My (now former D’: ) coworker Kevin Chung was a member of the Semester in Detroit program, and today was their symposium showcase thingy (how proper, right?) which he invited me too and I got to visit with my mentor Emile. That semester in Detroit looks like a very interesting affair, one which I plan to do in accordance with an Urban Studies minor that I usually forget to mention to people! Just a side note, Apparently, according to Kevin, it’s only $250 a month for a quad suite at the University Towers for the 7 weeks he stayed there. Wha????? They have a twice-a-week internship partnership, go on frequent field trips, take one mandatory class and 2 electives, and they showcased what they learned today at 5 stations: Redevelopment, SIDfiinity (pertaining to the Semester In Detroit experience), Community, Sustainability, and Education.
When I was at the Redevelopment station, there was an opening activity in which we put the first word we thought of about redevelopment on a sticky note, which was then passed in and categorized by the group as either positive or negative. I immediately thought of the word Gentrification, which I have been observing in many ways since I moved in here. I have a radical/progressive perspective on virtually all social and political issues, my rose-tinted glasses of sorts, and see gentrification as a negative thing because of the waves of economic eviction that it causes, firstly of primary residents, and later of the original gentrifiers. It also causes community conflict and homelessness among other things, but is also seen as a positive thing by many because it raises the affluence level of the community, produces demands for better public services, widens the tax base, and out-develops blight, yatta yatta (the ‘Effects’ section of the Wikipedia article gives a pretty good run down on the night and the day of Gentrification, so you can decide what you think of it yourself), but I think that it is a regressive, socio-politically passive, laissez faire form of urban development that preserves the affluence of those who were already affluent at the expense of the original residents, who’s socioeconomic condition may not enable them to survive the new economic inflation of their native community (“Ethnically cleansing the hood, economically” as Immortal Technique raps in his song ‘Harlem Renaissance’. Listen to that song. Don’t second guess, just look it up ASAP!)
It also flies in the face of proactive solutions to Urban Community development that improve the public institutions, social services, community and economy for those who already live in those communities as they deserve.
Not to mention solutions that allow original residents to become empowered themselves through their communities.
Funding Schools and family supports! Increased Minimally-armed Police Patrol Presences! Public Light Rail! Public Cafeterias! Expansion of University Matriculation opportunities! Close knit Public Housing Communities! Career retraining programs! Expanded funding in Public Parks! Health Care rather than insufficient Sick Care! The possibilities are numberless and priceless if you truly value human life and potential!
Gentrification can bring about all of these things. Typically after those who can’t afford to demand them are out. It’s not haves and have-nots anymore, it’s cans and can-nots.
So… back to the sticky note, I sort of assumed that people in the group I was in at the SID Showcase might classify my Gentrification sticky note as positive or at least neutral, by they almost unanimously saw it as bad. Faith in Humanity restored.
That’s so cool that you got to see them. And I really enjoyed reading your insight on gentrification. Good job on the way you used the word “empower.” I have been seeing it everywhere being used in a way that I now see that I don’t like 🙂