *not* pay lousy wages, provides benefits, and is generally a *good* corporate citizen.

In your hip, ironic, leftist critique, anything corporate is bad and anything local is good. How limited your vision. How impoverished your analysis.

I remember when Starbucks *was* a small coffee shop in Seattle. Nothing pisses off people like success, eh?

Redirect to the Red and Black... 05.May.2004 09:48

Varro

Why not redirect people to the nearby Red & Black Cafe? There, you can get your coffee, plus food, and most importantly, BEER!

The Red & Black is the kind of business people *should* support, as opposed to sucky corporate coffee like Starbucks. Remember, even though Starbucks popularized fancy coffee, it doesn't deserve your business unless it behaves itself, and trying to put locally-owned businesses under is definitely not cool.

if im not right im 05.May.2004 10:34

left

but wanst there some issue of weahter or not starbucks was really having to deal with the windows i mean i support it and all - the BIG A - but not if were acecedently making some poor worker clean up and pay for it all

just hoping the message isnt lost in the hiarchyal way our people end up cleaning up after our destruction

otherwise fuck starbucks and its corprate whores

Glad to see it 05.May.2004 10:45

again

3 windows eh? Good work.

The corporate media announced that it was a firebomb. The corporate whores also stated that people might not go to the protest of the opening because of the action against the property. Obviously they are trying to scare people away from demonstrating. I hope people show up anyway and particularly because of the direct action.

As "neighbor" stated in an earlier post "yay for the night workers! and yay for the folks who do the above ground organizing. it all works together!!"

Have the windows been replaced yet?

Is the opening still going on today?

re: another neighbor 05.May.2004 11:03

Mark

You may not see how sheltered you are, or how intellectual and divorced from real life you are.

Calling some broken windows violence? Ha! That is a simple and direct response to an attack on the community.

The owner and property developer lied to the neighborhood saying it was not going to be a Starbucks. Obviously, if they are lying, then they know there is going to be opposition and they are trying to blunt it. That is what happened. The Starbucks was almost a done deal by the time people found out.

Big corporations with lots of money have the attitude that they can do whatever they want, to whomever they want.

Starbucks purposely targets existing small businesses to drive them under. They send their representatives to attack existing places by trying to have their leases broken and so on. They are a sleazy company with the sole objective of monopoly domination. They care only about money. They are a sickness and an offense to common sense and decency.

I hope the store keeps having its windows broken. It is about time for people to exercise their innate authority to defend themselves from these souless predatory entities. I have no sympathy for Starbucks whatsoever and I do not mind if it were burned to the ground.

Twenty bucks 05.May.2004 11:13

James

Says there was a camera. I hope you wore masks. Jeffrey Luers all over again. I hope some teenager doesn't get twenty years over this.

Next time, there'll probably be a private security guard waiting in a car for you.

I'd quit the acting out, examine your authoritarian tendencies, and work towards something useful. ("Neighbor" has one good piece of advice: grow a garden).

Response 05.May.2004 11:13

Indy Reader

The corporate media works hand in hand with Starbucks efforts to control and dominate people. Big corporations are a blight on human culture. Of course the corporate media is going to try to deter people from going. They jump to the tune of their corporate masters who own them.

Slaves they are to the interests of money. Money over good sense. Money over sustainable culture. Money over human beings. Money above everything. That is the corporate mantra. Whatever lip service they pay to being a 'good corporate neighbor' is just PR and for their image.

The corporation is swiftly destroying all forms of intelligent creative life and replacing it with a psuedo-life - a facade, a mask of real life, but it is hollow and empty because at the core of it, money/power is the only objective.

In the long run, nothing good will ever come from this motivation.

All people of good sense and a love of nature and life should oppose corporate domination at every turn.

3 cheers to the night owls doing their work!!!

Honest question 05.May.2004 11:31

not just being a wise ass

Can anyone here name me a locally owned coffee shop that was "driven out of business" by the opening of a starbucks?

Name of business, city where it happened, and approximate date, please.

// 05.May.2004 11:57

//

I know of one in Vancouver but don't remember the name, but it was not that long ago. Across the country there must be at least 500

Watch the Media reaction to these attacks 05.May.2004 12:28

Non coffee drinker

The funny thing is, there will probably be more of an uproar over the destruction of Starbucks windows, than there is to Bushs agenda or the thousands dying over in Iraq. We can firebomb children and torture prisoners, but by god, we cant destroy a Starbucks window because it is an outrageous act of terrorism. The vandalism will probably soon be called domestic terrorism in the media.Watch with me and laugh at how the mainstream media will turn this into an Atrocity....

Broken windows 05.May.2004 12:34

photo bee

Here is are a couple photos of the broken windows. Corporate media has been all over the place this morning, talking to people, filming and so on.
Starbucks - broken windows
Starbucks - broken windows
Starbucks - broken windows
Starbucks - broken windows

// 05.May.2004 13:00

///

The corporate media will turn it into an act of terrorism, and the unwitting liberals will be right there helping them.

nvstgtn 05.May.2004 13:04

ieiaio

One person who I spoke to near the Starbucks today, said they were passing by last night and there were police and the Starbucks was cordoned off. The person said there was only one window broken at that time and the photos show two broken windows so it looks like someone went and broke the second after the cops left.

Since I walked past early this morning, there have been two different security guards.

Misplaced misbehavior 05.May.2004 13:08

Rollin Aiez

You silly rascals. You're willing to spend years in prison to protest a neighborhood Starbucks? For Christ sakes! Can't you find an issue a little more worth your attention than this?

Burn it down. 05.May.2004 13:17

Oni

Broken windows are not an act of violence. In fact, burning the whole damn complex down would not be an act of violence. Direct Action is violent action when it targets individuals. Hurting the economic situation of a major corporation does nothing harmful to anyone.
I'd like to caution future saboteurs to make sure there aren't cops or security across the street, down the block etc. Throwing a Molotov at a building might just warrant a stakeout for further arsonists. Watch your asses. and make sure to have someone run interference with the popo's if they are in attendance.

$20 for James 05.May.2004 13:34

Red Apple

Excuse my likely to fail HTML skills, but here you have it: KOIN reports surveillence cameras. HREF="http://www.koin.com/webnews/20042/20040505_starbucks.shtml"

more 05.May.2004 13:49

camera dud

there were broken windows on the west side and on the south side of the building. contrary to popular belief the reporters only slant when they run out of material on a story. I'm actually amazed the local TV even spent any time on this one. I was not aware of the previous incidents it was the fire dept being sent that caught my attention to this. I'm not surprised it happened but the arson side of it bothers me.

Gonna support them 05.May.2004 14:16

someone else

I will go out of my way to support this Starbucks, when it opens, just because it pisses you guys off so much.

morons 05.May.2004 14:29

a neighborhood resident

How exactly does Starbucks drive independents out of business? With shitty $3 cups of coffee? If the neighborhood doesn't want the Starbucks there, then they won't go there, and it will go out of business - that's how the grown-up world works.

But I'm sure you're all right - the vacant pile of bricks that was in that location for years was much better for the neighborhood than an actual succesful business.

The work of ants 05.May.2004 14:36

just another worker

Focusing on this store forces the issue into the public eye, therefore I thinik it's tactically an excellent target. It was on the various AM radio stations and I'm sure TV news will pick it up.

Are these type of tactics sustainable though? Like the poster James said " Twenty bucks says there was a camera. I hope you wore masks. Jeffrey Luers all over again. I hope some teenager doesn't get twenty years over this."

Something to think about. James also says "Next time, there'll probably be a private security guard waiting in a car for you." I'd take that advice. If someone gets caught doing this, most of the community energy will go into fighting that persons case instead of fighting Starbux. Is that where we want our energy?

A possible alternative would be to target the store with disruption. This is what I mean.

Because Starbux is a business open to everyone, people can just walk in. Once inside they can do lots of things from ordering items they don't have money for to public vocal reading of street poetry about starbux corporate nastiness. The current Blackthorne has an article that talks about revolution being the work of ants. Everyone does a small part, but together they create a mountain. Here are some small repeatable actions.

1) Buy a triple latte soy milk frapafreeko and then change it to rice milk
2) Order 10 mochapukes and then spill them before paying of course you forgot your wallet
3) Handle lots of the fancy glassware, maybe put it back in the wrong place, careful not to break it.
4) Look for bugs/glass/snot in the coffee (you never know what's in there)
5) Go in and ask for water. Do you feel nausious? Are you going to be sick? Maybe you shouldn't have drank that cepocol vomit inducing over the counter drug you bought just before eating all that chillie.
6) Order every freekin thing on the menu. Did you forget your wallet?
7) Enjoy a frapacrapo with your cockroach collection. Does it break accidentally in the store?
8) Is there a hole in that non-recycled cup they gave you? Did it get on your expensive clothes? Are they paying for the cleaning bill?
9) Stinkbombs, constantly.
10) The bathroom has a door and lock. And no camera. How do toilets overflow anyway?
11) How is that climate-conrtrolled air piped into the store? And what is that smell?
12) Get a job there (think of the possibilities!)
13) Take all the postage paid comment cards. Tape them to bricks and mail in your comments.
14) Don't shower for weeks and bring lots of smelly friends. Sit one to a table with a small coffee during the rush morning. Sink up the joint and use up all the table space. Read the paper.
15) Put out an anonomous call to prankster action on that Starbucks. Encourage people to drop by and take a small action, maybe before they visit the red and black. Maybe have a stamp wall people can stamp after they take an action so people can see the collective effort.

And so on. All hypothetical of course. Each of these actions taken alone are an annoying prank. Taken daily and sustained by the community, they will seriously disrupt coffee as usual. And no one goes to jail. Worse case senario, you get banned from that store, though I bet that would be trickier than they think.

Here's a story from what people did in san francisco.
______________________________________________________________________________________

(08-05) 16:45 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --

Police are investigating a coordinated attack on at least 17 Starbucks outlets in downtown San Francisco.

The vandals spread glue and posted official-looking "For Lease" and "Closed" signs on store windows, according to Dewayne Tully, a spokesman for the San Francisco Police Department. He said the vandalism took place between 11 p.m. Monday night and 4:45 a.m. Tuesday night when the stores were closed.

Starbucks Corp. confirmed that eight stores were vandalized. The Seattle-based company said there were no injuries or serious property damage, and all the stores are open for business as usual.

Nobody has claimed responsibility for the vandalism, but police believe it was a carefully planned attack by a group, Tully said.

"The motive is unclear at this point," Tully said. "It could be an anti-franchise group."

Police are questioning one possible witness and are encouraging others to report any information.

Good plan, just another worker 05.May.2004 14:59

a neighbor

That's much more constructive than just not going to Starbucks at all, and maybe, say, going to Red & Black everyday to get your coffee. It takes quite a stellar individual to deprive others of services that they would choose to support. Especially one that supplies jobs on the high-end of the salary range, for the industry, and gives their employee's full benefits. Those bastards!

to moron exhibit A 05.May.2004 15:16

tt01

"How exactly does Starbucks drive independents out of business? With shitty $3 cups of coffee? If the neighborhood doesn't want the Starbucks there, then they won't go there, and it will go out of business - that's how the grown-up world works."

wrong, that may be how you THINK the grown up world works, but the corporate world works by spreading out risk. there are so many starbucks that the chance of putting one out of business by not buying there is negligible. maybe this starbucks is independently owned, i havent researched the *$s thing enough to be familar with their franchising operations. in any case, division aint no *$s neck of the woods, so they can go to hell and take their coffee with 'em. and the reason why most people in the division area do not want *$s there is the vacuous, uncaring sheeple that worship at its altar of moccha lotta GM junk crap. if a business has a right to do business regardless of what locals have to say just because someone thinks the ability to choose a mass produced cup a joe is a great thing and capitalism is always best then someone else has the right to do business their way, even if it involves destruction of property.

don't forget 05.May.2004 15:38

a few years ago

it sure is amazing what can be accomplished with color copier. remember a few years ago in sf how all those kids handed out "free coffee" cards for starbucks? a few hours later all starbucks locations were mobbed with people demanding their free (and crappy, but free) coffee?

About the cameras 05.May.2004 15:43

XOXO

Look - they always say there are cameras. It justifies spending tens of thousands of dollars each year to install and maintain them.

People do not get caught because of cameras. The police are not that smart. The pictures are not that clear. The cameras very rarely catch the actual alleged criminal activity. Sometimes cameras are used later in trial but most of the time that evidence is inconclusive if it is even admitted as evidence at all.

The lie that cameras catch people engaged in alleged criminal activity is just that a lie. It's true that cameras prevent some activities because people believe the lie. The truth is that there aren't enough guns and police to stop a rebellious populous and the power elites have contrived this surveillance myth to control people. There is nothing to support that control just the fantasy that a camera will see you and lead the police to you. It's bullshit.

As far as security guards go. Good - let this asshole starfucks franchisee waste his money. Protecting his little business will soon become profit prohibitive.

If the security at 7 corners is too tight and the night workers have some extra bricks maybe they will visit a different starfucks.

Cameras don't catch people? 05.May.2004 16:18

Yes they do.

What are you talking about? There are people in jail who are there because of cameras. Do they always work? No. Sometimes the businesses don't turn them on, sometimes they erase the tape... stuff like that.

The blonde bank robber was recently caught because she was on tape, the brunette also... two guys were caught a few months ago (I forget for what) because they were caught on tape on a Tri-Met bus. The guy in Florida who kidnapped and murdered that girl was identified and caught because he was caught on tape... gee I could go on and on.

Who knows if Starbucks' surveillance cameras were working? We will find out soon enough. You'd think they would've made sure they were. They must have been expecting trouble.

DEAL WITH IT! 05.May.2004 16:36

Amused

I find it somewhat amusing that the self-same comments being generated by the "left" in this forum as "progressive" or "resisting" would be decried by same if done by the "right."

I find the far extremes of the political spectrum equally dangerous.

One last passing thought. Have any of you given thought to the employees of the store? Although Starbucks (a chain I don't patronize because I don't drink coffee) is certainly a national chain, they still hire locally. These individuals are your fellow citizens and are directly impacted by their store being closed (either temporarily or permanently). Do these people deserve to lose wages or their jobs because you don't like the employer and choose to express that dislike with vandalism?

What a stupid prank! 05.May.2004 16:41

moped

That Starbucks shop could not have bought better advertising. The place is jammed with customers.

Get a life, or at least a better cause, and a more effective plan. You vandals are no better than Bush when you behave like spoiled little bullys.

Exactly 05.May.2004 16:58

James

"I find it somewhat amusing that the self-same comments being generated by the 'left' in this forum as 'progressive' or 'resisting' would be decried by same if done by the 'right.'"

Exactly. It's unbelievable, really. I wonder if these pranksters, with their 'direct action,' are the same people who believe society would self-organize into non-violent groups absent a state monopoly on violence.

Many abortion clinics have been burned to the ground by right-wing direct actions. (Some have been bombed while in use, resulting in death. Others have been burned in the night, with no casualties). This is no different.

And, it was violence, albeit mild violence. Breaking a window is not violent, but throwing a molotov cocktail is.

It's amazing that people here actually support it -- and for such a silly, minor, insignificant (not to mention wrongheaded) cause.

what are you thinking? 05.May.2004 17:19

barista's dad

My daughter (20) works at Starbucks--not that one--and I'm reading on here about how great you all think it is that somebody tried to burn the place down. I hope you're lucky enough to have kids someday, to know that kind of love. Then you'll understand the furious feeling I have at reading of your violent intentions which might easily endanger the life of my daughter, or of anyone who works there. That's who you're hurting, not some fat cat.

She makes nine bucks an hour and works incredibly hard so she can go to PSU and eventually become a nurse. She volunteers at lots of places and cares a lot about people, including the same people who are putting her life in danger. This makes her feel like she's a target of terrorists. I haven't hung around Starbucks a lot because I am yuppie-averse, but I'm going to begin lurking and keeping an eye out for some of the creepy shit that some of you think amounts to committed activism. Hope you don't mind being punched in the nose.

this is so pointless 05.May.2004 17:39

bored

First off, there is no way that Starbucks is going to collapse because one, ONE of their zillions of stores is having trouble opening because of constant vandalism. The gesture means nothing to them and just introduces vandalism to the generally quiet, safe neighborhood unfortunate enough to have this store there.

Secondly, who is being penalized for the destructive behavior here? If you think the individual people coming in to fix the windows and clean up the glass are employees of Starbucks, you're wrong. The only people with more work to do are the contractors involved--the construction workers, the security workers. Why are these people your targets? They aren't making crappy coffee for the big corporation, they are just going where their employers happened to send them. And they shouldn't be asked to refuse to make their living to not support Starbucks, that's ridiculous.

Thirdly, the suggestion that these actions are somehow NOT violent? Excuse me?

great ideas, just another worker... 05.May.2004 17:44

never been to a starbucks...

we could probably order to go from the red and black, and then fill starbucks tables drinking our QUALITY coffee. YUM!

Information on Starbucks 05.May.2004 17:57

Jake

Anyone looking for a reasoned, coherent critique of the way Starbucks operates and why people ought to be opposed to corporations in general should look at Naomi Klein's No Logo, then see if they can still find reasons why we should all be overjoyed that another fucking chain outlet is being opened.

quibbling over semantics 05.May.2004 18:17

stale discussion

There is a difference between actions which harm living beings and those which do not. For many people, including myself, we choose to use the term violence only for the latter for it is seen as the more serious and harmful action. It makes for an easy distinction (as opposed to the difference between breaking windows and throwing a molotov cocktail which seems indistinguishable to me). And it sad to see people making such silly assumptions about what others think. I do not feel burning down an abortion clinic nor burning churches to be violent if no living being is harmed (though we could progress beyong the discussion of physical violence to that of psychic/mental/emotional violence in many cases). PRoperty is just property: insured, rebuildable, and unfeeling.

As for who is being penalized I would say it's certainly not the people getting extra work in this economy. If I were looking for some extra work...

No one is trying to make starbucks "collapse". This is not an issue of whether or not starbucks should exist; it's an issue about whether a neighborhood gets to have any say whatsoever in how businesses in the neighborhood are developed. Right now they have no say and so many feel that issue needs to be addressed. How can we have responsible communities if those communities are not allowed some say into how businesses and other organizations enter into and interact with the community.

We may not all agree on the tactics employed by individuals but we should at least be able to discuss the situation in an informed manner. I wouldn't expect this tactic to occur again; tactics which do not evolve quickly become ineffective.

Personally I would like to see much more focus in working toward community input into development for the future and let this starbucks fail on its own lack of merit. So that is the path I will choose; others can do as they please.

Property is just property 05.May.2004 18:22

James

"Property is just property: insured, rebuildable, and unfeeling."

Right. The violence stems not from the property damage, but from the fire. Fire is dangerous. Fire easily spreads. People risk their lives -- and sometimes lose them -- trying to extinguish fire, before it spreads.

If a worker had been at the Starbucks -- perhaps in back, preparing for opening day -- they could have been harmed.

Propery damage is not violence, no. But arson is.

to clarify, for those who need it 05.May.2004 18:50

stale discussion

"If a worker had been at the Starbucks -- perhaps in back, preparing for opening day -- they could have been harmed."

The key words are "if" and "could have been". I don't feel the need to base my definitions on conjecture and speculation. If a person shoots someone with a gun and kills them it is murder and if it does not kill them it is attempted murder. I wouldn't claim that it is murder "if" someone "could have been" killed by the shooting. I would think that if we are going to create distinctions in our terminology it would make most sense for them to be meaningful ones.

If someone is harmed by arson I would say it is violent. If someone throws a brick through a window and someone is harmed I would say it is violent. If no one is harmed by the arson or the brick then I would say it's not violent. I think there is a good point to be made that arson is a lot less controllable then say throwing a brick and hence if one is opposed to violent actions one may not want to choose arson as a tactic. Though I'm certainly in the reserved crowd about whether this was even a case of arson; I've heard that claim to many times to take it at face value.

And again, I think there is more important work to be done but that is why I will do that work and leave others to make their own decisions on what is effective and important.

To Barrista's Dad 05.May.2004 19:00

Calvin's Mom

"I hope you're lucky enough to have kids someday, to know that kind of love. Then you'll understand the furious feeling I have at reading of your violent intentions which might easily endanger the life of my daughter, or of anyone who works there. That's who you're hurting, not some fat cat."

I do have a child, and this is why I am heartened that anyone would still be willing to stand up against the oppression of the corporate police state. Even in the face of overwhelming police violence and condemnation in the corporate media, people are still willing to do what it takes to check the cancerous growth of giant, faceless corporations.

Violent? You think it's violent that a few windows were broken out of a corporate coffee shop in the middle of the night, when the place was closed? Where are your priorities? Violence is what is happening to the people of Iraq right now. They're dying, if you haven't noticed. Violence is what's happening in Afghanistan. Violence is the threat of the draft breathing down my neck as I try to raise my child in this heartless imperialist nation. Violence is the shallow, consumerist culture we're trying to raise our children in. The very culture that makes places like Starbucks thrive, the culture that trades the earth's gifts for corporate profit, the culture that force-feeds us more than we need, that glorifies over-consumption to the point of mass gluttony. The same culture that makes imperialist wars not only acceptable, but unavoidable. Violence is the razing of rainforests in the third world to be replaced by corporate coffee plantations. Violence is the corporate slavery that brings that latte to your table.

Until you learn what violence really is, what terrorism really is, you will be flinging these empty epithets at the only people out there who may be trying to save the world for your daughter and all of our children.

One more thing. /// said, "The corporate media will turn it into an act of terrorism, and the unwitting liberals will be right there helping them." Right, because the corporate police state is terrified that The People will soon realize that We're right. That corporate America is immoral, dangerous, and must be stopped. And people like barrista's dad will be selling us out to them, keeping the world safe for multi-national corporations and dangerous for everyone else.

Along the lines of "unwitting liberals" helping them, rumor has it Lynn Hanrahan of Mirador plans to go over to Starbucks and "apologize" on behalf of the community for the "firebombing." Say it ain't so, Lynn. Say it ain't so.

Starbucks is an easy target 05.May.2004 19:01

The Critic

Thanks for ensuring that I patronize a Starbuck at least twice a week. If something as insignificant as Starbucks gets your liberal pantyhose tied in a knot this bad, then I'm all for supporting Starbucks. I'm willing to bet you wouldn't pull this crap on a gun shop. The people that support the harassment & vandalizing of a LEGAL business make me sick to my stomach. You are all scum, & i hope that you get caught & rot in jail for this.

"Hope you don't mind being punched in the nose. " 05.May.2004 19:13

bye bye

sorry kids,

Starbucks on Division ain't gonna fly.

abortion clinic burning is not the same 05.May.2004 19:20

in eugene

abortion clinic burning is not the same. those people are attacking someones _civil right_ to terminate a pregnecy. Corporations are not citizens and Starbucks does not have the right to come into my community and put local coffee shops out of business. through the psychologocal warfare of branding, Starbucks is duping the public into thinking that we are free when they can choose between foamy and non-foamy latte. they are brainwashing us into believing that there is nothing wrong with mc-coffee that is produced on the backs of indigenous farmers that see 10-20cents a kilo for thier beans. they try to convince us that there is nothing wrong with coffee grown on huge plantations that rape the soil with chemicals. Like Wal-Mart, Starbucks manifests global exploitation at its most effcient--with no moral connection to local communities, to the farmers that grow the beans, or the ecosystems that produce them.

Although smashing windows is symbolic act, it is an inspirational act as well. it sends an important message to all of us who are fighting for a world free or corporate terrorism and who are enraged over the corporate domination of our cultures. writing a letter to the editor or holding a sign at are rally are valid methods of poltical expression, but not for all. all choices are good choices. fuck starbucks and smash the state.

byebye, mr.camera 05.May.2004 19:33

beady i

Think it was a link on this site that told how you can knock out security cams with laser pointers-do you remember? Also people shouldn't try to bust windows with bottles, full of gasoline or not-try a big brick or ball bearings shot from slingshots first. Sure would like to hear more about the people who post "closed" and "for sale" signs on unwanted businesses. Good tactic!

Expect a counter-revolution 05.May.2004 19:38

Da

I'm making a beeline for this Starbucks on opening day, and several times after that. And if a protestor gets in my face, my diplomacy skills will probably be lacking. Don't mess with me.

Starbucks is a predator 05.May.2004 19:43

Wake Up

"a neighborhood resident
How exactly does Starbucks drive independents out of business? With shitty $3 cups of coffee? If the neighborhood doesn't want the Starbucks there, then they won't go there, and it will go out of business - that's how the grown-up world works. "

That is not how the grown up world works. How the grown up world works is that Starbucks saturates the market with Starbucks to the point where they are even competing with themselves and others are put out of business because they are small businesses and cannot match the deep pockets of a corporate giant.

Please do learn a little more and wake up from your idealized dream.

. 05.May.2004 19:52

///

"'d quit the acting out, examine your authoritarian tendencies, and work towards something useful"

You do not know the meaning of authoritarian if you call this authoritarian. Educate yourself

. 05.May.2004 19:56

/

"You silly rascals. You're willing to spend years in prison to protest a neighborhood Starbucks? For Christ sakes! Can't you find an issue a little more worth your attention than this?"

Don't you think years in prison is absurd for breaking a window?

Also, Starbucks is a dangerous corporation. It is destroying life and killing people worldwide. Starbucks is a massive purveyor of violence worldwide. Look deeper than a clean storefront.

/ 05.May.2004 20:02

/

"Many abortion clinics have been burned to the ground by right-wing direct actions. (Some have been bombed while in use, resulting in death. Others have been burned in the night, with no casualties). This is no different. "

Actually, it is quite different.

Actions are not divorced from truth and what is real.

Your argument is that someone going out and killing someone and someone killing in self defense are the same thing. They are the same thing only from a superficial glance, but not a close and honest look.

Take the blinkers off your eyes.

Think clearly 05.May.2004 20:10

Shimmer

barista's dad

What a manipulative post you made. Your daughter was never endangered, not in the least

And if she is so concerned about people, tell her to look into Starbucks corporate practices. Starbucks has destroyed the lives of many many children just like your daughter. By working there, she is supporting that. Since she sounds decent, I am sure if she knew the truth she would quit and work for a small business that is not in the business of pillaging the earth for profit like Starbucks is.

Look a little deeper at Starbucks, and you will learn why they are so strongly opposed. Opposed I might add, by many people with children. Don't ever think that such acts of vandalism are only supported by 'fringe' people.

Countless normal average people are angry as hell at the loss of culture, sense of place, destruction of the environment and their childrens future that corporations like Starbucks are ushering in.

thelock 05.May.2004 20:14

Jimmy

Right. The violence stems not from the property damage, but from the fire. Fire is dangerous. Fire easily spreads. People risk their lives -- and sometimes lose them -- trying to extinguish fire, before it spreads.


James, get real. There has never been anyone harmed by such actions by the ELF, ALF or this sort of local sabotage by earth warriors.

Meanwhile, corporations like Starbucks kill worldwide, and fools like you accept it and call it BUSINESS

Are you one of those so in denial that you would chastise someone trying to help you as you are carted off to the gas chamber?

Windows 05.May.2004 20:31

Vachel Lindsay

Factory windows are always broken.
Somebody's always throwing bricks,
Somebody's always heaving cinders,
Playing ugly Yahoo tricks.

Factory windows are always broken.
Other windows are let alone.
No one throws through the chapel window
The bitter, snarling, derisive stone.

Factory windows are always broken.
Something or other is going wrong.
Something is rotten - I think, in Denmark.
End of the factory-window song.

- The Independent, 1913

Starbucks corporate practices 05.May.2004 20:56

check this out

If you have a job, can your employer say he or she has done anything like this?


05/04/2004: Press Release from Starbucks Corporation

Starbucks Distributes 2003 Special Reserve Coffee Award Money to Farming Cooperatives in Indonesia, Guatemala and Kenya

Fourth Annual Search for the Year's Best Coffees Now Underway

(CSRwire) SEATTLE — Starbucks Coffee Company (Nasdaq: SBUX) announced today the distribution of award money to four coffee farming communities in Sumatra, Guatemala and Kenya that won the 2003 Starbucks® Special Reserve contest, the company's annual search for the world's best coffee. The funding will be used to support social improvement projects that were jointly determined by the winning farming cooperative and Starbucks.

"Starbucks is fortunate to work with farmers who produce the world's best coffee," said Dub Hay, senior vice president, Coffee for Starbucks. "We value our relationships with all coffee farmers and we hope our Starbucks® Special Reserve financial investments make a lasting difference in these remote communities. The social fund component of our program is another example of how Starbucks looks for ways to positively contribute to the people and places that grow our coffee."

The money will be divided equally between the communities for the following projects:
* Indonesia, Sumatra (Lintong, Sileang Village) - water supply system
To date, this village of 75 houses has relied on rain as the primary source of water. The Special Reserve award will be used to construct a water supply system from a natural spring that lies approximately 500 meters away from the village. Soon, the villagers will have direct access to a constant supply of fresh water.
* Guatemala (San Marcos, Finca las Nubes) - health clinic construction
A local work force will build a new health clinic that will serve more than 2,800 people during the harvest season. Plans for the clinic include a waiting room, reception and patient control office, medicine cabinet, lab, shower, dental operating room, maternity ward, two patient rooms and four restrooms. All restrooms will have hot water showers.
* Guatemala (Antigua, Finca Santa Clara) - expansion of health clinic services and construction of kitchen, dining room and restroom
Funding will be used to make infrastructure improvements on a building used by temporary workers during harvest season. Additionally, the farm will expand health services to the community by providing eye exams, women's health services and educational materials for health awareness.

* Kenya (Nyeri, regional cooperatives) - purchase of ambulance for Nyeri Hospice
As a non-profit organization, Nyeri Hospice is located in the heart of a coffee growing community in Nairobi. The hospice cares for terminally ill cancer patients and HIV-AIDS patients. Starbucks social project funding will be used to purchase a four-wheel drive vehicle that will transport medical staff to patient residences or patients to the hospice.

Looking ahead to the 2004 Starbucks® Special Reserve Coffee, Starbucks has invited coffee growers, exporters and importers to submit their finest coffee for consideration.

"The search for the world's best coffee is never-ending," continued Hay. "Even as we celebrate the success of last year's Special Reserve coffee and the resulting social programs, I'm looking forward to the exotic and unique coffees we will taste and consider for Special Reserve 2004."

Through May, Starbucks Coffee Trading Company in Lausanne, Switzerland will accept coffee samples from around the world. After roasting the samples, Starbucks experienced coffee tasters will select their favorites of the 2004 crop year through their standard rigorous cupping process, evaluating each coffee's individual excellence on four key attributes: aroma, body, acidity and flavor. This fall, Starbucks will unveil its 2004 Special Reserve Blend, inviting customers to sample the finest coffee of the growing season. It will also work with the winning farmers to identify social programs that will benefit their community.

Introduced in 2001, Starbucks® Special Reserve is a contest that highlights the company's passion for exceptional coffee and commitment to preserving sustainable coffee farming practices on farms of all sizes. The Special Reserve designation has been awarded by Starbucks to recognize coffee from farms that produce coffee that perfectly captures the best of the year's growing season. In addition to paying a fair price for the premium coffees from the winning farms, Starbucks makes a financial contribution to the community where the farms are located to help fund a relevant project, such as education or medical efforts.

Social improvements completed as a result of past Special Reserve programs include advanced dental equipment in farm health care facilities; transportation upgrades; and enhancements to coffee processing facilities that help improve the quality of coffee on participating cooperatives, reduce the impact to the environment, increase productions yields, and boost profitability.

Starbucks Coffee Company is the leading retailer, roaster and brand of specialty coffee in the world, with more than 7,500 retail locations in North America, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East and the Pacific Rim. The Company is committed to offering the highest quality coffee and the Starbucks Experience while conducting its business in ways that produce social, environmental and economic benefits for communities in which it does business.

I respectfully disagree... 05.May.2004 21:40

me

..with all this Starbuck hatred. It's not GE, not Haliburton, not even Walmart. Workers are treated well and I know of no such evidence that they put others out of business. I also happen to think their coffee is if high quality and much better tasting than many others I've tried elsewhere. Just one man's opinion. I remember when it was a small NW business in which the NW was once proud. Okay, so they're everywhere. I happen to like the local Starbucks baristas who treat you like a friend. So hmmm ;)

starbucks helps local business 05.May.2004 21:50

coffee drinker

gosh if Starbucks' evil corporate plan is to saturate Portland with franchises and drive the locals out of business, aren't they doing a damn crappy job? I mean have you *ever* been anywhere with more independent coffee shops than Seattle and PDX?

Or maybe your closed minded analysis is flawed? maybe "generic" shops like Starbucks (coffee), amazon (books), rock bottom (brew pubs) actually *stimulate* demand?

I've posted before and NO ONE has been able to deny: where there are lots of starbucks in this town, local business THRIVES (Hawthorne, NE 23rd, Sellwood, Pearl). And there are Starbucks where there *aren't* viable businesses (Interstate Ave) where Starbucks is the bleeding edge of business growth.

no, that couldn't be true, right? it would run contrary to your closed minded anti corporate ideology.

remember: starbucks was once a small local coffee shop. nothing burns you like success does it?

timeline 05.May.2004 22:08

...

for those interested...
the windows broken earlier in the night were replaced that night, after which a security guard(rent a cop) was put in place to keep watch. At approximetly 4 am myself and a friend biked by on our way home and saw the guard and NO BROKEN WINDOWS. Essentially this means that the two windows on the street facing side were broken in the early AM. Also as far as the video camera is concerned, the camera is located over the door facing the entrance. The angle of which the camera points would make it hard to catch anyone who threw something from some distance.

Essentially Starbucks is a waste of space. there are several coffee shops already in that area.Maybe this StarFucks wont shut the other local shops down but it sure did prevent another local business from forming which would circulate the communities money IN THE COMMUNITY, and not in some CEO's pocket. whether or not you support it or hate it the fact of the matter is, is that if you frequent it then you are no friend to the community, MY COMMUNITY. And if that is the case then i dont want you here to begin with. You can frequent StarFucks all you want to piss the rest of us off but in the end the only person you are hurting is yourself.

to Baristas dad.. 05.May.2004 22:21

ralphie

Perhaps you didn't read what happened. Windows were broken at night, while the building was unoccupied. The only poster on this forum who has suggested violence against another human being is YOU! While I personally choose to fight starbucks by taking my coffee dollars elsewhere, if people feel the need for more direct action that doesn't cause any harm to people, then go for it. Implying that it is terrorism, is just plain wrong. Property damage as a political statement in America goes all the way back to the Boston Tea Party. Were they terrorists? It is my hope that your daughter will choose to seek out a job in a place that is a part of a community, not another franchise that seeks to obliterate any variety in the american landscape. Best of luck to her.

Nine bucks an hour... 05.May.2004 22:30

*

I did work for a small local health food store during one of my college summers and made about $7.50 an hour-- I'm guessing few small, local businesses will beat $9 an hour or provide health insurance to part-time employees.

Myth of Starbucks being progressive 05.May.2004 22:53

6 corners neighbor

Several years ago, I was asked to come speak to some Starbucks workers who wanted to organize a union. I was rather suprized but went to talk to them.

This is how they explained the starbicks sham:

1) Starbucks promotes itself as a progessive company, offering benefits, etc for those who work offer xxx number of hours a pay period.

2) Workers will be assigned the offered hours at one location, but SENT HOME EARLY, in order to keep payroll down and keep workers short on their hours to get benefits.

3) Let's say a single mom has to make benefits hours, they have to take all sorts of flex hours subsitute shifts all over town, making it hard for those the working stiffs the Pro-starbucks folks keep championing, to travel all over town for an hour or two, arrange childcare, or especially organize a union.

4) I may be wrong on the following, but once you have gotten benefits for a period, then you fall out of hours, you have to work another lengthy period to requalify. But you are still statistically "receiving" benefits but they are temporarilly suspended.

wise up 06.May.2004 01:26

The Henry

This is not helping the progress of life. Destruction and violence towards a freaking coffee shop is stupid. You with your liberal drivel make such a mock of yourselves. I'm a writer, and I have gotten so much good material from all your rants, that I could publish a book about it. But first, please, don't destroy coffee shops. Maybe try Wallmart/KFC or MCDonalds. And second, don't make yourselves look so desperate and adolescent. Protesting a coffee shop is in all sense of the word, "weak". This is the most basic of services, and you're acting like they put up a sweat shop. IF you want something to complain about, there's a lot more out there than java dealers. How about trying to fuck up our government. Like the entire Republican party. Why dont you try to snipe or break their windows. I think that would be a lot more satisfying.

More creativity damnit! 06.May.2004 02:25

Mr. B.

Come on people! Don't any of you have an imagination? There are much more creative ways to subvert Charbucks than throwing bricks through windows. At least some one on here had a bright idea, involving the use of a color copier. Lets hear more of these ideas. That's what this is here for.

The Red and Black's 06.May.2004 05:55

--

coffee, as well as their food, kicks the holy living shit out of Starbucks anyway.
But even if that wasn't true, I would rather eat and drink mediocre stuff from them than anything from Starbucks any day.
Starbucks gives financial support to the police club, too...hmmm...
The media did talk about vandalism, but not the VIOLENCE of the development company VIOLATING their contract with the citizens of the neighborhood, nor about the clear way that such "accepted channels" completely VIOLATE the will of the people....
And apparently the media can get away with lying??!?!?!?!? Is this not lawlessness or what?

Silly, silly 06.May.2004 06:49

Watching this thread

Thank goodness someone is willing to throw things through windows. That's at least a start.

What cracks me up here, though, is all the clueless "you liberals suck" postings. Man. This is a publis forum, representing many different people's views. So who, exactly, is the chimerical "you guys" who "all suck"? For the record, the people you seem to be ranting at (the ones who support the action) are not even liberals. Shit, getta clue.

And to the snobbish and pedantic "the henry," you don't seem like much of a writer to me.

The sheeple's denial has never been greater! 06.May.2004 08:14

StevetheGreen

As I read through the comments of those who don't understand the angst about Starbucks, I can only hang my head and sigh very deeply.

Do you "braindead fucking status quo supporting kings of denial" ever go beyond the surface during your capitalist based analysis of any given situation????
The corporatization of communities is a huge problem and while Starbucks is only one of many, they are in many ways an icon for what is wrong with our country.
Fighting against Starbucks is much more than it appears to the "Lars Larson" simplistic thought processes that some have aspoused here.

Perhaps a better understanding of "globilization" (I suggest the library) might help you expand your awareness of it's relationship to this particular issue and why it is so important?

Or maybe you might want to attend a public forum or lecture that outlines the facts and statistics pertaining to the American worker and the expansion of Corporate America's profit margin that is manifested through the deluge of service level jobs replacing living wage jobs?

You might want to even consider taking your "deperately needed education process" to another level by actually talking to "real people" all across the country who have been directly affected by the "Wal Martization" of communities all across the United States.

Or you could continue to remain ignorant and come on this site asking idiotic embarassing questions that reveal your total lack of engagement with the trends that even a blind man could see.

Then you can continue to cling to your "liberal rants" about the acceptable rules of dissent and talk about the need for non-violent resistance while the nazis lead you to the shower.

This is why the left fails 06.May.2004 08:15

me

This is why the left has gotten nowhere in this country. You can whin about the corportate media but you idiots continue to support these stupid acts. All you do is give symphathy for Starbucks a boost. There is a fucking Starbucks not five blocks from this one!!!!! Leave it alone. I bet it will even bring people to the neighbor who might notice the tiny Red & Black for the first time. Think before you act.

By the way, I used to belong to Laughinhorse so I am not a support of corporations. However, I am pissed that these stupid children keep fucking up any political capital the left might ever had gained.

See what I mean? 06.May.2004 08:15

Amused

This is what I mean when I indicated my bemusement at the tactics advocated.

It is the inconsistancy with which standards are being applied that I am trying to underscore.

Advocating arson is never a good idea for the community. Fire is uncontrollable and unpredictable. I do not know this neighborhood, but I would be willing to bet that there are residental buildings (homes or apartments) that would be at risk in the event of arson, as well as other businesses. Those people do not deserve to be placed at risk.

You're unhappy with Starbuck's, fine. Just realize that your actions may impact more than just your "faceless" corporation and be prepared to deal with the consequences.

Violence is as much emotional and psychological as it is physical.

To all of you who would advocate "burning the place to the ground," and who see this as only vandalism/destruction of property, I ask...

Would you burn a cross on the property of an African-American?
Would you paint a swastika on the property of a Jewish person?
Would you desecrate a place of worship (church, temple, mosque, etc)?

...because all of these acts are acts of violence.

Something to think about, not that it will probably matter though 06.May.2004 08:46

(can be anonymous or made up)

Bear in mind that Starbucks started out as a local, independent coffe-shop, just like Wal-mart and McDonalds started out with 1 store. And if I recall correctly one of Starbucks competitors SBC, aka Seattle Best Coffee, aka Stewart Brothers Coffee has been around longer than Starbucks and hasnt experienced the growth that Starbucks has. Why? Better product? Thats debatable, I dont drink coffee much, I like my Oregon Chai. Convenience? Price? I suspect that it had more to do with a demographic trend that Starbucks was able to capitalize on. If you dont like Starbucks thats fine. Don't patronize them. Has anyone asked the other coffe-shops in the area what they think? If they offer a better product then people will choose them over Starbucks, as long the price is in the same range as Starbucks. Alot of the anger seems misdirected though. Shouldn't you be mad at the landlord? After all he was the one that said there wasnt going to be a Starbucks at that location.
I know that alot of the readers and posters on here are opposed to capitalism, and see all large corporations as evil. So imagine that regardless of what is said you will continue to attempt to break windows and/or fire-bomb.

Signifying Nothing 06.May.2004 08:56

Elwood

So, how do you know that your "neighborhood" coffee place is purchasing coffee that's any more ethically produced that Starbucks, or that it pays or treats it's employees any better?

And who do you think gets paid more; the growers & pickers that produce the coffee that Starbucks uses or those that produce the coffee that Proctor & Gamble uses in Folgers (which, since it's not "yuppie", must be OK, right)? What if - in fact - the growers and pickers for Starbucks are pretty much the higest paid?

Ah, but it's not really so interesting to examine these issues is it? Can't be confusing the situation with complexity.

Better just to take mindless aim at some fashionable symbol that you don't even understand.

Sure makes you look smart.

No wonder real change never occurs.

Property Rights 06.May.2004 10:04

Brian Durst bdurst@hotmail.com

<B><font color=red>I don't know any reader of this website that would be pleased to have some neighborhood group declare that their house should be torn down to provide more open spaces in the area. And by the way the homeowner gets no compensation for the loss of his home. He still owns it. He can have a picnic on it. He just can't live on it. But it's his.
That's what zoning does. Zoning lets government steal an owners right to use his property in any way they see fit. And many of the wacko readers of the website think that's not enough. They think that even if I own a propety that is zoned for a particular use I should get their approval to use it as they see fit. That's absurd. You are mostly a bunch of loonies and hot air.</font></b>

The Circle Closes 06.May.2004 10:06

The Watcher

The far "left" finally aligns with the far "right" in desperate acts of cowardly vandalism in alleged protest against a phantom "evildoer," thereby cementing the sympathy of the vast "middle" firmly to the victim. Brilliant tactic! Never mind the facts, Rush. Compare wages and benefits paid by this vicious corporate "rapist" against those offered by your vaunted local small business establishments. You who would commit violence against the purveyors of products and places you hate so much, and in doing so imperil your neighbors, whom you purport to value so much(arson is a crime for good reason): describe the difference between your weak hearts and those who bomb abortion clinics in the name of their "beliefs". Through your deeds you are shown to be ignorant, arrogant, uncaring, selfish cowards with some serious contradictions in values.

So this is what passes for neighborhood activism in Portland, huh?

You mean, rough and tough, passionate members of the elite vanguard, protectors of all that you have deemed to be "right" need to get some lives going for yourselves.

Oh, and learn how to spell, OK?

dear "amused" - i am too! 06.May.2004 10:08

tt01

"One last passing thought. Have any of you given thought to the employees of the store? Although Starbucks (a chain I don't patronize because I don't drink coffee) is certainly a national chain, they still hire locally."

ahhh...not exactly. in fact, they often hire people from out of state or even out of the country. do a little homework...

here, go get yourself a job...there are currently no openings in Afghanistan or Iraq. check back soon.

 http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/jobcenter.asp

Stop the theory... take back your lives. 06.May.2004 10:48

Oni

How dare you compare the burning of a cross on a black persons lawn to a molotov being thrown at starbucks? HOW DARE YOU!? You obviously are not a minority, nor am I, but you have no place claiming that the "psychological violence" of a corporate chainstore being firebombed is ANYWHERE NEAR the caliber of specifically targeting a family of people (INDIVIDUALS) who can be targeted elsewhere, like when they're walking down the street. You're a fucking moron.
And regardless of Starbucks' corporate practices, which I admit are difficult to defame, it is still a homogenizing corporate store which supplants local, diverse, interesting, businesses, which are owned by people who have a connection to the community. I'm sick of our communities being gutted. I'm tired of walking into an establishment and knowing for a fact that the people working there or who own the store, probably aren't my neighbors.
Also, stop blaming "the left" for the use of these tactics. What I keep hearing from "the left" is that they DO NOT support these tactics, but don't oppose them either. Quit lumping all of us together into one stereotype of leftist idealism. I personally feel absolutely no affiliation with most of you who have posted here, right or left. Analyze the tactics for the tactics they are, don't assume that they are the tactics of any particular faction.
And for God's sake people. quit posting your worthless political ideologies on Indymedia and go do something with your lives. stop being a passive observer, participate in life.

Good work 06.May.2004 10:54

working class

Karma.
I encourage everyone to rail against these, and other corporate monsters (mcdonalds, wal-mart) even if it means destroying their buildings. No government will ever help us take back our lives. Governments were created by the rich, to serve the rich and that alone is their function. Take to the streets people, vote with you dollars, think with your minds, and act with your hearts! Revolution is you!

"out of state/country" 06.May.2004 11:29

Elwood

"ahhh...not exactly. in fact, they often hire people from out of state or even out of the country. do a little homework..."

Well, compared to anyone working in the kitchen (where you don't see them) of any "neighborhood" restaurant in Portland, I doubt Starbucks even comes close on this basis. And I'd just about guarantee you that they are more exploited and more poorly treated than anyone working at Starbucks.

But that's not what you guys are really upset about. I don't believe you're really concerned about any of the specific "crimes" you accuse Starbucks of having comitted. If you were, you'd be focusing doing something about those issues rather than smashing windows (or applauding the smashing of said windows).

It just shows that you're as brainwashed as that goddam yuppie with the Vente Frappuccino™ in his hand. Unlike him, your reaction to the store is negative rather than positive, but it's just as automatic and unexamined. He sees a Starbucks and buys a coffee there rather than at the mom & pop place down the street. You see a Starbucks and want to smash a window rather than doing the same to the mom & pop place down the street that may have an exploited illegal immigrant in the back washing dishes.

Mindless reaction might feel good (for both you and your yuppie counterpart), and it sure it easy, but like I said before, it isn't gonna' change anything.

Real change comes from a lots and lots and lots of people changing their minds about something, right?

So, super-gluing the locks of a Starubcks: Who's minds are you changing? About what?

Homogenization reeks 06.May.2004 11:31

buck off

To those that spout the "good" that Starbucks are spreading throughout the planet with their charitable efforts- They are only able to do that at a very high cost. The cost of wiping out local culture and local independent businesses. I just recently returned from Wales and my little town of Swansea now has a big offensive Starbucks slap bang in the middle of it. It depresses me to travel the world and see the same shit everywhere I go, from the Persian Gulf to Portland. Seattle to Swansea. same coffee, same food, same clothes- it fucking reeks. Obviously American imperialism is offending vast poulations of the world right now but so is American Cultural imperialism. Starbucks and the like, better be ready for more broken glass if they don't slow down this runaway juggernaut that is plowing through local and international cultures.

This is not to mention the source of their coffee and whose backs are broken in that process...

What would the outrage be.... 06.May.2004 12:06

Adultpersoninsoutheast

I can just see the headlines...

A firebomb is thrown through the window of the Red and Black. Unknown to the bomber, two activists are sleeping in the store room. They die from smoke inhalation before the flames engulf them.

The bomber is aprehended. The person claims that they are just resisting the practices used by the cafe when they use eggs (aka potential chicken people) in their omelettes. They feel justified in their actions, and actually believe that the people slumbering in the back room deserve to die because of their association witht he Red and Black.........

Do you seriously believe that Starbucks is worth killing for? It could happen.

Portland has thousands of small businesses that thrive in competition with franchise merchants. Your determination to "rid the world of Starbucks" is a mis-guided effort to impose your choices on others. This reeks of totalitarian abuse of people's freedoms to build successful businesses and drink coffee wherever they please.

Wearing the mantle as victims of corporate greed, you fools have convinced yourselves that your acts are justified.

Here are the facts: YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DRINK COFFEE WHEREVER YOU WISH - SO DO I
THE VNADALS ARE CRIMINALS WHO SHOULD DO SOME HARD TIME AND GROW UP
THERE ARE CRITICAL ISSUES FACING OUR COUNTRY STARTING WITH A DANGEROUS MAN
IN THE WHITE HOUSE. STARBUCKS IS NOT AMONG THEM. STOP WASTING ENERGY
ON THE WRONG ISSUES.
WE LIVE IN A COUNTRY BASED ON FREEDOM AND CHOICE.
NO BUSINESS IS GURARANTEED THE RIGHT TO SUCCEED. IT MUST EARN IT. IF THE RED AND
BLACK WANTS TO SUCCEED, DO IT WITH PRODUCT, VALUE, AND ATMOSPHERE. YOU
DO NOPT HAVE THE ENTITLEMENT TO A MONOPPOLY ON DIVISION STREET.

To "amused," "elwood" 06.May.2004 12:17

Answers to u

"Amused" asks, "Would you desecrate a place of worship (church, temple, mosque, etc)?" The implication that starbucks is similar to a place of worship is funny. And it's exactly the point here. The cult of capitalism is brainwashing you.

Elwood asks, "So, how do you know that your "neighborhood" coffee place is purchasing coffee that's any more ethically produced that Starbucks, or that it pays or treats it's employees any better?"

Because, clueless, my "neighborhood" coffee place is the Red and Black, right across the street from friggin burnbux. Uh, starsux. Starfux. Whatever. You can go right over and ask the workers at the R and B. Haven't you been paying attention here? The red and black is a worker owned collective. Fair trade all the way.

Then Elwood says, "And who do you think gets paid more; the growers & pickers that produce the coffee that Starbucks uses or those that produce the coffee that Proctor & Gamble uses in Folgers (which, since it's not "yuppie", must be OK, right)?"

Wow, you really ARE clueless. No one posting here who advocates direct action against starsux is buying anything from procter and gamble, I'm pretty certain of that. Conscientious people not completely given over to pointless consumer culture have been avoiding P&G like the plague for many years, for many, many reasons. Starbucks, Procter and Gamble...see, we KNOW it's a big global struggle. You, however, do not. We're engaged in it, you sit on the sidelines and criticize. You're like the people who sat on their asses and criticized the struggles of anarchists and union organizers who fought and died for the 8 hour day. Everyone benefitted from the effort to make things better for all workers, but most of the people who benefitted fought tooth and nail for their oppressors until the battle was over.

So I guess, in reply to your inane comment: "Ah, but it's not really so interesting to examine these issues is it? Can't be confusing the situation with complexity," I would have to say the ball's in YOUR court, buddy boy. It really IS a complex world, but you seem pathetically ignorant of the facts and patterns so apparent to most of the readers here. Go forth and educate yourself, and THEN come back and share your snobbish but hopefully better-informed prose.

Once again 06.May.2004 12:22

xyz

I'll ask it again - where is the local coffee shop that was run out of business by Starbucks, where is the thriving locally-owned business district that turned "corporate" and bland after Starbucks arrived?

Sambucks in Astoria -- come on now, how many of you people would even know it existed if she hadn't been sued? Best thing that ever happened to her, and she's still in business.

So don't use that example. I'm starting to suspect these places where Starbucks destroyed the community don't exist at all.

non-productive 06.May.2004 12:24

regular guy

if you want to make starbucks go away, demonstrate some positive initiative (huh?) and sell a better cup of coffee yourself. or at least do something more productive than break someone else's shit. doesn't matter whose. i'm not some right winger, just an average working person who has no respect for these idiotic efforts.

has anyone even considered..... 06.May.2004 12:30

duh

that the folks who are going to go to starbucks are not the same folks who would go to the red and black?

think about it: do you know anyone who frequents the red and black who will now go to starbucks? what about the converse?-- do you know anyone who likes starbucks who goes to the red and black instead?

it's a different market, believe it or not.

Swansea 06.May.2004 12:32

Elwood

" I just recently returned from Wales and my little town of Swansea now has a big offensive Starbucks slap bang in the middle of it."

Ah here it is!

So there was some magical, wonderful coffee place in Swansea that made delicious coffee, bought its beans from happy unionized pickers that were paid solid working class wages (without really being asked to work too hard), paid it's employees middle class wages, yet somehow charged it's customers very little, that Starbucks just rolled in and put out of business just by opening it's doors?

No, there wasn't, was there? I'm guessing there probably wasn't a decent cup of coffee in town, regardless of how ethical (or not) it's purveyors were.

This whole issue is much more about imaginary notions of neighborhood and place than it is about any of Starbucks business practices or products.

A homogonized world does suck, but we could just as easily blame the rest of the country or world for their lack of imagination and business savvy for not providing alternatives to Starbucks as we can Starbucks (and the people of Seattle - you really do have to blame them for Starubucks after all) for providing the world a product that it does indeed seem to want.

Oh, but they're brainwashed now, that's right. But they weren't before when they drank Twinnings?

And as for workers' backs. If you are really concerned about them, you WOULD NOT DRINK COFFEE AT ALL (or tea either, for that matter).

At The Red and Black 06.May.2004 12:40

Alternative

* There is song and dance.
* A place for community interaction.
* A bullitin board full of community interest fliers.
* A safe place to gather and discuss radical ideas.

At any Starbucks there is none of the above. Corporate managment is afraid of offending anyone. Corporate managment mandates a "non-hostile" environment for customers - read dumded down, useless consummers. Once the Starbucks at 20th and Divison gets established you can bet the Starbucks corporate management will go after the Red and Black in any way they can. Red and Black will be forced to shutdown or move within a year. This is about corporate attempts to dismantle local community - make no mistake about it.

Pathetically Ignorant 06.May.2004 12:52

Elwood

"Because, clueless, my "neighborhood" coffee place is the Red and Black, right across the street from friggin burnbux. Uh, starsux. Starfux. Whatever. You can go right over and ask the workers at the R and B. Haven't you been paying attention here? The red and black is a worker owned collective. Fair trade all the way. "

"It really IS a complex world, but you seem pathetically ignorant of the facts and patterns so apparent to most of the readers here. Go forth and educate yourself, and THEN come back and share your snobbish but hopefully better-informed prose."

A simple question then (to educate my pathetically ignorant self) me, how much are the growers and pickers for the Fair Trade coffee that Red and Black serves getting paid vs. the growers and pickers for the various coffees that Starbucks purchases?

I would really (seriously) like to see how this compares.

Anyone?

oh 06.May.2004 12:58

boy

"dumded down, useless consummers"

yeah, those "consummers" are sure "dumded" down.

See what I mean - Part 2 06.May.2004 13:00

Amused

To "In Eugene," you stated

"Although smashing windows is symbolic act, it is an inspirational act as well. it sends an important message to all of us who are fighting for a world free or corporate terrorism and who are enraged over the corporate domination of our cultures. writing a letter to the editor or holding a sign at are rally are valid methods of poltical expression, but not for all. all choices are good choices. fuck starbucks and smash the state."

All choices are not good choices and your choices are no better than those (corporations) you rail against. Why? Because you make the same fundamental error as they do. You fail to realize that behind the "faceless corporation" or the "state" are people with the same needs in life and the same desires for the future as anyone else. All you are doing is espousing a negative ideology with no viable resolution.

To "tt01." I took a brief look at the website. The listing shows where openings exist, not where the people filling them came from. Remember, Starbuck's is a multinational corporation with locations throughout North, Central, and South America, and Europe. I seriously doubt that someone from Central or South America is going to come all the way to Portland for a job.

To "Oni." Believe it not, I am a minority. I'm mostly Chinese, with a small amount of Native American. But that, in this instance, is secondary. I never stated in my post that violence directed at a corporate entity or property is the equivalent of interpersonal violence - on any level. I'm merely pointing out that it is violence and that other people, inadvertent and undeserving victims, may end up paying the price.

Violence can be both symbolic and psychological, but some of the people posting on this forum are making a false dichotomy. For example, there have been posts that have stated, more or less, that property is just property and it can be replaced. That statement is true in most instances, but not in all instances. In most cases, a couple of 2x4s are nothing more than pieces of wood, easily burned and replaced with no inherent symbolic value. Put together in the form of a cross and burned on someone's lawn, especially someone of African heritage, they become a message of hate and violence.

I also never blamed "the Left" for using these tactics, again, I'm merely pointing out the irony of decrying the use of such tactics on one hand, and the advocacy of using the selfsame tactics on the other.

I am stating that violent acts are violent acts and that arson - in any form - is a danger to the community and to potentially inadvertent and undeserving victims. Does anyone believe a potential arsonist can control the fire he starts or that the fire itself cares who or what it burns?

Violence for me, not for thee 06.May.2004 13:53

Justin Henderson justinchend@yahoo.com

The philosophy advocated by most of the commenters here works fine, if we assume unanimous support for each and every one of our causes.

But what about the day that somebody decides they don't like seeing, say, our radical-political garden? What then? Fend for yourselves, I guess.

I'm no consumerist. I think the soul-sucking spread of corporate culture is bad--socially, culturally, architecturally, politically. But I live near Seven Corners. And while I like R&B, I didn't like the dilapidated hunk of shit that sat across the street for years and years--plenty of time for a locally-owned business to sprout. (Division Street's woes and the city's Hawthorne- and Belmont-favoritism obviously helped keep that area vacant.) However you think the development process was mangled, though, it's a good--not a bad--thing that a viable business is there now.

If you really believe that R&B is unjustly threatened by Starbucks, explain how and perhaps coffee-drinkers will side with you. Otherwise, I'd be careful moving toward violence. Your likely to get your asses handed to you.


That day already came 06.May.2004 14:06

James

"But what about the day that somebody decides they don't like seeing, say, our radical-political garden? What then? Fend for yourselves, I guess."

Precisely. That has already happened.

Officer Meyers, if memory serves, decided a local community garden was a haven for homeless people. As part of the City's crusade against homeless people, they razed the garden, destroying the work of the Children who grew and tended it, and leaving an empty, gray lot in its place.

CatWoman wrote a series of telling narratives on the whole affair.

From the City's perspective, they were ridding the public of a nuisance. They were lowering crime. They were working to ensure the first priority of government was met: the public safety.

Indymedia, of course, was up in arms. (Rightfully so, in my opinion. But I have the opinion (and vote!) of only one man). Many center-column stories decried the outrage. The gall of Officer Meyers and his goons!

But far be it for any of us point out the inherent hypocrisy which exists in most extremists. They always justify it to themselves somehow.

IRONY ALERT: "Food Not Bombs"? Starbucks vandals say "Bombs, Not Food!" 06.May.2004 15:04

CoffeeGrll

I love irony: On the front page of this site is an article about "Food Not Bombs." Below that, an article about how a food provider (Starbucks) was bombed...likely by the same people promoting "Food Not Bombs." DUH!

Don't you just LOVE idiots? They always succeed in making themselves look stupid, no matter how just they view their cause. They probably think "irony" means their fucking coffee has an iron taste to it.

I hope they caught the perp on camera and he or she goes to prison. I'm so tired of the Starbucks bashing. Oh, and Peet's Coffee is better? What about Coffee People...were they "good" before they sold out to a much larger corporation, then automatically became "bad?" (Hint: They still serve the same stuff and now take better care of their employees.) Idiots just can't think things through, though.

Look, to each his own, and I resent you do-gooders from telling me what fucking coffee I should drink. I DO try to patronize local coffee stores, but the quality varies so widely, and they often charge more, that I often regret it. Yet no matter where I am, I know that I will pay Starbucks $2 for a medium Americano. And it will have 3 shots. And they will have skim, half and half, and whole milk to choose from. And I will like the taste. But with most local coffee companies, I will pay more. I will get 2 shots. I may or may not like the taste. And there won't usually be three milk choices.

Why should I put up with inconsistency? Why should I reward anyone but who I believe to be the best product provider? Because some anarchists said so? Because they don't want me to have the choice?

I'm outta here. I have to go to the Hawthorne area...I think I'll PURPOSELY stop by the new Starbucks at 7 Corners just to say FUCK YOU to these perpatrators of violence. Yeah, you really showed me, didn't you! You really proved a point. Well, here's two words for you idiots: FUCK YOU!

Never let them catch people 06.May.2004 15:19

Galadrial

One poster speculated about cameras. Well, this is like having sex-you cover(mask) up or else!
If someone is identified and arrested, there must be consequences if any prison term handed down exceeds that which someone would receive for an arson for profit.

Considering Free's case, if he had been hired by one SUV dealer to torch a rival dealer's stock, and done it at night the same way, he would maybe have gotten five years, possibly ten if he was not white. Instead he got a sentence that would be within sentencing guidelines in many places for the arson of an apartment building full of children! this sort of shit must never be tolerated, and mustr lead to the most severe consequences.

Get over it or move out of the US! 06.May.2004 15:48

Realist

Starbucks is Cancer? Are you kidding? Starbucks, the company that offers great benefits to its employees, that uses recycled napkins and cup holders, that pays fair bean growers in South America and is starting a training program to give more people in South America jobs, and which supports the SMART program which helps children improve their reading skills all over Portland; you've obviously have never had cancer. I volunteer for SMART and think it is an amazing program and don't see any local high-on-themselves coffee shops making an impact as big as Starbucks on literacry rates in Portland. We live in a capitalist country, if you don't like move to Russia! Also, I've been to Red and Black cafe, the service was always pretty rude and the chai tea is horrible, why not stick to good old Oregon Chai?

Moronic and short sighted 06.May.2004 15:52

Monk

That complex is owned by a local developer who pays taxes and supports more local work than anyone on this board probably. He is not taking the money out of the community. Starbucks can afford to pay the rent consistently.

Starbucks provides it's workers with incredible benefits. Do local coffee shops pay more and provide more benefits if any? Starbucks is committed to refurbishing blighted buildings. Just because a company is large and makes money doesn't mean they are evil.

This form "activism" is incredibly unproductive and childishly niave.

to... 06.May.2004 16:16

...

The Henry: If you're a writer, you're a bad one. Good writers are observant. No one is protesting "coffee shops" here. They are protesting a particular shop and it's corporation. No one wants to get rid of a harmless little coffee shop.

Can be anonymous or made up: Seattle's Best coffee was not better than Starbucks. Now it's a part of Starbucks. This is not just about Starbucks starving out "local" businesses. It is about Starbucks starving out any coffee shop it sets it's sights on and gobbling up any coffee business it covets (again to destroy competition). The result of this for the consumer is *no choice.* Seattles Best is owned by Starbucks now, as is Torrefazione.

Every other stupid business person who gets into the coffee business and can't do anything but try to emulate Starbucks is guilty, along with Starbucks itself on this matter.

I know of one store that closed down because a Starbucks planted itself right across the street from it. There was a Javaman on Broadway and... don't know the cross street, but somewhere downtown. It was in the ground floor lobby of an office building, on the corner. There were already many coffee shops in the area, including a few Starbucks, but Starbucks planted itself right across the street on the opposite corner. This is next so some hotel. The man running the Javaman very soon sold out, after everyday having to look straight into the Starbucks across the street. He sold to some Asians who sold Illy coffee. They soon sold out. That space is now occupied by a bank.

Before anyone starts yelling the typical "if you can't compete" garbage... it is true that a small business can't compete with a large corporation with deep pockets. If that new, and tiny Starbucks siphoned off just a little business from this coffee shop that already had a lot of competition, it doesn't necessarily mean that tiny Starbucks was better. Starbucks can keep a store that is losing money around for a very long time... long enough to starve any little guy out.

The Javaman 06.May.2004 17:13

...

The Javaman I referred to above is on the same block as Broadway Metroplex, but on the North corner. It was run by a man who I believe was Russian, and he sold Allann Bros. coffee. Allann Bros. is an Albany OR roaster.

treatise on starbucks 06.May.2004 18:33

bob poe

Ok, for starters I am no fan of Starbucks, I work in a shop around 7 corners and was sad to see them come into the neighborhood, and I happened to be working the night it was firebombed ( yes, it was definitely a molotov cocktail).
Here's my problem: The people protesting against this store argue that it sucks money out of the local economy which to me is not entirely true. The store creates local jobs not only in the store - tazo tea has a factory on the eastside which is owned by starbucks - the fact is trickle down jobs from the stores do happen at a local level, whether it's truck drivers or district managers living in tigard.
The employees that are employed by starbucks have full benefits; affordable medical, dental, vision, 401k, life insurance, stock option program, and paid vacation . This sort of corporate stewardship is something that should be encouraged, not condemned.
Wal-Mart pays their workers almost nothing, with no benefits. They're entagled in dozens of lawsuits ranging from discrimination to working off the clock. They are anti-union and don't give a damn about employee retention while exploiting cheap labor from around the world.
There are many worse companies in the world (Enron, Halliburton, MCI,Qwest,Adelphia, and on and on), and while I do not agree with Starbucks' aggressive business tactics, I do believe there are more important things going on the world than who serves a latte in our neighborhood.
We have soldiers dying daily in Iraq, but Starbucks is moving in our neighborhood? Boo-Hoo.

wake up 06.May.2004 19:53

jesus love man

Okay the people who are condoning the act of arson against starbucks are the same type of people to turn around and scream facist if other groups want to close the local head shop, strip club, abortion clinic, etc and rally to do that. Now imagine if those groups were firebombing those places. Shouldn't people have freedom to choose the business they want to patronize? And if people are still frequenting places that are exploitive to thirdworld workers, the environment, etc, maybe because were all failing in educating ourselves and them to that fact.

You guys are forgeting 06.May.2004 20:17

Workingclasshero

DOn't forget that starbucks CHief Exec. Howard Shultz is also a large supporter of the terrorism against palestine.

Starbucks is a hip place for many people. Find a way to make it not hip or embarassing to been seen at and then it will take a financial toll on Starbucks.

As far as vandalism goes....if you are gonna do it, then at least do it right.
Cut powerlines, telecom connections to the business. Make it very uncomfortable for customers to enjoy the business (ie: go in incognito and break a few fart bombs in the bathroom or the HVAC intakes.

I myself to not recommend violence or vandalism.

7 Corners 06.May.2004 20:34

neighbor

I have always made the trek up Division to Stumptown because the product is great! I often go to K and F too. Unfortunately, I had a bad experience at Red and Black (rude server) so I can't comment on the product. But I really don't think Starbucks is gonna put them out of business, they obviously have a great deal of very loyal fans. I wasn't too thrilled about their (Starbucks) arrival, I am rethinking this now. I see already a big increase in foot traffic that I think will eventually benefit many businesses in the area. And, though you may detest seeing that corporate logo....the corner does looks much better. That can't be too bad. Now I would love to see some of that wonderful young idealistic energy redirected in this very crucial election year! Time is of the essence! PS don't lump Walmart with Starbucks... REALLY. As someone said; Get educated. PAH-leeeze take some of that wonderful young and idealist energy

I'm done with you all 06.May.2004 21:55

Oni

You fucking status quo junkies suck. you think that just because you can continue living your life the same way you always have that everything will be ok. Well, it won't, and when the day comes I'll know who my friends are and where to find support because I've been out here fighting for my freedom from day one. While you, who sat inside drinking your starbucks, watching corporate media, and advocating voter registration, will be getting dragged from your homes. have fun when the fascist own your sorry asses.

Status Quo Junkies 06.May.2004 22:12

Elwood

"You fucking status quo junkies suck... While you, who sat inside drinking your starbucks, watching corporate media, and advocating voter registration, will be getting dragged from your homes."

Why would the facists drag the status quo junkies from their homes?

If facism becomes the status quo, wouldn't the status quo junkies be fascists too?

Anarchist Terrorism 06.May.2004 22:18

Jeff

One of the too few commentors against violence stated:

"Would you burn a cross on the property of an African-American? "
"Would you paint a swastika on the property of a Jewish person? "
"Would you desecrate a place of worship (church, temple, mosque, etc)?"

I noticed none of the brave people who advocated violence were courageous enough to answer this person's questions. Why not?

Are you afraid of what you will see in the mirror?

Is there a difference between waving a Black Flag for violence and terrorism, or waving a Nazi Flag for violence and terrorism? You all know the answer already. Didn't Adolf Hitler call for "National Socialism"? But it really wasn't socialism, was it? No more than the falsities of those who advocate Anarchist violence as "freedom" from globalism?

Time to read some history and learn from the past.
Don't be tomorrow's suckers for the same hate-mongers who used people in the past.
The fact they have a different label makes no difference except the "brand".

Just like coffee is coffee - whether it is Starbucks or Red & Black.

But those who advocate Anarchist Terrorism are *using* you. For what?
Now that is the question? What do they really want to get out of this?

If you do believe in freedom and decency, could you imagine Martin Luther King throwing a firebomb at a Starbucks? Of course not. Why? It is the morally wrong thing to do.

Those of you who think that terrorist arson is morally acceptable, who is pulling your strings? And why are you letting them do it?

They are not the friends of freedom, they are not the friends of equality.
They are really the friends of Adolf Hitler. Remember that Anarchists.
Look in the mirror and think of how Hitler must take such pleasure in your promotion of firebombing local coffee shops. I am sure he would say to you: "Sieg Heil, Anarchists!"

Think long and hard about what you are becoming.
Perhaps you like some swatiskas with your coffee.
Me, I would rather be a decent, law-abiding American citizen.

Are there many of those left in Oregon?

time for a tea party? 06.May.2004 23:27

anyone

"I noticed none of the brave people who advocated violence were courageous enough to answer this person's questions. Why not?"

Because most people can recognize a straw-man argument when they see one.

"Time to read some history and learn from the past."

Yes, we must not forget that the corporate power enjoyed in this country was something Mussolini could only fantasize about in his dreams of a corporate state.

But let me ask a question, if 150 years ago someone had burned down a slave-owning plantation without anyone being hurt, would that person be a terrorist? Or would that be a morally defensible thing to do? What about the Boston Tea Party? Were our founding fathers anarchist terrorists because they believed that British tea merchants (corporations) shouldn't be allowed to put local merchants out of business?

Woops, that analogy is probably a little too uncomfortable for most people to deal with.

Think about it.

the personal is political 06.May.2004 23:49

in eugene

"Amused" you said

"You fail to realize that behind the "faceless corporation" or the "state" are people with the same needs in life and the same desires for the future as anyone else. All you are doing is espousing a negative ideology with no viable resolution."

Amused, you fail to recognize 2 things: 1)that the violence is part of natural systems and 2)that the personal is political. The ways we fufill our desires, and the daily choices we make have real poltical conquences. voting can be considered poltical violence because of the system it supports. Using that logic, our dicesions have as much wait as senator's or a CEO's.

you fucking losers 06.May.2004 23:54

peace the fuck out

What's wrong with you stupid mother fuckers. Wake up, smell the coffee. No pun intended. Like what you are doing is so great for society. Most likely your sitting around smoking pot, drinking, and complaining about how this and that is so wrong. What's wrong is you pathetic existence. I'd be surprised if half of you have a diploma, let alone ever took an economics class. Learn how the world works before you think you bright idea of trying to burn down Starbucks is such a good idea.

I was born to break windows 07.May.2004 01:25

but I live far away.

Their coffee is shit. I mean, that should be obvious to anyone who drinks coffe on a regular basis. There's too many of them. They have some formula for computing how far apart to establish stores so that each one generates profit. I think that's creepy!
Bottom line is, if you don't want them around, don't give them business. They're not here for people with principles. I'm not opposed to breaking the windows and shit...However, mabye picketing the place while they're open would do more to keep prospective Starbucks customers away? It'll only stay open as long as it's making money.
I AM totally against fucking with employees of the place though. It's hard to find a job damnit. Going inside and making a ruckus, ordering drinks and intentionally being rude, etc. (I saw someone make these suggestions somewhere up there) is just stupid. If you've ever worked in the service industry you know there's enough crappy people to deal with every day without some snot trying to be all "activist" and shit. Keep customers out, yeah -- but take it easy on the poor baristas!!! PLEASE!!!
I have to at least give them some props for being from the NW. Imagine if the company had been founded in Texas or Mississippi.

You intended that pun! 07.May.2004 02:01

:-!

You intended that pun, peace the fuck out! I know you did!

Born to break windows... 07.May.2004 02:03

;-)

Dude... what that weed? Has done to your personality? Good stuff.

The real anamosity 07.May.2004 09:08

working class hero

When I look at these posts I can't help but notice that most of the anomosity is coming from the people opposed to the resistance. Man amazing! There are threats of getting beat up etc. So, if many of you who are against these acts are threatening to respond to them with violence...what's the difference.

Violence is ok to almost everyone as long as it is within their relm of motivation. So, let me ask some of you moderate conservative suburban housing development dwelling, land rover driving, franchise lovin people with your 2 .4 kids in the next room playing video games. Do you support the war in Iraq? Is this not terrorism. There is alot of innocent people dying over there. Why is that justified? Bin laden is not there, no WMD's, getting saddam hasn't changed anything yet. Well I guess having enough fuel for your SUV is a worth while reason to kill. Hypocrisy at it's best.

PS I love the way "peace the fuck out" (great name for someone that is supposedly so educated) states that in order to know anything about economics you must have a "Diploma". I work in a business were I am in charge of people with college degrees and I have got to tell you, Most of these people can barely spell their names right. I highly reccommend education but college is only one way and a way that is becoming more like a mold to form corporate people like you.

Utopia? 07.May.2004 10:27

Georgia

I guess it's true that one person's utopia is another's dystopia! Starbucks has created an environment that is highly pleasurable to mainstream Americans using strict ordering and control of everything from the drug to the lighting. Their success is a sign that this sort of environment can be created, it is like a model ideal world for many people. Now can we work towards a utopia that is not so limited in scope, doesn't depend on getting high, appeals to the mainstream (we need the majority of people for any revolution, do we expect them to change first?), and is based on a selfless desire to create a new world rather than greed? Do we want to? For me, these are the questions and Starbucks is helping us ask them. I much prefer R/B to Starbucks but most people would NOT feel comfortable there! The only way culture changes is if people never give up on their ideals. We may never reach a utopian state (variations in human nature, etc) but we have to try or at least know what we want. This is how change happens. Just my two cents.

i don't know.... 07.May.2004 10:34

hmmmm

maybe i'm just being naïve, that pun seemed genuinely unintended to me.

ha! 07.May.2004 11:31

that's funny

"So, let me ask some of you moderate conservative suburban housing development dwelling, land rover driving, franchise lovin people with your 2 .4 kids in the next room playing video games. "

yeah, there are a lot of those folks posting here.

When they Come for Us 07.May.2004 12:53

CatWoman

Someone in the long, rambling thread above (I think Justin Henderson) said, "But what about the day that somebody decides they don't like seeing, say, our radical-political garden? What then? Fend for yourselves, I guess."

See, here's the thing. They DO come after the things we believe in, every day. They come for the forests, and chop them all down. They come for the wetlands and fill them all in. They come after affordable housing and "gentrify" it into upscale crap most people can't afford. They come for our neighborhoods, and make them all the same, plastic commercial wastelands. And yes, they came for the children's garden.

And when they come for these things, we ARE forced to fend for ourselves. Because the system you seem to be asking people to rely on, Justin, is not there to help us. The police don't protect us, because it's all "perfectly legal." It's not against the law to raze a public forest, it's against the law to stop it from being razed. It's not against the law for developers to force low-income people out into the streets, but it's against the law to be homeless. It's not even against the law (if you're a cop) to shoot an unarmed man to death in the streets. So you see, we DO have to fend for ourselves if we're ever gonna stop the global monster that's threatening every one of us right now. And we're not going to stop it at the ballot box.

Admittedly, Starbucks is just one piece of the enormous puzzle. Taken out of context, it's only a few windows here and there. But it's at least a start. At the very least, people are recognizing that something is wrong with mega-corps dictating the boundaries of our culture, something wrong with globalization itself. People are fighting back. They're fighting back because they have to. They're fending for themselves because the system is not gonna save any of us from corporate dystopia, we must save ourselves.

See what I mean? - Part 3 07.May.2004 13:58

Amused

Irony must be dead. Along with ability to hold reasoned and thoughtful public discourse without being sworn at or threatened.

Please go back and read my previous posts. You will note that I have taken no particular political stance. In fact, all I've said is that some people are operating under a false dichotomy, that violence is violence, and that arson is never a good idea for the community. While several people have commented on this, and recognized the double standard, many more have only continued to post vituperative statements.

I ask again, can anyone state that arson is a good thing for the community? Can an arsonist control his fire? Does the fire care what it burns?

creepy but wrong 07.May.2004 16:52

yak

i seem to have this role of pointing out when people are wrong. i just cant stand it, regardless of what side they are on:

"They have some formula for computing how far apart to establish stores so that each one generates profit. I think that's creepy!"

actually, *$s is known for placing more than one store in a small area - not at all what you're saying. they do this so as to increase their share of the market in a given area. that way they can take business away from other LOCAL establishments and not give a flying fuck if they have to shut one of the stores they satuarted the market with earlier down, because all the dipshits who see *$s on every corner and think it is a great step forward for competition when in fact it is quite the opposite, will just love buying their product. you see, a company that operates locally and (sometimes) sustainably, cannot compete with a global corporation that doesnt give a shit how much money they spend in the short term by opening numerous stores, just so long they eventually put the competition out of business they will have the ENTIRE market. that is how *$s hurts local economies and businesses. the risks and profits are spread out.

for the wanna-be economist: go look up comparative advantage and think about *$s and a local economy and see wtf you come up with. and i realize that comparative advantage applies to countries, just consider *$s a country and you should be able to figure it out.

I'm going out fighting! 07.May.2004 17:35

workingclasshero

Someone in an earlier post wrote "you didn't see Martin Luther King throwing fire bombs" You are absolutely right. King, Gandhi and several other famous rights activists practiced passive non-violence. You know what though, look what happened to all of them. They were terrorized, their families and friends were victimized and eventually they were gunned down. Do you think If MLK had an armed militia to protect him he would have died so easily. I don't know about you guys but I'm not going into a battle with a dove and olive branch. If I'm going down then I'm going down fighting!

"Fascism - A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with a belligerent nationalism."
--The American Heritage Dictionary - Houghton-Mifflin Company, 1983

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
--Benito Mussolini (1883-1945), Fascist Dictator of Italy

let's see.... 07.May.2004 17:43

ronnie dobbs

>"King, Gandhi and several other famous rights activists practiced passive non-violence.
>You know what though, look what happened to all of them. "

yeah, look what happened.... they won.

Did they?? 07.May.2004 18:16

workingclasshero

Yeah .... they won alright. And shortly after recieved a bullet between the eyes! They also had the support of the mainstream media. Times have changed now.

let's be honest 07.May.2004 18:20

a pacifist

"yeah, look what happened.... they won."

Well Gandhi wanted to end the violence between hindus and moslems. MLK wanted to achieve equality and justice for blacks in the US. It would be fair to say that the movements they were inolved with made progress in some ways toward these goals. But it would be inaccurate to say that they "won". As much as I would love for that to be true.

Break your 07.May.2004 21:07

Chains

-- I ask again, can anyone state that arson is a good thing for the community? Can an arsonist control his fire? Does the fire care what it burns? --

One poster above mentioned that not a single ELF or ALF action, nor any locally generated actions like the one at this Starbucks has resulted in the injury or death of anyone.

Meanwhile, cars kill 40,000 per year and corporations like Starbucks cause unmeasurable destruction to the environment and to the inner human environment. Everytime you get in your car, you are endangering others to a much greater extent than the act that some are so righteously condemning.

Everytime you buy Coke products, you are saying you do not mind that they are involved in the torture and death of indigenous people who organize unions.

Everytime you buy coffee at Starbucks, you are saying you do not mind the enironmentally destructive practices of their coffee growing. Everytime you buy a Starbucks product with hormone laden milk, you are saying you do not mind all the health problems it causes.

When you do these things, you are digging your own grave.

You have massive international corporations spending billions to convince people to do things destructive to themselves and the greater environment, and only for their own short term profit. At the same time, they use their power, often violently, to undermine efforts at better alternatives. It is basically suicidal to allow this, and do nothing.

true.... 07.May.2004 21:44

ronnie dobbs

>it would be inaccurate to say that they "won".

but inaccuracy and hyperbole seems to be the way things are done on this thread.

It's now or later! 07.May.2004 22:12

workingclasshero

To all of you suburbanites, what you just don't get is that it is either now or later. If we don't stay on top of this stuff now while it almost controlable it will get to the point where you, YES even you will be backed into a corner and that is when it will really get violent. It is unfortunate that in almost every society where a revolution has taken place, it was not until people where basically backed into a corner.

This is the very reason people in Palestine are willing to be sucide bombers.
It is a predicament that most of us Americans can not understand. Laugh you may, but that time is coming. I don't think there is anyone here now that is willing to give up their life for this cause, it's because none of us have experienced exploitation to the degree that it takes to achieve that mindset.

Just as many war supporters would change their opinions if the draft were fully instated and their very own children where susceptable to the draft.

Focus! 07.May.2004 22:44

Barista

I have just spent the last half hour reading all these comments. Some are very legitimate and interesting for me. But this one guy going off about going into a store and harrassing the employees who work at Starbucks has NEVER worked in the service industry! What kind of crap is that? Do you know what kind of weird, saddistic, drugged out, abusive, smelly people almost every service industry worker has to put up with anyway??

Yes I work at a Starbucks. They pay me decent, I get amazing, cheap health benifits for working only 20 hours a week and they have all sorts of other little perks that make dealing with those kinds of assholes all day long almost worth it!
Should there be a Starbucks on every block? NO! And certainly not in a neighborhood that doesn't want it.

It is SUPPLY and DEMAND people! If there is no demand there will be no supply there. It WILL be the local neighbors who will make or break that store. Just don't be abussive toward people who are trying very, very hard not to be homeless!

Supply and Demand 08.May.2004 00:37

is a line of crap

The old line about supply and demand is crap. Starbucks is big enough to subsidize a weak store in order to drive competitors out. I'm not saying that's what's happening in 7 corners, but let's not get too fixated with captialist ideology that doesn't necessarily ring true in real life.

Reply to the Starbucks "Barista" 08.May.2004 00:41

anon

Would you respond to the following:

Several years ago, I was asked to come speak to some Starbucks workers who wanted to organize a union. I was rather suprized but went to talk to them.

This is how they explained the starbicks sham:

1) Starbucks promotes itself as a progessive company, offering benefits, etc for those who work offer xxx number of hours a pay period.

2) Workers will be assigned the offered hours at one location, but SENT HOME EARLY, in order to keep payroll down and keep workers short on their hours to get benefits.

3) Let's say a single mom has to make benefits hours, they have to take all sorts of flex hours subsitute shifts all over town, making it hard for those the working stiffs the Pro-starbucks folks keep championing, to travel all over town for an hour or two, arrange childcare, or especially organize a union.

4) I may be wrong on the following, but once you have gotten benefits for a period, then you fall out of hours, you have to work another lengthy period to requalify. But you are still statistically "receiving" benefits but they are temporarilly suspended.

pffff 08.May.2004 10:16

ronnie dobbs

>To all of you suburbanites....

how many suburbanites do you think are posting here? i'd bet few to none, mr. high-and-mighty urban guy.


>This is the very reason people in Palestine are willing to be sucide bombers.

yes, because they don't want starbucks. *that's* it.

Mr. Lou Dobbs I'm sorry I meant Ronnie Dobbs 09.May.2004 08:16

Guld War I veteran and BUSH / GWII opposer!

Ronnie:

Much to your ignorance, Starbucks spreading like a bad virus does effect
the people in Palestine and the terrorism that is thrust upon them daily.

Inspiration 12.Aug.2004 11:51

yes i am a commie bastard, so what?

As long as none of the poor, underpaid workers in the starbucks, or the deluded people who do not realise that what they drink there is liquified capitalist oppression were hurt, then the person who did it needs a medal. I live in the u.k. and there are two starbucks within 300 meters of each other (Sorry to use the metric system, but hey, you know its better than yours) and another two in the town where my school is, and another within 5 minutes of my house. That's quite a few molotovs i have to make then...