112
submitted 5 months ago by ConsciousBowl@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Cracker Barrel's CEO faces an uphill battle to revive the restaurant chain after a blunt admission sent stock prices plummeting 20 per cent.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] DreamAccountant@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The cracker boss man done fucked up. Some new barrels for the crackers should do it. They'll even have loyal cracker programs.

"cracker" is a term used for slave owners on horseback 'cracking the whip' on the backs of slaves. Possibly analogous to a modern CEO that pays slave wages. Like half minimum wage to server staff.

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 41 points 5 months ago

"Cracker Barrel" refers to 19th century rations. The Cracker was a shelf stable hard-tack biscuit and they were packed into barrels or boxes for transport. You would have encountered hard tack in the military or as a poverty food.

There is a story about General Lee and Jackson meeting before Chancellorsville while sat on these boxes called the "Crackerbox Meeting"

I don't think the name is related to the anti-white pejorative.

[-] DannyMac@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Oh yeah! Cracker Barrel, as far as I can tell, never offered hard tack made items on the menu! Boo! False advertising!

Thanks for the info, I didn't realize that's where the name came from :)

[-] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world -2 points 5 months ago

Not it is not but, it is know to a haven for old white people so...

[-] randompasta@lemmy.today 5 points 5 months ago

I thought you were wrong about the term. I've lived all my life in the south and had known it to reference poor whites that had to crack corn to live. But Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracker_(term), says your definition is one of the meanings. I learned something today!

[-] njm1314@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

This is a cute little history lesson you two have been on, but the name for the restaurant comes from barrels of literal crackers.

[-] shalafi@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

First time I got called a cracker I laughed and hung up on the caller (customer service job).

"Eww! You a smartass little cracker ain't ya!"

Pulled a black friend aside:

"Hey Darren, I just got called a 'cracker'. Is that a racial slur or something?"

LOL, Darren just stared at me a minute. "Yeah, you know, master cracking the whip? (with hand-waving demo) You never heard that?!"

Darren was an education. Got stuck with him and another coworker in a room all afternoon. Had to leave because my stomach hurt from laughing so hard and so long. Thought I was getting sick until I got away from him and took a breath.

[-] FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Are you familiar with the term "whitewashing"? That's another good one, and it happens frequently when it comes to history classes in southern states.

[-] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

It's one of my favorite things to teach white friends and (extended) family when they say they don't care about being called cracker, or are "never offended" by words

"Oh, you're right. I don't really like that!" - my cousin in law. lol. The look on her face was honestly priceless

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It’s a reminder that those you oppress see you as less than human too, but they have a reason to. It’s never just a word, it’s the weight behind it

[-] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Idk about less than human; moreso, we just see them/each other through a racial lens - one rooted in our respective culture(s) and understanding of history (which is itself usually heavily-written/influenced by earlier European culture/historians).

That said, most Americans tend to use racism as a synonym for prejudice (as opposed to the academic definition of racism; i.e. an "organized system of race-based" prejudice). To probe this line of thought, I've recently started asking people whether they would consider a black American (wo)man growing up in 1845 (pre-Civil war) or in ~1930 (peak KKK membership; ~5 million Americans) racist for their likely negative views of the average white American. I've yet to get an answer, which is a bit of a bummer. Personally, I think most people realize it would be silly to call a black American slave racist for being prejudiced of their fellow white American citizens who they know only as brutal slave owners/traders. (Did y'all know pirates would use African slaves to launder money since they had a stable monetary value?)

Sorry, if it's a bit of a tangent. I find this stuff super interesting. Highly recommend "Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?" by Beverly Tatum and the doc "Exterminate All the Brutes" on HBO to anyone interested. Then come and chat with me about your thoughts! No one I know cares about this kind of stuff. It's all rap battles and dumb culture war crap, but I digress (further)

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Thank you for the insight, and I suppose I may have spoken carelessly.

And yeah as a white American I’ve absolutely noticed a tendency to view racism as you describe and I really appreciate your examples and hope to remember them next time I’m in that argument

[-] AmidFuror@fedia.io 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

But we're not saying racial prejudice is a good thing just because it doesn't fit the academic definition of racism, right? Like, if a white child grows up in a predominantly black area and is picked on for being different, it's still terrible if they grow up loathing black people. Even though it's not an example of systemic or ~~instructional~~ institutional racism and just plain old boring racial prejudice.

Edit: autocorrect

[-] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

But prejudice has always been bad. It's just that racism, especially the racism that resulted from centuries of chattel slavery, is worse. It's a lot worse. It's something that can be studied through multiple lenses/fields, politics (colonization, authoritarianism), psychology (identity formation, PTSD), law (red-lining, jim crow, mass incarceration) economics (no business loans from banks, racist hiring practices), philosophy (justice, freedom, epistemology), sociology, anthropology, etc.

People don't really fear being called a slur on the street as much as they fear being seen as less than human by our society and shared institutions.

[-] AmidFuror@fedia.io -5 points 5 months ago

You mean c*****r if it's as bad as you say.

[-] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Uhh, did I say it was bad somewhere? I don't think I even stated my opinion about it. lol. Wtf u talking bout?

It's usually white people that say it's not bad/offensive and/or that everyone should be allowed to say whatever they want or they're just words, don't get so offended, etc.

I'm just teaching my white friends and fam their own history. Personally, I think it's worse and more offensive that they don't know or care about the atrocities their ancestors committed than the modern use of the word cracker. That said, it's offensive like seeing a piece of trash on the street - it won't ruin my day or anything but I'm well aware it's stll trashy

this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
112 points (94.4% liked)

News

23259 readers
1561 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS