Far-right “Proud Boys” party in SF Mission

At the brewery. Photo submitted by a reader.

Some 20 members of a group associated with the far-right movement — the so-called “Proud Boys” — were spotted at Southern Pacific Brewing Co. on Friday night.

Customers said some of the 20 or so men were wearing black Fred Perry polos with yellow piping — the the group’s unofficial uniform. The Proud Boys are a far-right men’s group with pro-West, anti-immigration views.

Southern Pacific Brewing Co., located on 19th Street and Treat Avenue, took a hammering on Yelp over the weekend following revelations that it served the group, even after staff figured out who they were.

“I will never support a business that plays host to small-minded bigots and their friends,” wrote Sarah H. on Yelp. “Boycott this place.”

One customer, who asked to remain anonymous out of safety concerns, said they decided to leave because they weren’t comfortable with the group’s presence and weren’t confident the brewery’s staff would kick the group out.

“If I’m at Southern Pacific Brewing in the future and there’s an obvious gathering for a specifically racist organization like The Proud Boys, would they be kicked out or is this a crowd the bar is happy to cater to?” the customer wrote in an email to the brewery.

Southern Pacific posted on its Facebook page that it was aware of the seriousness of the problem, but that its security staff decided against engaging with the group “to ensure the safety of everyone here.”

By no means does Southern Pacific support this group, and they are not welcome on the premise (sic),” the Facebook post continued.

Some didn’t buy it.

“When this bar realized they were hosting a group of white nationalists, they didn’t kick them out,” wrote Josh W. on Yelp. “Now they claim the racists aren’t welcome to return but proudly refer to their own business as unaffiliated. Which side are you on?” 

On April 15, the Proud Boys sponsored a protest in Berkeley that resulted in 11 injuries and 20 arrests.

Later in April, Proud Boy founder Gavin McInnes, who also co-founded Vice Media, announced that the Proud Boys were teaming up with Kyle Chapman, who was charged with a felony for brandishing a leaded stick during a March 4 protest in Berkeley. They created an offshoot group called “Fraternal Order of the Alt-Knights,” or FOAK.   

McInnes formed the Proud Boys in 2016. In August 2017, he wrote an article trying to distance the Proud Boys from the alt-right and white nationalism after the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. In the article, titled “We Are Not Alt-Right,” McInnes explains his group differs from alt-right followers over the “the JQ and racial identity politics” and asked members not to admit people with alt-right views.

Before the article was published, Unite the Right rally organizer Jason Kessler had been initiated as a member of the group

In an email to Mission Local after the publication of this article, a lawyer of the Proud Boys, Jason Van Dyke, said Kessler was never a member of the group.

“The truth is that Mr. Kessler attempted to infiltrate the fraternity for his own reasons and, once these motivations were discovered, he was immediately expelled from the organization,” Van Dyke wrote. “This expulsion occurred well before Mr. Kessler’s rally in Charlottesville.  The Proud Boys had absolutely nothing to do with ‘Unite The Right.'”

The Proud Boys describe themselves as a “pro-Western fraternal organization” whose core beliefs include minimal government, maximum freedom, anti-political correctness, anti-racial guilt, pro-gun rights, anti-Drug War, anti-immigration, anti-masturbation, venerating entrepreneurs, venerating housewives and Western chauvinism.

You may also like:

25 Comments

  1. Kenneth Newnum

    The message they want to scream out is “Freedom of Speech and how they are being denied these freedoms.” Proof of that is places that allowed them throws off their scam and they end up being the ones who cancel these events. In pathetic fashion, they change their media rant to well they couldn’t guarantee our safety. I’m sure visiting establishments is in hope that they get removed so they can Rant about that as well. There are even scheduled speakers at these ‘rallys’ who knew nothing about the rally or committing to it. Why? There was never an actual rally to begin with. So the question is how do we handle this?

    • First amendment, yhea right. When they decide to do something about schools not allowed to teach evolution I will believe them.

    • David

      Your handle it by stop being a little b*tch and by being an adult about the situation, mind your own business and leave these men alone and let them be. This report makes no claim that they were bothering anyone and seems to say they kept to themselves and simply drank beers and ate food.
      Mob rule through social media peer pressure campaigns and social coercion is totalitarian, uncivilized and unbecoming. The people on Yelp and Facebook need to grow the f*ck up.

  2. Venerating housewifes = force women to their “right place”

    • John Thompson

      Dictionary definition – ven·er·ate – regard with great respect; revere.

      • Jose Espinosa

        So base on your definition, they revere working on the house, not helping in this case. Cooperating is a builds a team, venerating leave all the house work to the wife.

    • Elizabeth Platt

      Beware of men who blather about “venerating” women, or “venerating” housewives. I’m a mortal human woman, not a saint, so I should never, ever be “venerated,” even in a secular sense. It’s also super stupid to “venerate” a *job title* – which is what they’re doing by trying to argue that housewifery is hallowed or somesuch.

      Sidebar: Perhaps these guys are yet another batch of loud, entitled man-boys who never really learned how to cook, clean, or properly load a washing machine?

      We also need to be wary of people who still try to keep women in a trad role as household servant and baby-makin’ machine. Women should stay in the home, they say; therefore, any woman who *isn’t* chained to the stove is a bad, bad woman. Single after your 18th birthday? No kids? Work a job outside the house? Going to college? Walk down the street alone? Well, you know what happens to “bad” women in a patriarchal society, and the blame will be placed on the victims of sexual violence for not conforming to “traditional” roles set out for them.

      Maybe these Proud Boys would be happier in Saudi Arabia, or some other autocratic state? So much for being die-hard defenders of “Western values”!

  3. Tyler Wood

    Recommend the writer and commenters read more or listen more closely to the Proud Boys. Your assumptions are wrong. They are anti-racict. They were actually there for beers and you’ve turned it into something sinister

    • Jose Espinosa

      And I recommend you to read the article and the commentators. The article just just report what happen and that some people do not feel safe and decide to vote with their dollars and not support and establishment (that is not one of the features of Capitalism?) None of the comments mention that they are not allowed to go to have a beer, just express that they do not agree with there view or their tactics.

    • Katy Steudel

      They’re anti-racial GUILT. Very different than being anti-racist.

    • James

      Absolute bollocks. They are shot through with anti-Semites, racists and misogynists, as was shown by the Discord logs of communications between their leadership, rank and file, and neo-Nazis in the Charlottesville rally organizing.

      More Proud Boys are fascists than not, and they claim as much in their private communications.

    • Kim

      As they flash white pride signs in the picture? They do not want to feel guilty for being white and having privilege. They are white supremacists

  4. So now you people think businesses can just deny service to anyone they don’t like? Wasn’t there like a whole civil rights battle about this a few decades ago?
    Also. You force people to bake cakes but think those you disagree with can be ejected from public places? What is wrong with you?

    • Jose Espinosa

      And I recommend you to read the article and the commentators. The article just just report what happen and that some people do not feel safe and decide to vote with their dollars and not support and establishment (that is not one of the features of Capitalism?) None of the comments mention that they are not allowed to go to have a beer, just express that they do not agree with there view or their tactics.

    • Katy Steudel

      In this case, I’d say there’s a strong chance of violence that wasn’t there in the cake incident. Otherwise, I agree.

      • Jose Espinosa

        “The bake incident” is way more complicated than you express. Why is OK to refuse service in some cases (based on sexuality) and not on other cases (based on the color of their skin), in case that is OK what are the criteria to follow since “disagree” is not a valid guidelines since it will allow deny service base on whatever excuse like height. I agree that this particular case it went to far, it could be solved without going to court but the issue about discrimination is still there.

        The “chance of violence” did not come from the reporter or commentators. Is my reading of the article that the perception of violence come from the security staff so they were extra alert that is basically their job. So what statement are you complaining about the reporting? This site is for local news in the mission and we read it to be aware of what is going on in our neighborhood, this is what the article is about!

        • No one has any right to anyones labor or service…….and if the Amish and Jehovahs Witnesses don’t have to do the pledge…etc. etc…..then some whose religious convictions contravene providing a specific service have the same rights and protection……That same devout Christian too…..who would rescue a drowning gay person or pull them from a burning car without a thought shouldn’t be forced by the police state to provide a business transaction…..that’s the paradox of the Constitution……and the customer has many alternatives.

          • Jose Espinosa

            You said that is perfectly lawful deny service to people based on religious grounds. What about if there is a religious that says that it is not OK to be more than 7in high, the members of that religious are very willing to rescue a drowning person or pull them from a burning car no mater the person height.

            Are members of this religion allow to refuse service based on their own criteria? The Civil Right Laws do not allow to refuse service based on the color of the skin. So the question on the case is what are the criteria to refusing service. Given this reading of the case there is not an issue concerning sexuality but the criteria used to allow/deny service. The particular incident saddens me, since the two part were good friends and now they are mortal enemies.

    • James

      Of course businesses can deny service to people who are members of hate groups organizing for pogroms against non-whites, Jews and others. They aren’t an ethnic group, it’s a choice they make to be violent, hateful garbage.

      The Supreme Court has upheld withholding of service to people based on association multiple times, you blithering racist nitwit. Comparing that to withholding of service based on traits like ethnicity, tribe, or sexuality shows you morons for the uneducated buffoons you are.

  5. Max

    *influx of nazi-apologists commenting about freedom of speech* Not very shocked to see people like this commenting on Mission Local lmfao. Yes the proud boys are racist that’s their entire frontline. Thanks for reporting on this. This isn’t to be swept under the rug.

  6. Kim

    They are flashing the White Power sign, so tell us again they are not white supremacists? Racists are not a protected class, the business had every right to toss them out, but too chicken. Will not be going there again.

  7. George Bittancourt

    Beer-hall pooches?

  8. Joel

    These guys are generally libertarians that hold many left wing social views so to call them far-right is just wrong. So they happen to hate the irrational side of the left wing agenda. That doesn’t make them a hate group. It makes them normal and reasonable people who are not afraid of bullies like the author of this article.

  9. Chris Sro

    What exactly did Southern Pacific do wrong here? I find their beer mediocre and staff rude but it doesn’t seem like they are deserving of this vitriol just because they served some horrible people (presumably) not bothering anyone.

Comments are closed.

Full name required to post. For full details, read our Policy