Here’s what the Chronicle‘s Caille Millner has to say about members of the Stop American Apparel effort:
They are not serious people. They live in a world where facts like 27 vacant storefronts on Valencia Street and 9.3 percent unemployment statewide and nearly 600,000 jobs lost nationally last month do not matter. The few who read books know no authors beyond Naomi Klein. They do not believe that the world has changed since the 1999 World Trade Organization protests in Seattle. This accounts for both the static nature of their vocabulary – “no formula retail!” is their death chant, though anyone who has picked up a newspaper in the last five months could tell you that there isn’t a single retail establishment with a formula today – and the juvenile nature of their worldview.
Reads like a blog comment with better punctuation don’t it? She goes on to refer to the protestors as “nasty little elves.” Link.
Way to go again Chronicle. Always the voice of reason. Thanks for showing us that the 15 shitty retail jobs that won’t get created would have remedied the 600,000 jobs lost last month. These radical lefties are bringing us down into the third world.
Glad you see the big picture. This is as helpful as when you let me know that Public Owned power would somehow be more expensive than profit-driven PG&E.
What does “serious people” mean?
I think she has a point, personally. Especially given that divide that MAC SF was blogging about – there’s real, substantive things going on over on Mission that people don’t seem to give two bits about, but everyone’s getting upset because there’s a single storefront that wants to move in there. What’s ironic is that the store in question wouldn’t want to move in if the very people who are protesting it didn’t live there.
I say – combat the real problems in SF, there’s schools that are falling behind, still tons of homeless on the streets and soaring rents pushing families out of the city.
Focus on what matters – not what’s in a two block radius of your house.
It’s laughable really — people put more energy into protesting an American Apparel store (great free advertising for them guys!) than standing up to basic quality of life issues that we have in the Mission, such as used hypodermic needles laying around the street, homeless people shitting on your doorstep and the ever-so unsettling experience of seeing people get shot or stabbed in broad daylight.
But at least we saved Valencia St. from American Apparel. I guess this means we can feel closer as a community now.
What, there are writers other than Naomi Klein? I had no idea. And what would this world be if we didn’t have a few nasty little elves?
Did the Chronicle accidentally insert copy intended for The National Review or the Dallas Morning News? I’m surprised she didn’t say that the people against American Apparel are the same ones that voted for that Marxist Obama.
while the folks that rallied and protested and censored AA are entitled to their positions & right to do what they did…
the fact that this editorial was written & published (together with the article by Nevius along the same lines)…
simply shows that there are in fact many facets to every issue, and that community planning isn’t the kind of thing that is best served by “single issue” or “knee jerk” reactions.
that in itself is probably – after the fact – what is most hollow about the anti-AA “movement”…that it’s insular, self-referential and exclusive.
someone in this city still reads the chronicle???
No, but I have a Google Alert set up for “Stephen Elliott.” Because I’m a fan.
@raimondo…
that’s funny. i get the chron at home for some reason,(bad) habit more than anything i guess, but the main value is that during the rainy season i use the plastic bags to pick up my dog’s poop.
i really need to cancel that thing. it kind of is a rag…even though i do agree with this particular editorial.
@Justin: hey I agree. However, I think it’s an awful piece.
I hate most of the stores that were represented at the hearing but I was opposed to American Apparel moving in because I oppose chain stores in general and because ATA’s rent would have gone up and made ATA move.
Unlike you Justin, The author did not mention any more threatening problems she thought people should work on. And unlike one of the commissioners at the hearing who took a stance closer the MAC SF’s by pointing out the irony of displacers freaking out, the author didn’t list any community groups like MAC or MEDA that might be working on bigger, more inclusive campaigns.
Based on this article, I don’t think she really gives a shit about the mission and is just on staff to write opinion pieces in favor of big businesses.
Sounds about right to me. There are 27 vacant storefronts on Valencia, and a handful of preening jackasses in trucker hats don’t care.
LoLz TruCKeR HaTz
LoLz, way to keep up with fashion. what year are you living in? nobody wears truckers hats anymore. rofl
K.I.T. & LoLz
Someone needs to be the voice of reason for Mission residents. I firmly believe that she speaks for the majority. I also feel like, as zinzin said, the whole activist community is sooo insular that these people probably don’t realize that they live around a lot of people who might feel differently about this issue. Talk to your friends, a lot of people who love the Mission were not opposed to the AA opening. I wasn’t.
sigh. thing about it is, while i am sure many people really do have a great personal distaste for “formula retail”, my guess is a lot of folks were either duped by half-truths as put forward by the anti-AA “movement”, or didn’t give the whole thing a lot of thought, or really just like to jump on bandwagons.
“…anyone who has picked up a newspaper in the last five months…”
Aw.
I loved her riff on magical. Valencia, magical indeed. A place where wrong is righteous, and hip is really uncool.
I oppose formula retail stores in neighborhoods on principal so I opposed the AA opening on Valencia St. Since I had never stepped foot in an AA store before, my curiousity got the better of me and I stopped in the AA store on Grant St. After all the hoopla I imagined that it must carry some pretty special stuff…but…what a dump! The clothing was a big yawn. I walked out feeling that the neighborhood was right in keeping a chain t-shirt store out of the Mission.
@clapback wrote: … Talk to your friends, a lot of people who love the Mission were not opposed to the AA opening. I wasn’t.”
That’s one of the wonderful things about a constitutional republic system. It’s designed for the people that bother to show up and speak out.
And so as irony would have it, these “friends” you’re referring to are the very definition of insular. But actually I seriously doubt there are any “friends.” You might as well be saying your point of view is valid because that lots of people sent you emails saying they’re not against it. It’s unverifiable, self-referential and therefore total b.s. Which gives us a fair viewpoint on your objectivity – read: lackthereof.
zinzin wrote: …my guess is a lot of folks were either duped by half-truths as put forward by the anti-AA “movement”, or didn’t give the whole thing a lot of thought, or really just like to jump on bandwagons….”
Keep quessing zinzin. Eventually you might be right. But, sadly, not quite yet.
American Apparel appears to be gearing up to open in Tijuana. I wonder if folks there are banging out whiny blabber on retro typewriters. I seriously doubt the citizens of Tijuana could even comprehend the self-righteous idiocy that only spoiled brat gringos can afford. I know I can’t.
http://tijuanatales.wordpress.com/2009/01/29/american-apparel/
These must be the most clever, most deceptive, most terrifying, maybe even delicious Half-Truths. Magical at the very least.
I say that because Half-Truths don’t usually make people show up to a hearing from 1:30pm til 7pm.
I know I showed up because I was told that if I didn’t go that Roe v. Wade was gonna be overturned and that there was free ice cream. It’s a hard lifestyle trying to make people believe I am progressive.
unbelievable delicious
Matt G writes: “The author did not mention any more threatening problems she thought people should work on.”
As much as I dislike her tone, she does. She suggests that commercial vacancies are a problem and that property standards are low as a result. She says that the neighborhood needs more jobs like AA’s ($30k salary + health insurance.) She says that the city would benefit from the increased tax revenue – every city’s revenues are being drastically cut this year.
I don’t understand what was gained here. People in the Mission like AA the brand and wear AA clothing. So why protect a small business that sells AA from AA at the expense of workers? Health insurance for workers is surely one of the most important things in our country, and small businesses in the Mission are not offering it.
You might cite high commercial rents as the reason why small businesses on Valencia can’t offer health insurance (which would be relatively cheap given their mostly young and healthy workforce.) But let’s say that neighborhood activists got a commercial rent control ordinance passed (a worthy solution, perhaps). Would small businesses offer health insurance or sick days as a result of the reduced financial pressure?
We know that it took legislation to get restaurants to charge the SFHSO fee and use it to pay for health insurance, and it wouldn’t be different with other kinds of businesses. If Valencia businesses were so progressive and concerned about their workers as to justify protection from AA, would they not have done something innovative like collect SFHSO donations and pool the proceeds to help their employees?
I think a lot of people here need to stop mythologizing small businesses. Keeping revenues local is not a victory when it doesn’t actually benefit working people. In virtually every case, the only people who make a living wage from them are the owners and their families. Profits don’t trickle down to workers.
My main problem with the piece was two-fold. It over represented the positive impact of 15 jobs, and one less empty storefront, and it didn’t take into consideration the long term. Why would it, they can just write another article later about how Valencia has changed – and wistfully look back on the days of yore.
Plus as has been noted in other publications for every vacant storefront about 15 business plans are being submitted, so the Landlords (who weren’t mentioned at all) play a role.
I like Caille as a person, but this piece was rather like going to the Marina and making fun of them keeping a discount store out of their neighborhood.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/07/08/MN215970.DTL&hw=Charles+Phan&sn=006&sc=595
@fledermaus – Funny article. There is nothing working class or Latino about Valencia any more. It’s not really part of the Mission at all.
This whole AA debate proved that point perfectly.
AA would be welcome on Mission street. We’re not too proud, we need the jobs and we need shoppers with more than $5 in their pockets.
I’m neutral on AA as a business, but it’s shameful to read those horrid screeds in the media decrying an open, fair, and democratic process. Going down to City Hall and voicing your opinion about the community you live in is about the most basic citizen participation there is.
AA will be fine, and SF will be fine. AA will open in another neighborhood or on another street in SF, and life will move on. Meanwhile, the residents and business owners around Valencia will get exactly the neighborhood they want and deserve. Whether the result is better or worse remains to be seen. But the important thing is that the outcome was chosen by people who actually live here, not imposed upon us by distant corporations, no matter how cool and friendly those corporations may be.
Man, will you all realize that YOU’RE the reason AA wanted to move in here in the first place?? Get the hell out of my community already.
While I think there are better things to protest right now than American Apparel, I am HORRIFIED that such a creep writes for the Chronicle. What horrible, incorrect stereotyping. What a deliberate, ignorant bitch. I mean, “The few who read books know no authors beyond Naomi Klein. They do not believe that the world has changed since the 1999 World Trade Organization protests in Seattle. This accounts for both the static nature of their vocabulary – “no formula retail!”’
You know Caille — If more people read Naomi Klein than your fetid almost unbelievably greedy corporate-apologia journal, the world wouldn’t be in the crisis state you outline. You are an asshole, and a very smug one to boot.