discipline posted:I'm from duval
Edited by shermanstick ()
discipline posted:shermnstick can my german friends crash at your place next weekend for a night
-Hitler, to Austria.
in the 1970s united states, as a result of deindustrialization in a number of midwestern and eastern cities, a whole boatload city economies collapsed. perhaps you've heard of the rust belt? at any rate, a ton of cities were left scrambling to find a solution to their suddenly massive economic problems. people of means quickly migrated out of cities in order to find jobs elsewhere, exacerbating the problems faced by the cities.
an influential activist named Jane Jacobs published a book in 1961 called The Death and Life of Great American Cities, which was a series of observations about how "healthy" cities functioned. in in, she called for "mixed-use" neighborhoods, or neighborhoods where different types of zoning were placed near to one another in order to create an "authentic" neighborhood, such as her beloved Greenwich Village. more importantly, jacobs called for cities to be built on a series of weak social ties. strong social organizations, such as labor unions, bowling leagues, etc. were to be eschewed in favor of informal networks where citizens protected one another in moments of distress and garnered the trust of one another through the contact they would have as a result of her mixed-use zoning. the idea was to create an "authentic" environment, as cities that functioned well were cities that were... authentic. she advocated for cities that were diverse in class and function, which, i think, most people would consider to be a somewhat noble goal.
jacobs, however, did not offer any particular vision as to how her values of diversity and authenticity could be preserved. instead, due to her omission, opportunists were able to pounce on her theories and use them in order to justify and promote their own agendas. historic preservationists, for example, were able to use jacob's theory about keeping old buildings around to promote diversity as a means of saving entire city blocks from the wrecking ball. however, these old buildings were then used by these same preservationists as a means of jacking up costs and rent. jacobs, somewhat unwittingly, became a pawn of others, though i should be quick to note that it was her own fault due to the incompleteness of her theory. her works (The Economy of Cities too) became primers for non-equitable gentrification practices around the united states.
one of the many people who latched onto her ideas was a man named richard florida. taking hold of jacobs and her theory regarding weak social ties, a reduced "welfare state," and am emphasis on diversity, he published a book entitled The Rise of the Creative Class in 2002. in this book, florida advocated that "creativity" has become the driving force of economic growth in today's new economy. in other words, the old industrial economy was dead, and a new age, that relied on the "creative power" of the human mind, had come in. economies were no longer based on commodities or anything of that nature, but on creative output. thus, the drivers for economic growth in cities were creative people: artists, high-tech workers, bohemians, professors, gays, etc. place remained important to florida, who argued that sustainable cities required creativity, and that people themselves moved to where creativity was located. it was therefore essential for cities to attract this "creativity" if they were to survive and be competitive in the new economy.
in order to do so, florida advocated that cities pursue the three "T's." these were technology, talent, and tolerance. technology is self-explanatory, i think. simply put, florida emphasized high-tech industry in order to attract the most "talented" people. these talented people, who are considered by florida to be the "supercreative" core of the creative class (and, coincidentally, defined almost entirely by their educational level) were what were required to make cities function. but the talented required tolerance in their environment, so florida argued that cities that were more friendly to gays were more likely to be attractive to talented people.
florida's arguments were massively influential among urban planners for some strange reason. one of my profs mentioned today that a reason why florida was so popular was due to the fact that he was able to offer a solution to the american urban crisis in a language that was positive, as opposed to the negative language of slum-clearing and blight that had been used until that point.
at any rate, florida's argument is full of problems. he defines the creative class as being approx. 30% of the population. this correlates roughly with the number of college graduates in the united states. college degrees here are extremely expensive. it is therefore, i think, not too much a stretch to argue that florida is using the word "creativity" as a guise for class. indeed, florida has some strange ideas about economic realities in the u.s. he states, for example, that we live in a time of "post-scarcity," which conflicts sharply with the lived economic realities of many people. indeed, what about the other 70% of people in the country? according to florida, they would effectively serve as servants for the creative class. he relies on the usual argument of "a rising tide lifts all boats" in order to talk about how they can improve their lot. they must, according to florida, due to the weak role that the state is to play in our daily lives.
anyway, i guess after all that, my point is that gentrification, in this light, is just a function of attracting a "creative class" in the united states. this creative class, naturally, is a manifestation of unequal development, which leading theorists, such as florida, are willing to ignore almost completely in order to command speaking prices of over $35,000 an event. he, however, is a product of his environment, and his work was only successful as it was due to urban planning policies that mirrored his ideas which had already been put into place.
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/The-312/February-2013/Where-Chicagos-Creative-Types-Live/
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/neighborhoods/2013/03/class-divided-cities-dallas-edition/4415/
jools posted:gentrification is really about creating a mass base for fascism and the prison-industrial complex
Go on……
discipline posted:does that asshole really make $35k per speaking event
yeah, something close to that. he's a real dickhead. to be fair though, he did retweet me yesterday for about 30-45 minutes before taking it down. here's the tweet in question:
Squalid posted:The ultra liberal students coming out of that class would be very vulnerable to the kind of "positive language" theories you describe that may just serve their own preferences for an urban lifestyle.
certainly so. brian tochterman (who was the source of a lot of my post) argues that florida's tolerance index is essentially a measure of cities commitment to social liberalism, which is an incredibly easy sell to a "left weaned on identity politics." florida irritates me because there is absolutely nothing original in his argument, other than the way he cobbled together a wide range of explain-it-all theories in order to broaden his mass appeal. he's like an "academic" hipster, appropriating whatever position he needs to justify his own positions without really taking the time to understand where what he appropriates comes from.
innsmouthful posted:discipline posted:does that asshole really make $35k per speaking event
yeah, something close to that. he's a real dickhead. to be fair though, he did retweet me yesterday for about 30-45 minutes before taking it down. here's the tweet in question:
NoFreeWill posted:my sister got into urban planning after reading the jane book about greenwich village, or at least really liked it. so those people are definitely in charge of teh next generation of planning.
it's a good book, but Jacobs was not a professional planner it it shows when turds use her ideas for evil or libs hungry for cheap urban housing justify their actions through her theories
innsmouthful posted:Squalid posted:The ultra liberal students coming out of that class would be very vulnerable to the kind of "positive language" theories you describe that may just serve their own preferences for an urban lifestyle.
certainly so. brian tochterman (who was the source of a lot of my post) argues that florida's tolerance index is essentially a measure of cities commitment to social liberalism, which is an incredibly easy sell to a "left weaned on identity politics." florida irritates me because there is absolutely nothing original in his argument, other than the way he cobbled together a wide range of explain-it-all theories in order to broaden his mass appeal. he's like an "academic" hipster, appropriating whatever position he needs to justify his own positions without really taking the time to understand where what he appropriates comes from.
http://www.brynmawr.edu/socialwork/GSSW/schram/peck.pdf
good shit, this guy interviewed for a position at my university... hope he gets it instead of moises naim
callahan posted:i thought jacobs loved social ties via her examples of neighborhood shops keeping keys and her idea of vibrancy on the sidewalks
she does, but those are weak social ties instead of strong ones
the change from top-down schemes of grandeur with rigid divisions between quarters of life to tight cores of urban 'multiculturalism' with the minorities exiled to the abandoned suburbs represents the shift in ruling ideology to neoliberalism really well. While the previous era focused on some kind of nationalistic or political goal (think of how Pyongyang has steets wide enough for aircraft to use) now everything is provided and done for the sake of a consuming elite. The Creative Class probably couldn't live anywhere that didn't have a starbucks and apple store within biking distance haha
in both cases the proletariat is segregated from the means of production, but while in the olden days it was an intentional and obvious design now the poor are simply pushed into the barren mismanaged wastes of Where Whites Once Were that is miles away from the only jobs available, which is providing menial services for the Consuming Class.
obviously this is less true in industrial countries where slums and ghettos serve the purpose of providing cheap labor for nearby factories but I guess it can still be seen in how the new Chinese elites are buying houses in Vancouver and other 'good' cities to escape their self-made polluted hellscapes.
innsmouthful posted:she does, but those are weak social ties instead of strong ones
maybe it's been a while since I've read her stuff, but I don't remember her specifically eschewing strong social ties, just showing the advantages of the weak ones
Squalid posted:good post innsmouthful. I had a blow off "urban studies" class a couple years back and Jane Jacobs really dominated the atmosphere of discussion. Gentrification was only covered in a 5 page reading assignment that justified white urban migration, and the instructor seemed interested in justifying behavior described as gentrification to her students. The ultra liberal students coming out of that class would be very vulnerable to the kind of "positive language" theories you describe that may just serve their own preferences for an urban lifestyle.
i had a class where the professor spent an entire class comparing jane jacobs and guy debord trying to radicalize sleeping youth or whatever