If there is one thing decidedly Californian apart from serial killing, it’s the state’s West Coast monopoly on In-n-Out. A magical fast-food place that bulldozes over all others when it comes to both taste and not feeling completely disgusting about what you’re consuming (not that Americans have ever had much guilt in that department). And yet, despite being such a beacon of California, In-n-Out has only a single location in one of the state’s major cultural epicenters, San Francisco. Or rather, there used to be a single location.
It was at the iconic (and, therefore, ultra-touristy) Fisherman’s Wharf. A unique outpost, to be sure. But one that was finally shut down by the San Francisco Department of Health after the establishment’s failure to comply with the citywide mandate (among the strictest in the state, hence its low incidences of Covid at present) to enforce vaccination checks before serving a customer.
The chief legal and business officer of the company, Arnie Wensinger, was quick to hit back at the “abrupt” closure (after numerous warnings) by making it, once again, a political issue and remarking, “We refuse to become the vaccination police for any government. It is unreasonable, invasive and unsafe to force our restaurant associates to segregate customers into those who may be served and those who may not.” Ah, can’t you just hear the Republican zealots of this state and beyond salivating? Shit, Larry Elder probably creamed his pants over that line of “reasoning.” And yeah, it’s a “lovely” sentiment, if we were talking about some kind of racial or gender divide that was being stoked. But what we’re talking about is ensuring the safety of all people in a public space that’s also not so public (e.g. an outdoor park) as to let the unvaccinated go unchecked.
Every business owner, of course, has the right to run it how they wish, but most businesses are in the game of making money. And the best way to (usually) do that is by not inciting customers to feel as though they’re at risk of severe illness or death as a result of partaking in a company’s product. Naturally, the flipside to that argument is that the surest way to drive a customer away is by “telling them how to live.” An ironic counterpoint considering that all capitalism has ever been about is telling people how to live. An entire corresponding industry—known as advertising—has been created around it. And yet now, the one time corporations might actually be capable of indoctrinating people with a message that’s good for the collective public health, they’re all waffling about it because they don’t want to “alienate” the so-called “my body, my choice” ilk. Potential loss of sales, after all. Even if from some, let’s be honest, very dubious types (see: Nicki Minaj).
The real clincher is that In-n-Out somehow thought they would be able to carry on like this in a city (/country unto itself) as “pinko” as San Francisco. What did they really think was going to happen? That the town would actually capitulate just for the sake of preserving its lone In-n-Out?
While, of course, there’s always the chance that the famed fast-food chain could reopen after “thinking it through,” the gauntlet has already been thrown, and the contention firmly established. Especially with Wensinger further adding, “We fiercely disagree with any government dictate that forces a private company to discriminate against customers who choose to patronize their business. This is clear governmental overreach and is intrusive, improper and offensive.” Well, considering the bulk of their other chains are in Texas and Utah, In-n-Out shouldn’t have too much trouble carrying on in states with a far more conservative bent than CA (lest one forgets that In-n-Out “subtly” prints Bible verse citations on its packaging).
As we know by now, it is the chief “cause” of the right to fiercely oppose “strong-armed” vaccinations (after all, they have to take what they can get in terms of “having a platform” after the Orange One was—and mostly still is—their spokesperson). But if this was polio all over again, the current anti-vaxxers would probably feel differently. For that was among the prime times for Republicans to be all about injecting their bodies with whatever (not to mention during Nixon’s reign later on [#DowChemical #Monsanto]). As well as thrusting it upon the bodies of others (see: napalm in the Vietnam War), as they claim is what’s being done to them now.
And so, while California may once have been as synonymous with In-n-Out as it is with “prison industry,” it may no longer be quite as much with the company digging its heels in about “enforcing” vaccinations, ergo “creating segregation” (a.k.a. merely highlighting the political divide that already exists quite plainly in this country).
