2 ms·
> I just don't understand why throwing trash on the ground is tolerated. There is virtually no argument for why someone should need or be allowed to throw or le
by throwawaysea 5y ago
> I just don't understand why throwing trash on the ground is tolerated. There is virtually no argument for why someone should need or be allowed to throw or leave their trash on the ground.
It comes back to the policies around law enforcement adopted by SF. Since it is effectively the epicenter of progressive politics in the world, there are a lot of radical policies in play. One of them is "restorative justice", which claims to make criminals / law breakers less stigmatized and more able to constructively reintegrate into society. Personally, I feel the motivations are sincere and have good intentions behind them.
However in practice, that framework of restorative justice has been warped into something more like an us versus them narrative, where those who break the law are viewed as helpless victims while those who seek to enforce the law are viewed as oppressors. I think this is partly because of the divisive nature of American politics in general, and partly because of the extremist language used by some activists who support these policies.
While I agree there is no excuse for this, and it shouldn't be tolerated (alongside open drug abuse, shoplifting, defecating on the street, assault, armed robberies, burglaries, and so on), the reality is that the politicians elected in SF and people like Chesa Boudin (the District Attorney) are very much all-in on restorative justice. In effect, they've decriminalized most crimes. And unfortunately it is a two-tier justice system where law abiding taxpayers are subject to the penalties of the law, while criminals are somehow not subject to penalties.
As far as I can tell, the only practical way out for SF is for constituents to wholesale reject fringe progressive politics and return to moderate politics that is closer to the Clinton or Obama era left. However, I don't view that as being very likely despite all the complaints, simply because the voice of activists is louder and more feared than other voices.
- wolverine876 5y ago> simply because the voice of activists is louder and more feared than other voices Maybe it is more persuasive and appealing. If it doesn't appeal to you, that doesn't mean the only explanation for everyone is volume and fear.