Skip to main content

Does everyone have the right to loiter? Or does it just apply to black folks?

The nerve of Starbucks for kicking two black guys out of one of their shops. No matter what the actual circumstances are, many people think this is a prima facie case of racial discrimination.

I can see the day when some convenience store owner gets accused of anti-black discrimination because he insisted on being paid for the chocolate bar.

"We wasn't doin' nuthin'. We was just grabbin' a few chocolate bars and this shopkeeper called the cops!"

Desmond Cole, Matthew Green, Andray Domise, (all of whom have blocked me on Twitter,) and a raft of other race-obsessed "activists" will be emboldened enough to declare that expecting to be paid for goods and services is just another example of "white supremacy."

What I would like to know is this, is it Starbucks corporate policy that anyone can occupy space in their stores, and use the washrooms etc. even if they have no intention of purchasing any product?

If this is indeed their policy, then yes, denying two black men the right to loiter in one of their stores, while allowing everyone else to loiter there is compelling evidence of racial discrimination.

If not, it's pure BULLSHIT!



It occurs to me, that the more the malevolent left accuses conservatives and libertarians of being racists, the more liberty there will be in honest discussion about racism.

At some point, those on the "right" will have to make a critical decision. Having been accused of being "racists" for every opinion they have, upon any topic under the sun, the libertarians & conservatives will come face to face with a crucial choice.

They will either have to abandon their advocacy of free markets, free speech, freedom of association, property rights, equal rights, and keeping one's earnings from the maws of the likes of Kathleen Wynne,

Or,

They will have to yield to the left, shrug their shoulders, and confess.

"Yes. I guess I am a racist."

But...

"I still believe in free markets, free speech, freedom of association, property rights, equal rights, and keeping one's earnings from the maws of the likes of Kathleen Wynne."

(Sorry.)

Comments

  1. Someone rang my door bell the other day and asked the use my washroom. I told the person to get the fuck off my property. He happened to be black.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Please feel free to leave your comments, insults, or threats.

Popular posts from this blog

How to Save the Ontario Basic Income Program!Background Leftist Ontario virtue signallers have been freaking out over the Ford government's cancellation of the Basic Income free money project that was cooked up by the Wynne government to build up their voter base. I follow a few of these caring individuals on Twitter to study their self delusions. They've all been afflicted lately with Ford Derangement Syndrome, peacocking their indignation at the cancellation of Wynne's free money giveaway "program." But does the program really have to be cancelled? Of course not. All it would require to be saved is for the virtue signallers, and there are loads of them, from Deb Matthews and Andrea Horwath, to a parade of obscure, Twitter addicts, and their offended fans. The good news is that the program can easily continue on a voluntary basis. The only difference is that the leftists would have to reach into their own pockets to show how committed and compassionate they …

Hamilton's Check Engine Light Crisis and Other News

Unanimous Pro-Uber City Council Vote: The Damage "Check Engine Light" Crisis Uber MADDness Uber Hamilton by the Numbers Working with numbers can be a lot of fun. At least, I think so. I once took an in-house course, back when I had a real job, called "Strategies of Experimentation." I can't remember anything I learned in that course, but it made an impression on me that impacts my thinking to this day. It says that if you don't have solid data to work with, use the next best thing. Try to build a cloud of probability. Use whatever information you do have and think about whether it falls within the realm of reasonable expectation. The following analysis attempts to use this approach to some degree. What is known for sure is the approximate amount each taxi operator pays to the taxi broker for the service of matching riders with drivers - just like any other "technology company." That is $500 per month, per cab, or $6000 per year, per cab. With 44…
Poor Uber Driver Oh my. This is a sad story. Here is an Uber driver voicing his concerns in the Uber driver's forum about whether or not his "sharing economy" gig is paying off. It's possible that this is not a genuine post from a genuine Uber driver. I see that. It's the kind of schlopp I would write if I were in a mischievous mood. On the other hand, given what I already know about the Uber scam, and the people it exploits in order to get them to employ "assets they already own," in Tim Hudak's famous phrase, it's entirely reasonable to believe that this is a REAL Uber driver, who is just beginning to figure out who is making money, or should be making money, and who is getting royally boned. (See my story about the Uber driver who drove a football player from Chicago to Buffalo for minus $38.50.) I knew it was a scam from the beginning. That is why, when people asked me why, instead of tolerating the City of Hamilton's demonstrably abs…