Just please shut up about beer gardens

Everyone is so pissed off about beer gardens! 

The story so far: If you've wondered how the bunch of beer gardens around the city are allowed to operate while it's pretty much impossible for anybody to get a liquor license, the Daily News explained it last week in a really interesting piece, Pop-up gardens take advantage of LCB loophole:

Want to open a bar in Pennsylvania and avoid the standard six-figure price tag for a liquor license? The Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, through its extraordinarily lenient interpretation of the state liquor code, lets you do it for as little as $500.

All it takes is a one-page application with none of the lengthy red tape and criminal background checks applicants normally face. The discount license is an unforeseen product of a 2012 liquor code amendment crafted by the Legislature to make it easier for licensees to cater one-day private events.

But thanks to the PLCB's curious reading of it, the amendment can be exploited to open a full-time bar with little regulatory oversight.

It's kind of a long story, and you should probably just go read it. But yesterday, four state legislators, including one the Daily News spoke with for its story, moved to close the loophole. And, it appears, the entire city freaked out! Lots of tweets! Lots of facebooking! Lots of blogs! Someone even made a change.org petition that's gotten a couple thousand signatures.

But it's not the entire city. It's a small group of people who have a really big megaphone and not enough self-awareness to go with it.

God, I so hate to be That Lady, because That Lady is a bore and an asshole. But please consider this chain of statements as I cast the spell REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM:

"Well, it sucks that they're probably going to get rid of beer gardens — but, really, the entire Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board is archaic, nonsensical and corrupt, and it manifests in much bigger ways than closing a loophole that briefly allowed college-educated people to drink beer outdoors in Center City without needing to brown-bag it? Isn't that a bigger deal?"

"Well, the PLCB is pretty ridiculous — but what about the situation with weed? That sends people to actual jail, and can prevent them from getting hired for a job for the rest of their lives. Isn't that a bigger deal?"

"Yeah, Ramsey's marijuana stand is strange and probably self-destructive for the city — but people who get caught with weed made a choice to break the law. There's so many other vitally important things, like the completely fucked-over Philadelphia Public School System, where there's no choice involved. Isn't that a bigger deal?"

"Well, the public school system may be all screwed up, true — but what about the insane amounts of gun violence, drug abuse and poverty that seem permanently entrenched in some Philly neighborhoods? Isn't that a bigger deal?"

"Well, those are big problems in Philly, no doubt — but, holy shit, look at Camden. It's got even worse problems with poverty, drugs and violence, plus no jobs, nothing to do and pretty much no hope of revitalization. Isn't that a bigger deal?"

"Yeah, Camden is a legitimately terrifying example of the endgame of globalization for America — but at least Camden's in America. What about all the workers in third-world countries who work horrendous hours in dangerous conditions for pennies? Isn't that a bigger deal?"

"Well, those factory workers at least have a way of making a living and live in a stable country — they could be from Iraq or Afghanistan. Isn't that a bigger deal?"

"I'm not saying it's a great time to live in Iraq or Afghanistan, but at least people pay attention to those parts of the world — Nigeria's been imploding for years, and the first time the rest of the world really paid attention was when those girls got kidnapped. Isn't that a bigger deal?"

"Nigeria may be basically run by a bunch of insane teenagers with assualt rifles right now, yeah — but the Sudan has a civil war AND an impending famine and has been that way on and off since 1983. Isn't that a bigger deal?" 

"Sudan's really awful, no argument — but at least a quarter of its citizens aren't infected with HIV, like in a lot of the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa. Isn't that a bigger deal?"

"Yeah, AIDS is pretty much the worst — but if global warming continues the way it's going, it's going to basically be the apocalypse. Isn't that a bigger deal?" 

So, clearly, the argument "there are more important things to care about!" is kind of useless, because there's always a bigger deal lurking somewhere — nothing would ever get done. But that doesn't mean that the relative importance of causes should go unexamined.

Think about it this way: Come up with something that would naturally slot into the little chain of statements above based on how big of an effect it has on how many people's lives, right before beer gardens:

"Man, it sucks that ______________ — but did you hear that the PLCB is probably going to shut down beer gardens?"

We came up with (debatably):

Someone painted over the Kurt Vile mural...

You're having trouble getting a vacant lot made into a dog park...

That bar you like is closing...

A historic movie theater is getting torn down...

The Barnes Foundation moved...

It's taking so long to turn the Reading Viaduct into a park...

The subway doesn't run 24 hours and you have to take the Night Owl...

Beer gardens are good! I have had a great time at the opening of Spruce Street Harbor Park! Flow of commerce and whatnot! I also enjoy many of the things on the list above, and know many people who are involved with some of these projects personally! They are across the board good people who genuinely want to make the city a nicer place to live!

However!

It makes me incredibly uncomfortable how much louder the outrage is about things like dog parks, the Boyd Theater and the potential abolition of beer gardens — things that mostly affect the affluent and educated — than the many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many more dire and pressing problems Philadelphia has. These are problems that the affluent and educated generally don't have to see on a daily basis, but are much more than an inconvenience or bummer to people who can't escape them. 

Let's be clear what all the outrage is about: The possible revocation of the newly established right to drink beer in a pleasant outdoor setting in Center City without having to buy a sixer and take it to the park in a brown bag, which only is in effect for three months a year. It falls somewhere between bummer and inconvenience for a small, disproportionately affluent percentage of the city's population. The petition claims that this is about how petty and time-wasting the legislators are being. This may not be untrue, but the state legislature wastes its time on petty things almost constantly, and nobody starts Twitter campaigns about it. 

It's human nature to care more about things that directly affect you than things that affect people you don't interact with on a regular basis.  (God knows I've written about plenty of frivolous things, and City Paper did the obligatory post pre-mourning beer gardens.) But the ability to raise a ruckus and have people pay attention to your concerns is a powerful privilege, and you may recall what Spider-Man's uncle had to say about great power. 

People who have the power to direct outrage also have the responsibility to examine where they tend to point the Outrage Laser Cannon — and what that means. Is it usually aimed at issues that primarily affect you, the people behind the controls of the OLC? Is it ever pointed at issues that don't directly affect you, but are fucked up nonetheless? Is it ever used pro bono in the defense of people who don't have an OLC of their own?

It's a good and admirable thing to try to make a difference rather than just complaining. It's just that I'd occasionally like to see this sort of energy and fire thrown behind an issue that's a step or two higher up in the "Isn't That A Bigger Deal?" rankings, even if it isn't an easy fix.