A friend of the blog emails:
This article tells me a lot of things that are happening in San Francisco aren’t progressive.
Thing is, a lot of what they’re saying isn’t progressive seems to be actually what the “progressive party” nationwide supports.
Progressivism = weaponized idealism.
The late George Carlin would probably argue that progressivism is also just NIMBY on a large scale.
Sclerotic progressivism is inevitable.
The article is an awful slander of “conservatism”.
They’re working definition seems to be “the opposite of progressivism”, but also seem to hold that “progressivism” actually creates “progress”. Something that is obviously at odds with reality, even from a progressive viewpoint.
San Francisco seems to have less of a problem with “conservatism” and more with elitist NIMBY and “do as I say, not as I do” attitudes. This would probably be characterized in some other city as “privilege”. When it comes to San Francisco, I don’t think “conservatism” has anything to do with their problems. Actual conservatives would try to do something about people literally crapping all over their city.
Pingback: In The Mailbox: 05.10.21 : The Other McCain