The San Fran Whitening Plan
20th April 2016
Steve Sailer peeks behind the curtain.
With San Francisco being one of the epicenters of the environmental movement of the past half century, local homeowners are adept at using progressive verbiage for justifying keeping San Francisco in stasis. As a conservative, I rather admire the cleverness with which liberals have contrived to keep San Francisco physically looking much like it did in the past.
That’s why I always say that soi-disant ‘progressives’ ought to be called regressives instead.
Of course, most of the people denouncing other people for being white and wanting to live in San Francisco are white San Franciscans themselves.
Indeed, that’s the case almost everywhere.
Paradoxically, under its current antidevelopment ideology, San Francisco—like Washington, D.C., and Brooklyn, and unlike almost all the rest of the country—is becoming more white. In 1990, young people in San Francisco were only 22 percent white, but by 2014 they were up to 33 percent white. And the future looks even whiter.
The dirty little secret of these hipster utopias.
In fact, this is a broad pattern. We see exactly the same incentives at work with elite colleges. While Arizona State and Florida International have added capacity for tens of thousands of additional undergraduates, Stanford, Harvard, and Yale have barely added any undergrads, even as demand soars. Stanford, for example, kept its class size virtually unchanged for over three decades despite having a 13-square-mile campus, the majority of it undeveloped open land.
To quote W. S. Gilbert, ‘When everyone is somebody, then no one’s anybody.’