Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Austin is the most overhyped and pretentious city in the US, bar none. Now that I've been living outside of the US, it's become even clearer. I don't think I've ever encountered a place with rapid growth and a high number of transplants that are also incredibly myopic and provincial. Usually that's encountered in stagnant cities with very settled populations. I forget who said it but it went along these lines: "Texas is viewed in America the way America is viewed around the world." Austin just happens to be a city version of that "exceptionalism mentality."
Its an interesting paradox that the reason I'm supposed to draw a distinction between Austin and El Paso or Amarillo is because "Austin is liberal." At the same time it appears to have all the characteristics of an insular "please don't move here, we're full" conservative type big town. When I talk about taking a trip to Dallas or Houston, people in California try to tell me that Austin is really the place to go, as if live music or downtown bar districts are tantamount to the great pyramids in their uniqueness as an attraction.
Not sure how we found a way to fit Austin into a peer group with San Diego, but here we are.
Its an interesting paradox that the reason I'm supposed to draw a distinction between Austin and El Paso or Amarillo is because "Austin is liberal." At the same time it appears to have all the characteristics of an insular "please don't move here, we're full" conservative type big town. When I talk about taking a trip to Dallas or Houston, people in California try to tell me that Austin is really the place to go, as if live music or downtown bar districts are tantamount to the great pyramids in their uniqueness as an attraction.
Not sure how we found a way to fit Austin into a peer group with San Diego, but here we are.
Because it's another place that hipsters "discovered" and constantly brag about on social media.
Also I keep thinking about the idea that we're forced to dismiss Dallas as more racially progressive to accept that Austin is more liberal when you don't look at the minorities. This just screams whiteness. Plenty of cities manage to be both diverse and progressive. Basically every major city. Boston, NYC, Philly, DC, Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, SD, LA, especially. They're highly diverse, yet very progressive, and the politics speak for all city residents, not just the white hipsters living there. It's been quite well-documented that Austin (and similar cities like Denver and Portland) is good for white hipsters, but it is still not racially progressive. Idk how or why that's just something we need to push aside just to make the comparison lean in favor of Dallas. Personally, I'll take the city that's more diverse and racially integrated and racially progressive, but votes slightly more conservative/moderate, over the city that puts on a facade of being progressive, but the progressive voices are only concerned about the white hipsters who "discovered" the city.
But on the ground living day to day in Dallas, does the QOL actually improve for, say, an LGBT Muslim/Jewish woman of color? If she lived in/around downtown Dallas like Uptown and Deep Ellum, would her life be worse than if she was living in Austin? I'm not saying one way or another. Genuinely asking. Because as it relates to this thread, if a woman like that would not actually experience a higher QOL in Austin, it's very challenging to continue the idea that Austin is far more liberal than the rest of Texas and SD as well.
In your example, she would actually have more of a community in Dallas than in Austin. There's a larger population of AA, LGBT, Muslim, and Jewish in Dallas (and DFW in general) than Austin. The vibe of places like Uptown, Deep Ellum, and other nearby neighborhoods are comparable to core areas in Austin (e.g. young professional), which also tends to be more "open" to different types of people. Both cities have anti-discrimination ordinances in place and have both received a 100% score card based on LGBT equality/anti-discrimination measures by the HRC. Even in the more conservative suburban areas of Dallas (e.g. Addison, Plano, Richardson), your example would be fine.
In your example, she would actually have more of a community in Dallas than in Austin. There's a larger population of AA, LGBT, Muslim, and Jewish in Dallas (and DFW in general) than Austin. The vibe of places like Uptown, Deep Ellum, and other nearby neighborhoods are comparable to core areas in Austin (e.g. young professional), which also tends to be more "open" to different types of people. Both cities have anti-discrimination ordinances in place and have both received a 100% score card based on LGBT equality/anti-discrimination measures by the HRC. Even in the more conservative suburban areas of Dallas (e.g. Addison, Plano, Richardson), your example would be fine.
That's honestly what I figured. So I really struggle to see how Austin can be considered more liberal or progressive. Maybe it's better for progressive white hipsters. But that's a niche area. Dallas and SD are the type of cities that are more open to everyone. Austin Denver and Portland are the types of places that are good for a select type of person. And that to me is why Austin's liberalism is overhyped. And again reaffirms that SD should definitely be winning this thread by the large margin that is.
Because it's another place that hipsters "discovered" and constantly brag about on social media.
Also I keep thinking about the idea that we're forced to dismiss Dallas as more racially progressive to accept that Austin is more liberal when you don't look at the minorities. This just screams whiteness. Plenty of cities manage to be both diverse and progressive. Basically every major city. Boston, NYC, Philly, DC, Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, SD, LA, especially. They're highly diverse, yet very progressive, and the politics speak for all city residents, not just the white hipsters living there. It's been quite well-documented that Austin (and similar cities like Denver and Portland) is good for white hipsters, but it is still not racially progressive. Idk how or why that's just something we need to push aside just to make the comparison lean in favor of Dallas. Personally, I'll take the city that's more diverse and racially integrated and racially progressive, but votes slightly more conservative/moderate, over the city that puts on a facade of being progressive, but the progressive voices are only concerned about the white hipsters who "discovered" the city.
I just can't wrap my head around the fact that Dallas has the world class airport, region leading mass transit system, is an economic rival to D.C. yet Austin is "the place to be." Maybe I"ll have to go to both to prove myself wrong, but it seems anything Austin has Dallas would have a bigger, better version.
That's honestly what I figured. So I really struggle to see how Austin can be considered more liberal or progressive. Maybe it's better for progressive white hipsters. But that's a niche area. Dallas and SD are the type of cities that are more open to everyone. Austin Denver and Portland are the types of places that are good for a select type of person. And that to me is why Austin's liberalism is overhyped. And again reaffirms that SD should definitely be winning this thread by the large margin that is.
I agree that Austin's liberalism is overhyped, but it does have a much more progressive city government than Dallas and probably San Diego, particularly around labor and environmental protections. The City of Austin tried to make builders provide work compensation protections and health insurance to their workers. The State of Texas decided that this was unconstitutional. The Austin city council is perpetually at war with the state legislature in a way that the Dallas City council is not often. Both Dallas and Austin were sanctuary cities until the state of Texas outlawed such status. San Diego never declared itself a sanctuary city, either before or after CA became a sanctuary state...
All 3 are liberal mostly tolerant cities, but Austin generally pursues a more progressive political agenda. How that translates into practice is up for debate...
I agree that Austin's liberalism is overhyped, but it does have a much more progressive city government than Dallas and probably San Diego, particularly around labor and environmental protections. The City of Austin tried to make builders provide work compensation protections and health insurance to their workers. The State of Texas decided that this was unconstitutional. The Austin city council is perpetually at war with the state legislature in a way that the Dallas City council is not often. Both Dallas and Austin were sanctuary cities until the state of Texas outlawed such status. San Diego never declared itself a sanctuary city, either before or after CA became a sanctuary state...
All 3 are liberal mostly tolerant cities, but Austin generally pursues a more progressive political agenda. How that translates into practice is up for debate...
Hmm okay yeah I didn't know about the labor and environmental protections. That can be pretty significant for sure.
In trying to Google which city has better union protections, I came across this. FWIW, Dallas is not stellar, ranking in the bottom 10 of cities with the least % unionized workforce. Dallas comes in at #9. But, Austin is #1 actually. https://fox26medford.com/the-most-un...es-in-america/
Not a great look for Texas with a very strong showing in the top 10 least unionized on that article and it's more the lesser of two evil options, with Austin being just slightly worse. It's good to know the city is trying to increase its union membership. But with such a strong showing by Texas cities, it seems more of state problem rather than a local problem, no?
Because it's another place that hipsters "discovered" and constantly brag about on social media.
Also I keep thinking about the idea that we're forced to dismiss Dallas as more racially progressive to accept that Austin is more liberal when you don't look at the minorities. This just screams whiteness. Plenty of cities manage to be both diverse and progressive. Basically every major city. Boston, NYC, Philly, DC, Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, SD, LA, especially. They're highly diverse, yet very progressive, and the politics speak for all city residents, not just the white hipsters living there. It's been quite well-documented that Austin (and similar cities like Denver and Portland) is good for white hipsters, but it is still not racially progressive. Idk how or why that's just something we need to push aside just to make the comparison lean in favor of Dallas. Personally, I'll take the city that's more diverse and racially integrated and racially progressive, but votes slightly more conservative/moderate, over the city that puts on a facade of being progressive, but the progressive voices are only concerned about the white hipsters who "discovered" the city.
Hah, back to this classic city-data debate.
Austin is quite racially diverse and integrated. Compared to Dallas it is only slightly less diverse, and is more integrated:
I agree that Austin's liberalism is overhyped, but it does have a much more progressive city government than Dallas and probably San Diego, particularly around labor and environmental protections. The City of Austin tried to make builders provide work compensation protections and health insurance to their workers. The State of Texas decided that this was unconstitutional. The Austin city council is perpetually at war with the state legislature in a way that the Dallas City council is not often. Both Dallas and Austin were sanctuary cities until the state of Texas outlawed such status. San Diego never declared itself a sanctuary city, either before or after CA became a sanctuary state...
All 3 are liberal mostly tolerant cities, but Austin generally pursues a more progressive political agenda. How that translates into practice is up for debate...
Austin's environmental protections haven't translated effectively into more public transit or more walkable neighborhoods. That is not to say Dallas is a symbol of environmental protections, but it's clear which city is more focused on removing highways, connecting neighborhoods, and improving public transit (hint: not Austin). I think the problem is people are still stuck in a pre-2010 generalization of these cities, which are now very outdated.
Only slightly less diverse? Try again. Austin proper's White Non-Hispanic population is at 48% compared to Dallas proper's at 29%. For San Diego proper, it's at 42%. Grant it, Austin is definitely more diverse than it's given credit for. However, the point remains when compared to Dallas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
