"Why is there a push to ‘cancel’ one of the wealthiest Bay Area cities?"

The piece below (after needed background) is from the San Francisco Chronicle, Aug 10, 2026

Some things about the future are easy to predict: You find out who's running any entity--a city, state, company, country, "association"--and if they're liberal Democrats you can be absolutely certain the liberal shitheads will penalize whites for the sole purpose of giving free shit to minorities. "Cuz dat only FAIR, citizen!!"

Oh, y'say you think that's hyperbole?  Not possible in the U.S.?  Ahh, I see you just arrived on this planet.  Enjoy your stay.

Some background on the story below: It's from the left-liberal (pro-socialist) San Francisco Chronicle.  The leftist propagandist is writing about a tiny city across the bay--a tiny, beautiful, 1.7 square mile enclave named Piedmont, totally surrounded by the city of Oakland.
 
San Fran and Oakland have always been rivals.  Then slowly, Oakland turned into a crime-ridden shithole.  I won't bore you by explaining how that happened, cuz you already know.

After the 1906 earthquake that destroyed much of San Francisco, some of that city’s wealthiest families flocked to an unincorporated portion of the wooded foothills overlooking Oakland.  Months later, as Oakland tried to force their tiny community to become part of faaabulous Oakland, citizens voted to incorporate their own city.  By doing that, Piedmonters preserved their large lots and ensured control over their town's decisions about parks, schools, police and so on. 

So why would the Chron be concerned about this tiny city inside its cross-bay rival, eh?

Because the Chron is run by leftists.  The Chron piece is absolutely dripping with leftist/lib propaganda--all of which has one goal: if you're white, the Left demands that you not be allowed to have a tiny town with better housing, better parks, better city services than the mega-shithole that surrounds you--even though you pay for those things.

Instead you must be forced to build "low-income housing" inside your tiny, 1.7-square-mile jewel.  You're forced to do that by a state law, rammed through by the Democrat-ruled legislature.  What could possibly go wrong, eh?

Over a century after this wealthy suburban enclave rejected being "annexed" by Oakland, Piedmont remains one of the Bay Area’s most controversial cities.  To its 11,000 residents, their 1.7-square-mile swath of oak trees, ivy-covered mansions *and top-ranked schools* represents the zenith of the American dream. 

But to its critics, Piedmont is a prime symbol of the economic and racial divides that continue to plague the Bay Area. 

“It really is ridiculous that a place like Piedmont even exists,” says [leftist "transit planner," Oakland resident and protagonist for this propaganda piece] John Rosemoore, who has a punk-rock aesthetic. “What’s going on there says a lot about our society as a whole.”

Yes, and the Left hates everything about the place--because it represents freedom, which communists absolutely hate.

It’s not just that Piedmont’s median home price is more than 3½ times that of Oakland’s.  Despite being completely surrounded by one of the nation’s most diverse major cities, Piedmont is roughly 70% white and just 1% Black—a striking figure compared to Oakland, where 20% of residents are Black.

You may have noticed that the Chron doesn't capitalize "white," but does capitalize "black."  No kneeling, fawning, slobbering suck-ups at the Chron, eh?

The boundary between Piedmont and Oakland means one household might have access to a better-performing school district and police department than the home right beside it.

Yep, and that's intentional: it's not a plot, or "oppression," just the difference between a well-run, honest city government, chosen by residents who have high standards, versus Oakland.
  So now Chron propagandist inserts a pithy quote by the assistant director of UC Berkeley’s "Othering and Belonging Institute," and with a name like that you already know it's run by leftists: 

“Back in the day segregation was having white and Black neighborhoods in the same city, but now most segregation is felt between cities, rather than within them.”

In case you didn't get that, read it again: it's the thrust of the article:  'It beez a crime dat whites wanna run dere own cities, wif' good skoolz and cops an' parks an' stuff!  Yew only gots dat 1.7 square miles cuz yew stole it!  We not shure how, but gotta be true!  Or yew exploited us!  However yew did it, it not right, so we gon' use state law to force yew to build "low-income housing" so we kin have duh benefits of yo' skoolz an' parks an' shee-it.'

Enter “Cancel Piedmont.”  Transit planner Rosemoore has been handing out stickers and selling T-shirts with that slogan.  The professional transit planner now sees the campaign as a vehicle for challenging the Bay Area’s intertwined systems of race, wealth, housing and local governance.

That's some world-class wordsmithing there: the screech from Leftists like the Chron propagandist and Rosemoore is that "We will not ALLOW you to somehow have better schools, better cops, lower crime and bigger lots.  We demand that you build "low-income housing" so you'll become as magnificently DIE-verse as Oakland!
  The article then describes an admittedly awful incident from a hundred years ago:

By the mid-1920s, Piedmont touted the most millionaires per square mile of any U.S. city. [cuz it was only 1.7 square miles, eh?]  One of them was Sidney Dearing, who’d made a fortune running a popular jazz club in Oakland. Since he was Black Seminole, at a time when Black people weren’t allowed to buy homes in Piedmont, he gave his white mother-in-law $10,000 to purchase a four-bedroom house.

Some residents were outraged, and there were many aggressions against the Dearings.  The city eventually bought the property by claiming it needed it to build a road--which was never built.  Outrageous?  Clearly.  Problem is, liberal white guilt wants to turn Piedmont into Oakland to atone for the century-old outrage.  Sound familiar?  The "reparations movement" is well underway in California.

By the time the leftist transit planner began his "Cancel Piedmont" movement in June 2025, Piedmont was well into confronting complex questions: how to build more housing, reckon with its history of racial exclusion, diversify its schools and respond to growing scrutiny over whether a city so different from Oakland should remain that way.

 "So different from Oakland," eh?  Different HOW?  Ooohh, can't say!  And there ya have it:  If you live in a jewel and have a lick of sense you do NOT wanna "build more housing" or "diversify your schools."  Living in Piedmont beats the hell out of living in Oakland, and everyone knows it.  Which (and here comes the entire point) is the entire reason the Left wants to see Piedmont brought down to Oakland's level.
  Is dat clear enough for ya?

If not, consider this:  Back when the Berlin wall divided communist East Berlin from free West Berlin, why did thousands of residents of the East risk their lives to get to West Berlin--with hundreds shot to death on the barbed wire--and yet NO ONE ever went the other way, eh?
   Same climate, same natural resources, and yet all the daring escapes only went in one direction.

Or consider North Korea vs. South Korea:  Same deal: identical climate and resources, yet hundreds of residents of the North fled to South Korea, with scores shot to death as they tried to cross the DMZ--and yet not one person tried to go the other direction!

Why do ya think that was, eh?

I don't need to tell ya, cuz you already know.  Sadly, your kids don't know.  The communist-ruled public skoolz nevah told 'em, cuz "Dat not important, comrade.  Prolly FAKE NEWZ by duh capitalists!"

See, when two competing ideologies are operating right next to each other--as in Berlin, Korea or Piedmont/Oakland, the difference in the results becomes to obvious to ignore.  So leftists wanna make people ignore the better competing system, whether by putting up a wall or merely barbed wire and shooting anyone who tries to go to the better side.  Or in the case of Piedmont, forcing that tiny enclave to bulldoze parks to build low-income housing.

So back to Piedmont.  Leftists: "We don' wanna do hurt doze wipipo in Piedmont!  We jus wanna force 'em to build low-income housing!  An' to "diversify" their skoolz and police force.  Cuz die-versity iz ouah strength, citizen!  Dat beez obvious to ebrywun!"

Wait...if "die-versity" is so fucking great, why is die-verse Oakland--in exactly the same location as Piedmont, with the same great climate, views and access to...everything...such a crime-infested shithole compared to Piedmont, eh?
   When you have an answer for that, let me know.  Take all the time you like.

 But the more Piedmont has tried to atone for its divisive past through diversity initiatives and public apologies, the louder some of its detractors have become.

Wow, what a shock!  Give socialists/leftists an inch...

The city’s diversity efforts have included hiring a consulting firm to help it address implicit bias and organizing community discussions to promote racial equity, which critics  claim are little more than performative gestures. 

The state of California says only 200 of Piedmont’s 3,947 housing units are in multifamily buildings like duplexes or apartment complexes.

Heaven forbid!  So we--your betters--will force you to fix that!

Complicating matters [nice wording], the vast majority of the city’s zoning is for single-family homes, and there isn’t much room for more construction.

Why is this a problem?  If you don't have room for more, why on Earth would you try to build more, eh?  You've got a jewel there--but if you do as the Left demands, you get Oakland.  "But dat jus' FAIR, comrade!"

Faced with these constraints, the city has long struggled to translate its stated support for affordable housing into completed projects that enable more teachers, firefighters and other middle-income workers to call it home.

Again the communist goal is revealed: 'Effrywun shall liff in identical 1,200 square foot apartments!  If dat requires building apartments where there are now parks and tennis courts, tough shit.'  To communists "equity" is far more important.
    Of course dat don't apply to duh rulers, like duh faaabulous Gavin Newsom, cuz dey deserve 7,000 square foot mansions in gated communities!  But yew are ordered not to object to dat, cuz...Gavin iz special.

Even modest housing proposals [i.e. building low-income apartments on what are now parks--this is considered a "modest proposal"] can spark public debates about altering a cherished neighborhood character defined by large lot sizes, abundant greenery and quiet street-scapes. 

Caption in the Chron: "The city remains controversial because of its high-priced homes and lack of diversity."

The city’s latest housing project proposes turning a stretch of open space, sports fields and public facilities into at least 132 homes, including 60 units of low-income housing.

Victory for liberal Democrats.  They force the city to allow the sharp end of the wedge in.  But hey, what could possibly go wrong, eh?

Professional transit planner Rosemoore has nothing personally against Piedmonters.  For him, Piedmont’s ugly racial history >>The city’s most consequential housing project proposes to turn a city-owned stretch of open space, sports fields and public facilities into at least 132 homes, including 60 units of low-income housing.

As decades passed, Piedmont’s exclusionary housing practices became far less blatant. But local real estate agents’ penchant for “off-market” deals with friends and acquaintances still made it difficult for Black and working-class families to gain entry.

You need to be a realtor to decipher that line: that means not listing a property, but facilitating a sale between friendly realtors.  The left wants this to be illegal.

Now every year Piedmont High School holds an assembly to educate students about the horror the Dearings endured. The city even commissioned an Oakland artist to design a memorial near the Dearings’ old home. The project, which could be unveiled by the end of the year, cost around $400,000.

So there ya go, citizen.  We order that every city mus' be "die-verse."  Yew may not like that, but we leftists rule the state and the courts, so we don't care what yew want or think.