The interesting thing about these perspectives is that while
half right, about appropriation of what we can call the "exchange value"
of culture or blackness, they are half wrong in that they inadequately provide historical
perspective in terms of analyzing the city demographically--e.g., Prince
George's County didn't become majority black because of the white
conspiracy, but because people of means moved out of the city in great
numbers.
For example, the "famous" New York Times Sunday Magazine cover story in 1992, "The New Black Suburbs," which featured Jack and Leslie Johnson in the cover photograph. I remember reading that piece.
As
far as dealing with the more fundamental issue of why so many
African-Americans in the city are ill-prepared to compete in the context
of a market economy, the articles don't address the problem.
I happened to
write something about this last December, in response to a similar
article, "Low income, high income, [the housing] market, and the right to the city." The end of the blog entry discusses some of the
policy/programmatic options that could be utilized.
Note
that I have speculated that the issue of neighborhood change (with no opinion about whether or not this is good or bad) in Shaw and Anacostia is more a function of achieving a critical mass of new, higher income residents, and is a function of time/access to transit/safety issues,
that these neighborhoods are likely to change demographically too,
significantly, just at a different pace from areas like Capitol
Hill.
Basically
it's a challenge to the thesis by Prof. Hyra that Shaw has successfully
resisted gentrification. I counter that his thesis employs too narrow a
time frame.
Much thanks to you for giving such significant data, and a debt of gratitude is for sharing this Business Promotion system.
ReplyDelete