ABSTRACT
Whenever I teach a course on rhetorical theory, I assign Paula Mathieu’s essay “Economic Citizenship and the Rhetoric of Gourmet Coffee” as an example of rhetorical analysis in the tradition of cultural studies. Mathieu argues that when we take for granted the invisible assumptions of global economics, the omnipresence of companies like Starbucks begins to seem benevolent, even radically so, to the point where even the act of consuming an expensive cup of coffee can be transformed from an indulgence into a means of painlessly subsidizing, say, health insurance for part-time Starbucks employees or clean drinking water for Guatemalan plantation workers. When we articulate these assumptions, however, it’s possible to see how the rhetorics of “unlimited choice” that support and emanate from globalism are in fact quietly incomplete. For instance, in offering literally thousands of possibilities for uniquely personalized coffee consumption, Starbucks renders invisible such options as making one’s own coffee or simply getting more sleep; in short, it effectively obscures those alternatives that might undermine its economic goals.
