The local NBC affiliate reports that at least four Smart Cars were recently flipped onto their sides, or onto their rear bumpers in San Francisco. In a lengthy post on the angry Luddite tendencies of some San Francisco leftists, Ace of Spades ponders the San Francisco NBC affiliate fixating on one of the cars having an Obama bumper sticker as a red herring; in his comments section, PJM columnist Zombie writes:
Ph come on, I’ve been following the car-tipping story and the vomit-on-google story for weeks.
There is a 100% chance that the car-tippers are the same anti-tech protesters blocking and attacking google buses. No question.
They dress like the same anarcho/Occupy idiots that do all the same kind of shit every day. They are filled with irrational hate toward tehcnology — essentially they are Luddite anarchists. There are thousands of them around here.
Everyone knows this. The Obama bumpersticker is a ridiculous and irrelevant detail. Hell, ALL OF GOOGLE is pro-Obama, and the protesters have been protesting Google itself. Ooooh, does that meant they’re right-wingers?
The media’s attempt at bias here is feeble and ignored. Everyone in the Bay Area knows these anarcho types. They cause about 75% of the problems.
Another of Ace’s commenters describes the Frisco kerfuffle as “a left-wing protest against ‘Gentrification:’”
Here, gentrification is embodied by the rich Googlers that tool around in electric cars and take the special Google buses to their Google campus.
The artsy/druggie Left is angry that the rich Googlers are pricing them out of San Francisco. They feel they should be able to live in the cool parts of SF while being a semi-employed busker while sponging money off mom and dad in the burbs. San Francisco is so expensive now that they increasingly cannot do that. They are angry about that.
Speaking of the angry anti-Google left and their transportation obsession, it was back in January that Ars Technica.com reported, “Protesters show up at the doorstep of Google self-driving car engineer,” taking yet another tip from Saul Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals.
And we can’t do a post about Silicon Valley today without noting that OkCupid CEO Sam Yagan has recanted his thoughtcrimes:
“A decade ago, I made a contribution to Representative Chris Cannon because he was the ranking Republican on the House subcommittee that oversaw the Internet and Intellectual Property, matters important to my business and our industry. I accept responsibility for not knowing where he stood on gay rights in particular; I unequivocally support marriage equality and I would not make that contribution again today. However, a contribution made to a candidate with views on hundreds of issues has no equivalence to a contribution supporting Prop 8, a single issue that has no purpose other than to affirmatively prohibit gay marriage, which I believe is a basic civil right.”
No word yet on Yagan’s thoughts on Laurence Harvey.
In an email to me (I wanted to confirm that the Zombie who posted at Ace was indeed my fellow PJM columnist) the mysterious Zombie adds:
I feel that there is a Great Convergence between three leftist worldviews happening:
2. “Social Justice”/income inequality/communism.
3. Slacker/pothead/trustafarian goof-off-ism. Each three is distinct in its origins, but somehow they have combined forces to create the great Anti Google Backlash.
A Civil War between the grassroots Left, in other words, which is occurring simultaneously and intersecting with the ongoing battle for control among the party’s elite, and connected by Henry Hazlitt’s 1966 definition of Marxism:
The whole gospel of Karl Marx can be summed up in a single sentence: Hate the man who is better off than you are. Never under any circumstances admit that his success may be due to his own efforts, to the productive contribution he has made to the whole community. Always attribute his success to the exploitation, the cheating, the more or less open robbery of others.
A segment on the radical anti-progress, success-envying Luddite anarcho Bay Area Left sounds like it would catnip to a TV news network struggling in the ratings and looking to break the cycle from the one story it’s been obsessing on for an extended period.
Related: “OKCupid Founders Promoted ‘Dis’ Generator with Gay Insults,” John Sexton writes at Big Government:
Brendan Eich was ushered out the door over a 6-year-old donation to a campaign which garnered a majority of the vote in California (and also over a 22-year-old donation to Pat Buchanan). His choices weren’t a joke or a satire. They also weren’t part of his work behavior. By contrast, the “Deliver the Dis” app was a product promoted by The Spark. It was always intended as an obscene joke aimed at high school kids, but does that make it okay?
As the recent “cancel Colbert” incident has demonstrated, saying something is a joke or satire isn’t always enough. Suey Park, who got the #cancelcolbert hashtag trending last week after the show’s Twitter account sent out a joke mocking Asian stereotypes, told the New Yorker, “That sort of racial humor just makes people who hide under the title of progressivism more comfortable.” Jay Kang, who wrote the piece, says Park “does not defer to white liberals who point out that the joke was meant to satirize white racists, nor does she believe that a debt of gratitude is owed to the good intentions of white liberalism.”
I contacted OKCupid to ask if they saw any of this differently today, especially in light of their stand against Brendan Eich. I also asked if they thought it was fair for people to judge their fitness to run a tech company based on something they had done years in the past. No one at OKCupid offered a response.
Perhaps they’re waiting for Mother Jones to pick up on the story.