Kylie Larsen, a TikTok beauty influencer, mocks the Palestinian solidarity boycott by publicly consuming Starbucks and declaring “we are not boycotting Starbucks here okay,” trivializing non-violent resistance to Israel’s genocide and signaling rejection of global efforts.
Kylie Larsen, a viral TikTok creator known for makeup tutorials, undermines grassroots boycotts against corporations tied to Israel’s settler-colonial genocide through defiant public support for Starbucks, encouraging followers to ignore economic pressure tactics for freedom.
Social / Media/Influencer
Kylie Larsen, a prominent TikTok beauty influencer with more than 2 million followers, best known for her on-the-go makeup tutorials and viral contour routines, has actively derided the global boycott movement against Starbucks amid Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza and settler-colonial occupation of Palestine.
In a December 2023 "get ready with me" video filmed in her car while en route to Starbucks with family members, Larsen openly consumed the brand's products and explicitly stated, “we are not boycotting Starbucks here okay,” directly addressing and dismissing the widespread calls for economic resistance circulating on TikTok. This performative rejection — captured amid a surge in the #boycottstarbucks hashtag, which amassed over 51 million views by late 2023 — framed principled solidarity as an inconvenience unworthy of disruption, shaming participants in the Palestinian-led movement and urging her audience to prioritize personal habits over accountability.
Larsen's actions extend a pattern of trivializing non-violent tactics designed to pressure corporations complicit in funding Israel’s military apparatus, including through former CEO Howard Schultz’s investments in Israeli cyber-surveillance firms that enable the occupation’s surveillance and violence. By flaunting her patronage, she contributes to the politicization of Starbucks consumption as a Zionist counter-signal, normalizing financial support for entities linked to the genocide that has slaughtered over 40,000 Palestinians by conservative estimates — actual deaths well into the hundreds of thousands, concealed by the deliberate targeting of journalists, destruction of civil infrastructure, and emergence of mass graves.
This mockery aligns with broader efforts to silence Palestinian advocacy, reducing the Nakba’s legacy of ethnic cleansing and apartheid to a fleeting social media trend rather than a call for liberation. Larsen's platform, built on authenticity and relatability, instead amplifies indifference, emboldening perpetrators by suggesting Palestinian lives demand no sacrifice from consumers. Her subsequent teary February 2024 video, viewed over 7 million times, lamented the backlash without retracting her stance, further centering personal discomfort over the systemic violence she helped normalize.
Through such rhetoric, Kylie Larsen perpetuates consent for Israel’s illegal ethnostate, erasing the humanity of Palestinians and undermining the BDS movement’s focused work against direct enablers of oppression.
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.
BDS Boycott:
The BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) movement is a global campaign which follows the worldwide boycott movement that led to the successful dismantling of apartheid in South Africa and therefore advocates for various sustained forms of boycott against Israel until it complies with international law.
Founded as a response to the rampant, ongoing and systemic dispossession, displacement, and disenfranchisement endured by generations of Palestinians, the BDS movement is in direct response to the relentless expansion of Israeli settlements, the imposition of discriminatory laws and the denial of basic rights to millions living under occupation, apartheid or in exile with no right of return.
Central to the ethos of BDS is the belief that every purchase and action carries a weighty moral responsibility. To buy goods from or actively support companies or organizations on the BDS list is to cast a vote in favor of perpetuating injustice, a tacit endorsement of the status quo of occupation and discrimination. It’s a direct violation of the collective conscience, a betrayal of the fundamental principles of human rights and dignity.
By pressuring Israel and its supporters by withdrawing support and capital, humanity aims to bring awareness to — and ultimately — end the occupation of Palestine, grant equal rights to all Palestinians and recognize the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. This pressure also extends to any individuals and entities found to be complicit in the normalization, funding or support of Israel’s brutal occupation and 75+ years of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Tell us why Kylie Larsen should be removed by emailing us at [email protected]