I don't understand why I do find certain kinds of goodness, kindness, compassion annoying. Of all the publications, The Guardians seems to rank highest in pissing me off with kindness. Consider this:

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/jun/12/anti-homeless-spikes-latest-defensive-urban-architecture

Ocean Howell, a former skateboarder and assistant professor of architectural history at the University of Oregon, who studies such anti-skating design, says it reveals wider processes of power. “Architectural deterrents to skateboarding and sleeping are interesting because – when noticed – they draw attention to the way that managers of spaces are always designing for specific subjects of the population, consciously or otherwise,” he says. “When we talk about the ‘public’, we’re never actually talking about ‘everyone’.”

Does anyone have any idea why may I find it annoying? Putting it differently, why do I experience something similar as Scott i.e. while I don't have many problems with most contemporary left-leaning ideas, I seem to have a problem with left-leaning people?

For example, I don't find anything inherently bad about starting a discussion about making design more skateboarder-friendly, or less directly skateboarder-hostile, I think skateboarders providing free entertainment to bystanders is kind of a win-win.

And I still feel like slapping Mr. Howell around with a large trout. But why?

Clearly it must be something about the style? Pretentious? Condescending?

Problem is, my emotions prevent me from analysing this clearly. But as far as I see it, the issue with the style is roughly this algorithm

1. assume very high level of compassion and altruism (public spaces are literally designed for everyone)
2. look sad or scandalized when you pretend to be surprised it is not so

Well, to use this example, we always knew it is not so. Clean, bourgeois middle-class folks never wanted e.g. homeless, amputee beggars, or other undesirables near where they live. I am not even ashamed about this, I don't find it incompatible to wish that they should get treated well, but somewhere I cannot see them much. It is not my eyesight is what they need most but more like professional care. I just wasn't aware skateboarders are also included in the category of undesirables. Anyway, the way I can best parse my emotions is that I find Mr. Howell condesdencing or pretentious because he is pretending to be surprised we are not saints. And this seems to be general tone of The Guardian, that may be why it annoys me.

Any better takers?

People of more or less explicit left-wing views: do you see your goals would better supported by, how to put, it less drama, or less pretense, or less antagonizing or trying to guilt-trip others, so I don't know, with a different tone than that of The Guardian or Salon.com? I cannot really express this better, but what I have in mind is more of a e.g. "please discuss why the homeless annoy you so much that you want to install spikes" tone, and less of a "fuck you for being a cruel monster who installs anti-homeless spikes" tone, do you find that counter-productive?

OTOH it is also possible that I find it annoying because it it actually pierces my conscience. But I actually don't think so. I never really considered perfect 200% compassion a super ace that trumps all other cards. It is one of the aces, sure, but there are other aces and also kings and whatnot in the stack. Maybe, it is annoying because it reminds me of a social expectation, certain social taboos, like, never feel grossed out by e.g. the homeless, because they suffer and the only proper reaction to suffering is compassion, those kinds of taboos.