4 ms·

> "what everyone hates about urban change and gentrification..." I don't mean to be inflammatory, but I've never understood exactly what "everybody" sees as th

> "what everyone hates about urban change and gentrification..." I don't mean to be inflammatory, but I've never understood exactly what "everybody" sees as the desired state. When white people move out of urban centers, it is "white flight"... a negative phenomenon. When white people move into urban centers, it is "gentrification"... also a negative phenomenon. Are white people just considered inherently evil, and their existence a negative phenomenon? Short of total income redistribution, and mandatory relocation (as ethnic groups tend to coalesce even without gaps in income)... what exactly is the inequality and diversity solution that "everyone" wants?

noxToken 11y ago
I see your point, but it's not just moving in/out. It's the subtext of why. I don't think anyone can be faulted for fleeing a neighborhood in the name of safety. The same can likely be said for moving into more impoverish areas that have the potential to grow into prosperous neighborhood. This holds true regardless of race. If someone is just throwing those terms around just because people move in or out of neighborhoods, then they're missing the overall context of what those terms mean. > what exactly is the inequality and diversity solution that "everyone" wants? I don't think this can be easily addressed. Most people want their neighborhoods safe with drivable streets and walkable paths. Some see culture in the history of their neighborhoods. Others want modern architecture and amenities. It really depends on who you ask.
omonra 11y ago
I don't think the people who are upset about both white flight and gentrification think of things in 'white people' terms. Rather they focus on blacks (or whichever minority the whites happen to be fleeing or displacing). It's a natural liberal tendency to focus on the 'underprivileged'. I believe it stems from the (unconscious) belief that the whites will look out for themselves - but blacks et al need to be helped. White man's burden 2.0, if you will. For example in today's NYT there is a long article about lack of black pitchers in the US baseball league (they don't count spanish speaking blacks as aa). And there is a regular recurring piece about lack of black players in certain NFL positions (while they're actually 70% of all players). Meanwhile I've never seen a similar article about dearth of white players in the NBA or the NFL. To an outside observer this might appear racist - but the journalist writing these pieces probably think that looking out for minorities is just what good people do. And whites will manage to take care of themselves.

noxToken 11y ago

I see your point, but it's not just moving in/out. It's the subtext of why. I don't think anyone can be faulted for fleeing a neighborhood in the name of safety. The same can likely be said for moving into more impoverish areas that have the potential to grow into prosperous neighborhood. This holds true regardless of race. If someone is just throwing those terms around just because people move in or out of neighborhoods, then they're missing the overall context of what those terms mean. > what exactly is the inequality and diversity solution that "everyone" wants? I don't think this can be easily addressed. Most people want their neighborhoods safe with drivable streets and walkable paths. Some see culture in the history of their neighborhoods. Others want modern architecture and amenities. It really depends on who you ask.

omonra 11y ago

I don't think the people who are upset about both white flight and gentrification think of things in 'white people' terms. Rather they focus on blacks (or whichever minority the whites happen to be fleeing or displacing). It's a natural liberal tendency to focus on the 'underprivileged'. I believe it stems from the (unconscious) belief that the whites will look out for themselves - but blacks et al need to be helped. White man's burden 2.0, if you will. For example in today's NYT there is a long article about lack of black pitchers in the US baseball league (they don't count spanish speaking blacks as aa). And there is a regular recurring piece about lack of black players in certain NFL positions (while they're actually 70% of all players). Meanwhile I've never seen a similar article about dearth of white players in the NBA or the NFL. To an outside observer this might appear racist - but the journalist writing these pieces probably think that looking out for minorities is just what good people do. And whites will manage to take care of themselves.