I wouldn't say it's overtly racist, but there is a very strong correlation between race, class, and privilege in the Bay Area.

Unlike the traditional American narrative around race (black vs. white), in this one, the privileged group consists of well-to-do Whites, Asians, South-Asians, and other highly educated recent-immigrants, while the underprivileged group consists of ghettoized African American and Latino communities.

These underprivileged groups are segregated physically from the former (in East Palo Alto, San Francisco's Bayview, and East/West Oakland), and are mired in a multigenerational cycle of poverty, violence, and disenfranchisement. However, they constitute a significant portion of the low-skilled, low-paid service labor force.

They reap comparatively little benefit from the economic boom brought on by the tech industry. Many of the arguments here on HN and elsewhere about gentrification in the Bay Area and it's benefits/costs ignore that the situation is layered over a long history of race-based tensions in the area.

I won't comment on the racist part, but by incestuous he means "lacks outside influence". That opinion is not uncommon even among people who like living inside the bubble.

think about living in the weird Bay Area bubble and how that doesn't translate at all to the rest of the world and Oakland.

Oakland is no longer part of the Bay Area?

Have you been to the Bay Area? The general sentiment amongst the other cities is that Oakland is decidedly "not one of us".

I live in Oakland. It's "East Bay", but that's still "Bay Area". There's clearly differences, but much more of the bay is bordered by Oakland than SF. Oakland is more like SF than either is like Marin, which is also still "Bay Area".

The question I was answering was about incest and racism.