Comments on: On Self-Hating Gentrifiers

By: IA

IA — Sat, 23 May 2015 02:22:32 +0000

But we had the same small core during “white flight.”

By: Dan

Dan — Sat, 23 May 2015 02:16:10 +0000

IA —

That is exactly my point. Gentrification is a very narrow and specific phenomenon that needs a strong economic source and a small piece of land that is competed over. This doesn’t apply to PG because it is not prime, close in real estate. PG county is not part of the precious urban core of real estate. Similarly, it doesn’t apply to the outer boroughs of New York.

Gentrification is not a solution that works most of the time. It is a rare thing that doesn’t even work in an entire metro area. Oldtown Alexandria is another area of the DC metro than has seen bona fide gentrification, but these poor must be pushed somewhere else, so it can’t work universally.

Therefore gentrification not something that can be counted on to rescue most people. Most hipsters in most cities will fail at it.

By: IA

IA — Sat, 23 May 2015 01:13:30 +0000

Hi Dan,

It’s irrelevant where federal dollars go. Black ethnic cleansing of 85% white Prince George’s County, Maryland was funded by affirmative action government jobs. 350,000 whites moved out of PG county from 1970 to 1995 and 300,000 blacks moved in, all government funded.

Washington, New York and SF have always been financial powers. Yet, this did no good during “white flight.” Something else is causing gentrification.

I understand that many conservative white guys hate cities. But, after living in Paris for several years, and not having an attitude, I am not impressed with this bias.

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 22 May 2015 23:01:09 +0000

Manhattan homes are fortresses. Steel bars on the ground level, doormen guarding the entrances, private security. Kind of stark on the outside, the beautiful luxury hidden from view.

Even so, property values were seriously depressed until Giuliani got crime under control by dominating the streets with a huge police presence.

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 22 May 2015 22:54:51 +0000

I live in the DC area. No discussion of its gentrification is even halfway correct without talking about the Federal Government. A huge amount of well-paying white collar jobs in the city ensured that the city could never fully tank. The Federal Government could afford to keep spending in the face of losses without any limit. Once crime came under control, it returned to the high level you would expect.

Another couple factors regarding DC are the terrible traffic and the height restriction on buildings. This resulted in a natural shortage of space that produced a concentrated burst of competition, and gentrification resulted.

The other examples I can think of also have this tremendous mix of extreme economic power and very limited space.
(1) New York has the huge money of the financial sector and the other industries (media, advertising, law) where they are nation-leading. This combines with the very limited space of Manhattan Island.
(2) San Francisco has the huge money of Silicon Valley and a tiny penninsula.

The fact that all three of these examples (New York, San Fran and DC) still became undesireable in the 1980s and 1990s when crime was out of hand (even as wealth and tight space were true then) shows how tenuous things are.

For these three cities, many others have simply continued to drift downward. In most parts of America, the suburbs are where 90% of the economic vitality is now. Even Detroit has vital, economically powerful suburbs that have always been fine.

By: Valkea

Valkea — Mon, 18 May 2015 21:37:01 +0000

Good and useful analysis. Something which supplements it in important ways:

http://orthosphere.org/2015/05/16/plotinus-and-augustine-on-gnosticism/

By: Thrasymachus

Thrasymachus — Thu, 14 May 2015 17:00:29 +0000

We “hobbits” (as one of the Nicks referred to us) were talking about this a few years ago. In places like New York, ghetto blacks live close to elite white neighborhoods, yet the elite whites are not troubled too much by them. Why? What keeps blacks away? Answers included that blacks are repelled by many things elite or hipster whites like, dogs, even small ones, trees and flowers, and attractive architecture. Convenience stores can keep blacks from loitering just by playing classical music, so I think this is true.

By: Mai La Dreapta

Mai La Dreapta — Thu, 14 May 2015 14:08:28 +0000

I’m not sure who’s really “correct” here, but it should be pointed out that queers can act as shocktroops for gentrification because they provide an alternate narrative that provides political cover for the Giuliani tactics. Some queer dude with pink nail polish gets knifed in a bad neighborhood, well that’s a hate crime. Call out the media, hold candlelight vigils, light up Twitter, and never mind the fact that the victim was white and the perp was black. This is about gay rights, not race, and what are you, some kind of bigot who’s questioning our narrative? Whereas a regular straight white hipster who gets mugged this way can’t excite the same level of sympathy, and so has a hard time breaking into minority neighborhoods.

By: seriouslypleasedropit

seriouslypleasedropit — Thu, 14 May 2015 02:18:37 +0000

They’re walking on the street, not having sex. Any assumptions you have regarding occurrence, frequency, exclusivity, or longevity are just that—assumptions.

By: Barely Intrepid

Barely Intrepid — Wed, 13 May 2015 14:30:34 +0000

I have to agree with the gays acting as shocktroops. Washington dc is the perfect example of this.

Gays began moving into ghettos. Their presence and concentrated disposable income businesses, then came the hipsters. Where there was once projects, now stand 3k/m luxury apartments, whole foods, craft beer stores. The early gay settlers we’re able to call the police constantly without being branded racist. The city needed to comply because of the tax revenue gays brought with them. Blacks never stood a chance.