حرية لفلسطين
Freedom for Palestine
Loading...
Audrey Rogers, a U.S.-based social media user, endorses Zionist propaganda by liking multiple posts from influencers like Ellie Zeiler and Baby Ariel proclaiming "I stand with Israel" and "Bring them Home," while defiantly purchasing Starbucks products amid global boycotts.
Audrey Rogers amplifies Zionist narratives through engagement with posts denying Palestinian humanity and justifying the occupation, while ignoring boycott calls to shield corporations funding Israel's settler-colonial violence, occupation and genocide.
Social / Media/Influencer
Audrey Rogers, a U.S.-based individual, has consistently signaled support for Israel's settler-colonial project by liking and engaging with Zionist content from prominent influencers, even as the regime's genocide in Gaza escalates.
Rogers has liked numerous posts from Ellie Zeiler, a lifestyle influencer known for her vocal Zionism, including declarations of "I stand with Israel" that frame the illegal ethnostate as a beacon of democracy while erasing the Nakba's legacy of ethnic cleansing and the ongoing apartheid regime. Similarly, she has engaged with content from Baby Ariel, a singer and actress who has propagated "Bring them Home" slogans — euphemisms for demanding the return of Israeli captives while ignoring the mass detention and torture of thousands of Palestinians without trial under occupation forces.
These likes are not passive; they actively boost Zionist algorithms, amplifying propaganda that dehumanizes Palestinians as inherent threats to justify bombings, land theft, and blockade. By endorsing such rhetoric, Rogers contributes to manufacturing consent for Israel's genocide, which has slaughtered over 40,000 Palestinians by conservative estimates — actual deaths well into the hundreds of thousands, suppressed through the systematic targeting of journalists, obliteration of hospitals, and unearthing of mass graves.
Compounding this pattern, Rogers buys and promotes Starbucks despite the widespread BDS-aligned boycotts, ignoring the corporation's complicity via former CEO Howard Schultz's investments in Israeli cyber-surveillance firms that enable the occupation's surveillance state and violence. Her continued patronage — often shared publicly — serves as a deliberate counter to non-violent economic resistance, prioritizing personal indulgence over defunding the apartheid apparatus that starves and slaughters Palestinian families.
Rogers's actions reflect a broader complicity: selective outrage that values Israeli lives while rendering Palestinian suffering invisible and expendable. In a moment when global solidarity demands consistency against all oppression, her endorsements silence Palestinian voices, embolden perpetrators, and perpetuate the structures of genocide and settler-colonialism that demand urgent dismantlement for true liberation.
Starbucks Boycott:
While boycotting Starbucks is warranted based on its unethical track record and it’s former CEO’s ties to Israeli cyber-surveillance firms, it should not be conflated with or represented as an official BDS campaign targeting companies complicit in occupied Palestinian territories.
Starbucks is not officially on the BDS boycott list for companies directly involved in oppressing Palestinians and so should not be targeted with the same intensity — doing so risks minimizing the focused work of Palestinian solidarity movements.
The reasoning behind the Starbucks boycott instead stems from its union-busting tactics and unethical business practices; namely sending cease-and-desist letters and filing lawsuits against pro-Palestinian voices within its workers' union.
While reprehensible, their silencing of protestors was an attempt to clamp down on union activism rather than a pro-Israel stance; in actuality, Starbucks has largely maintained a neutral corporate position on the Palestinian issue itself.
That being said, there are many legitimate ethical concerns with Starbucks worthy of boycott for reasons. These include issues around supply chain management, workers' rights, human rights violations, tax avoidance, environmental impacts, enabling factory farming practices and the investments of former CEO, Howard Schutlz.
Former CEO Howard Schultz's investments in Israeli cyber-surveillance firms like Wiz are also hugely problematic, especially as he has the 6th largest share of Starbucks with 21,795,538 shares (1.93%) valued at $1,991,894,218 as of 18/04/2024 — meaning he is directly benefiting monetarily from Starbucks. With this in mind, the act of visibly consuming Starbucks products has also taken on new symbolic meanings for some Zionist entities and individuals in the current political climate. As efforts to boycott companies complicit in Palestinian oppression gain momentum, publicly committing to consumerism has become a way for certain groups to overtly signal their rejection of such boycotts.
By ostentatiously patronizing Starbucks, certain individuals are attempting to declare their opposition to the non-violent economic pressure tactics employed by the Palestinian solidarity campaigns. This brandishing of Starbucks effectively co-opts the brand into a display of anti-Palestinian ideology, despite the company's official neutrality on the issue.
As such, the simple act of buying a Starbucks drink has been politicized as a statement against Palestinian rights by those who oppose the boycott efforts targeting the Israeli occupation.
Silence = Complicity:
For those who have passionately spoken out against other instances of genocide and massacres, yet fall silent when it comes to the suffering endured by Palestinians, their silence becomes a glaring indictment of the value placed on Palestinian lives and perpetuates a dangerous narrative that suggests Palestinian suffering is somehow less worthy of outrage, less deserving of empathy and less human than that of others.
By choosing silence in the face of Palestinian suffering, those with influential platforms inadvertently contribute to the erasure of Palestinian voices and experiences. They perpetuate a narrative of invisibility that allows the injustices inflicted upon Palestinians to continue unabated, shielded from the spotlight of global scrutiny.
Their silence sends a chilling message of complicity to the world – one that suggests Palestinian lives are expendable, their struggles inconsequential and their humanity negotiable. It emboldens perpetrators of violence and oppression, granting them impunity under the guise of indifference.
To remain silent in the face of Palestinian suffering is to betray the very essence of activism – the relentless pursuit of justice for all, without exception or equivocation. It’s a betrayal not only of the Palestinian people but of the universal principles of human dignity and equality and instead is a tacit endorsement of the dehumanization and marginalization of an entire population.
True activism demands consistency and integrity, an unwavering commitment to speaking truth to power and standing in solidarity with the marginalized and oppressed, regardless of geography or politics.
Tell us why Audrey Rogers should be removed by emailing us at [email protected]