If you needed another reason to boycott Starbucks. Or to recognize that the farthest fringes of the radical left are in the drivers' seat. Here it is.
Farrakhan fan Tamika Mallory had been criticized by the ADL for her attendance at an anti-Semitic speech by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. Tamika and her gang, including Patrisse Cullors of Black Lives Matter, then began hounding Starbucks for including the ADL in its anti-bias training.
Initially the left seemed able to hold off the black nationalist anti-Semites. Neera Tanden of the Center for American Progress, called out Mallory and her anti-Semitism. (The subsequent #MeToo attacks on CAP may or may not be related.)
But then Starbucks bowed to the bigots. And the ADL is out.
I have no sympathy for the ADL. Under Greenblatt, it became notorious for trying to have it both ways, pandering to anti-Semites on the left while belatedly trying to condemn the worst of the hate. And now it just discovered that won't work. Nothing less than complete appeasement and support for lefty anti-Semitism will.
But if a major corporation can't even stand by a lefty Jewish group and stand up to Farrakhan supporters, who can? Short answer: nobody.
It's not as if this began last week. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton got a pass on their bigotry. Why not Tamika Mallory, Linda Sarsour and everyone else at the Women's March?
Look at it from the perspective of Starbucks. If you're going to appease the Mau Mauers, you might as well go to the angriest of the bunch instead of trying to go half-measures.
Next up, Howard Schultz can kiss Farrakhan's wingtips.
Meanwhile the ADL is discovering what the Jews in the USSR and Nazi Germany learned, there's no way to have it both ways. And in response, the ADL will go even further to the left. And ignore even more anti-Semitism.
Exit question: Who would have gotten the final say on this at Starbucks? The overpriced coffee chain brought in Eric Holder to head its racist relief effort.
One guess whom Holder would have sided with.