California has long been recognized as a nanny state, and the city of San Francisco is of particular note as being a municipality that places priorities on special interests over the rule of law. While most of the rest of the country wonders how the homeless and illegal residents take priority over the active citizens, it becomes revealing when we see the mindset behind the legislative nightmare.

It begins with this story reported back in March.

For some reason, this story recently set off another tech executive, a deeply important blue-check member of society named Sarah Mei. Sarah has opinions, about many things. For one, Sarah assumes the character of an individual based on the car they drive. Or, that they simply drive a car.

A municipal parking garage is described as ‘Public Lands’? Oh…kay…

When questioned about her position Sarah launched into a grand thread of social activism.

Yes, she blamed this on income inequality. And yes, she is completely excusing away illegal activity, because as a social activist she judges guilt based on her liking you or not.

Also, she seems oblivious that if she gets her way income inequality will, in fact, be wiped out – this business owner will leave town and his jobs will no longer be available. Perfect — no salaries means there are no salary discrepancies. But Sarah is only just getting started.

Owning a car is enough to have someone declared ”rich people”.

Understand now, she is victim-blaming here, pure and simple. If you don’t own a car then your car will never be broken into. Crime, as we know it, can be solved completely if people would just stop having stuff.

Not content to look unhinged in the hole she dug, she managed to find a bigger shovel.

This is next-level psychosis. Now not only is the victim to blame, but to solve the crime problems the victim is the one who needs to address the issue. Next, rape victims not only need to stop wearing short skirts but they need to service men to prevent them from committing sexual crimes.

This is the mindset that drives California. Crime is justified, victims are guilty, and the revenue drivers of a community are demonized until they decide to leave — at which point they are demonized.

Not all were on board with Sarah’s social engineering.

It’s easy; someone disagrees with her world views, and as such they are A-holes who deserve to have crimes committed against them. Well, okay — it’s easily explained. That does not mean you will understand her logic.

And she seems perfectly at ease with driving out a company – that will leave people unemployed, and give her more reasons to complain.

I should probably inform you at this point — self-awareness is not a common trait with leftist activists. We mean, SO WHAT if an executive who trains people for the tech sector is also driving away tech businesses???

Then when asked about compassion — that favorite buzzword of the left — Sarah gave us all the explanation to her thinking.

That is a software engineer, decrying the executives in her very industry.

Interesting that a coder is unaware of the legal codes in her city.