In my old post analyzing the racial dynamics of the Bay Area, I briefly touched upon the many contradictions that pervade the region. One of the most blatant contradictions here in the Bay is that progressive ideology coexists with untrammeled capitalism.
No city embodies this contradiction more than San Francisco. San Francisco is frequently heralded for its tolerance and embrace of progressive values; a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants and safe haven for gays, San Francisco has received much approbation for its enlightened attitudes. However, San Francisco – like most of the left – is mainly progressive as it pertains to cultural and lifestyle issues. On the economic front, San Francisco’s divide between the haves and have-nots would give Sheldon Adelson a wet dream. Despite passing a retail workers “bill of rights,” San Francisco remains the second most unequal city in the entire country.
These pernicious trends can be confirmed by simple empiricism. The city’s large homeless population alone is enough to make someone think that perhaps something is amiss in this bastion of liberalism. Indeed, it’s not just the homeless who are struggling to find sufficient shelter. Courtesy of techie settler colonialism – resulting in gentrification and rising evictions – the standard of living for many locals is on the decline. I understand that most of my readers probably shed few tears for the plight of Latinos; however, what’s impacting the Mission today could easily spread to other parts of the city. As much as liberals champion humanity in the abstract, the greed that permeates cities such as S.F. is rendering life increasingly unbearable for actual human beings. Needless to say, I’ve always found this discrepancy fascinating.
That’s why the recent decision by the California Labor Commission, which declared Uber’s workers employees, piqued my interest. I find it completely unsurprising that this avaricious and ethically challenged transportation titan resides in the heart of the Bay Area. I also don’t find it surprising that denizens of the Bay continue to utilize the services of Uber, Lyft, and similar companies. While the Bay Area will remain socially liberal for years to come, business ultimately prevails. The leftist convictions of affluent Bay Area residents are shallow; I suspect they will evaporate the second that endorsing progressivism entails tempering their hedonistic, consumerist lifestyles.
I’m actually going to go out on a limb and argue that people in the Bay will play a role in fostering a backlash against “social justice” and other trends that we bemoan. Something just tells me that growing numbers of regular people will notice that, in spite of the prevailing progressive ethos, their standards of living continue to diminish. Such a disconnect is bound to provoke at least some feelings of frustration with the status quo.
I hope that the Bay Area serves as a wake-up call for Ayn Rand worshippers and other libertarian types who inhabit our corner of the internet. As the Bay Area clearly demonstrates, the SJW pestilence flourishes alongside plutocracy. Since corporate elites care little for race, nation, or culture, then they have no qualms about financing – or at least tacitly supporting – deleterious social trends.
The Bay Area should also illustrate that economic growth alone is not a boon for the majority of the population. Ever since the techie influx to San Francisco, the city’s economy has boomed and tax revenues have soared. At the same time, their presence has resulted in higher costs of living, greater social friction, and various other ills that have made everyday living increasingly onerous. Keep all of this in mind the next time some open borders enthusiast claims that immigrants are a blessing on account of paying taxes and increasing economic output.
S.F. and the Bay Area as a whole highlight the myriad contradictions and hypocrisies that characterize many leftists. Understanding these contradictions is key to formulating an effective strategy for combating the liberal plague.