Use
|
|
Additional
ideas
|
actually, additionally, and, also, as well, besides, for example, for
instance, furthermore, indeed, in fact, moreover, specifically,
|
Similar
ideas
|
similarly, in the same way, like+noun, likewise, similar to
|
Contrast
|
actually, although, anyway, despite this/that, even so, however, in
any case, in spite of this/that, nevertheless, nonetheless, on the contrary,
on the other hand, rather, still, though, whereas
|
Results
|
accordingly, as a result of, because of, consequently, for this/that
reason, hence, then, therefore, thus
|
Time
|
after this/that, afterwards, at last, at the same moment, at the same
time, before this/that, for now, from now on, henceforth, later, meanwhile,
while, previously, soon, until then, up to now
|
Sequence
|
finally, after this/that, first, second, third…, first of all, second
of all…, in conclusion, in short, last, next, then, to begin, to conclude, to
summarize
|
Point
of view
|
certainly, clearly, evidently, frankly, happily, honestly,
ironically, sadly, surprisingly, etc…
|
Sunday, May 8, 2016
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
When Jim Crow Drank Coke
Last year, the mayor of NYC, Michael Bloomberg, tried to ban the sale of large sized sugary drinks to help combat obesity and diabetes. Many people opposed this measure on the grounds that the government does not have the right to dictate what people eat and drink. Please read the following essay and comment on it. Remember that the N.A.A.C.P. stands for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
When Jim Crow Drank Coke
Keith Negley
By GRACE ELIZABETH HALE
THE
opposition by the New York State chapter of the N.A.A.C.P. to Mayor Michael R.
Bloomberg’s restrictions on sugary soda caught many Americans by surprise. But
it shouldn’t: though the organization argues it is standing up for consumer
choice and minority business owners, who it claims would be hurt, this is also
a favor for a stalwart ally — Coca-Cola alone has given generously to support
N.A.A.C.P. initiatives over the years.
This is
more than a story of mutual back-scratching, though. It is the latest episode
in the long and often fractious history of soft drinks, prohibition laws and
race.
While it
is widely known that John Pemberton, an Atlanta pharmacist, invented Coke as a
kind of patent medicine, it was in fact his second drink. His first, an 1884
invention called French Wine Coca, was a copy of a popular French wine that
contained cocaine. But in November 1885, just as the product began to sell,
Atlanta outlawed alcohol sales.
Across
the nation, support for prohibition was often tied to the desire by native
whites to control European Catholics, American Indians, Asian-Americans and,
especially in the South, African-Americans. It gave police officers an excuse
to arrest African-Americans on the pretext of intoxication.
Pemberton
went to work on a “temperance drink” with the same “medicinal” effects, and he
introduced Coca-Cola in 1886. At the time, the soda fountains of Atlanta
pharmacies had become fashionable gathering places for middle-class whites as
an alternative to bars. Mixed with soda water, the drink quickly caught on as
an “intellectual beverage” among well-off whites.
Eliminating
alcohol granted only a temporary reprieve. Though Asa G. Candler, who had taken
over the business, kept the formula secret, an Atlanta paper revealed in 1891 what
many consumers — who called the soda “dope” — already knew: Coca-Cola contained
cocaine.
Candler
began marketing the drink as “refreshing” rather than medicinal, and managed to
survive the controversy. But concerns exploded again after the company pioneered
its distinctive glass bottles in 1899, which moved Coke out of the segregated
spaces of the soda fountain. Anyone with a nickel, black or white, could now
drink the cocaine-infused beverage. Middle-class whites worried that soft
drinks were contributing to what they saw as exploding cocaine use among
African-Americans. Southern newspapers reported that “negro cocaine fiends”
were raping white women, the police powerless to stop them. By 1903, Candler
had bowed to white fears (and a wave of anti-narcotics legislation), removing
the cocaine and adding more sugar and caffeine.
Coke’s
recipe wasn’t the only thing influenced by white supremacy: through the 1920s
and ’30s, it studiously ignored the African-American market. Promotional
material appeared in segregated locations that served both races, but rarely in
those that catered to African-Americans alone.
Meanwhile
Pepsi, the country’s second largest soft drink company, had tried to fight Coke
by selling its sweeter product in a larger bottle for the same price. Still
behind in 1940, Pepsi’s liberal chief executive, Walter S. Mack, tried a new
approach: he hired a team of 12 African-American men to create a “negro
markets” department.
By the
late 1940s, black sales representatives worked the Southern Black Belt and
Northern black urban areas, black fashion models appeared in Pepsi ads in black
publications, and special point-of-purchase displays appeared in stores
patronized by African-Americans. The company hired Duke Ellington as a
spokesman. Some employees even circulated racist public statements by Robert W.
Woodruff, Coke’s president.
The
campaign was so successful that many Americans began using a racial epithet to
describe Pepsi. By 1950, fearing a backlash by white consumers, Pepsi had
killed the program, but the image of Coke and Pepsi as “white” and “black”
drinks lingered.
Not long
after, perhaps seeing the business error of its ways, Coke quietly began to
market to African-Americans. Eventually, part of Coke’s strategy was to support
African-American organizations, forming the basis of its relationship with the
N.A.A.C.P.
The
historical weight of that relationship came to the surface after a 1999
discrimination case brought by black Coke employees, which created bad press
for the company around the world. In 2000, Coke agreed to a settlement for $156
million and made a $50 million donation to the Coca-Cola Foundation to support
community programs.
It took
time, but the new tack worked: today the racial line between the soda
companies, even in the South, is a dim memory, and the soft-drink industry is
on good terms with one of its largest demographic markets: African-Americans.
Of
course, the New York State N.A.A.C.P. may have a legitimate complaint against
the soda restriction as a threat to minority business. And it may be fair to
see the proposal, as some observers have intimated, as an instance of
middle-class whites trying to control the behavior of working-class minorities
— just as they did under Prohibition. But to understand the real story behind
this unexpected alliance, we first have to understand its tangled history.
Grace Elizabeth Hale, a
professor of history and American studies at the University of Virginia, is the
author, most recently, of “A Nation of Outsiders: How the White Middle Class
Fell in Love With Rebellion in Postwar America.”
A version of this op-ed appeared in print on January
29, 2013, on page A23 of the New York edition with the headline: When Jim Crow
Drank Coke.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)