Discussion First, I will examine the restrictive covenants that occurred in Levittown. Levittown, NY was the first suburbia that was made in order to create a new frontier for American families seeking a new home. However, there was a hidden side of the new suburbia, a suburbia that consisted of restrictive covenants. Rather than the focus being on the production of new homes to the public, the hidden implications were established in order to create a “safe haven” for Caucasian families. (Galyean) Inequalities in opportunities occurred when it came to minorities seeking out opportunities to move out from the urban city life. In the context of Levittown, the primary actor of that initiated this project was William Levitt. He was the pioneer to a more affordable housing plan for American families. Addition to Levitt, there was multiple real estate agents and property owners that ensured segregation in the new suburban neighborhoods. Agents outside of the housing market were involved to the discriminatory practices also. Businessmen investing in the new suburbia along with government officials practiced discriminatory practices. Not only were the agents within the housing market, outside agents pushed for a segregated neighborhood. The main interest and objective of these actors were to prevent racial diversity in their neighborhood. Most of their motives were driven by the fact that racial minorities are harmful to the environment of the suburbia. William Levitt “made it an unofficial policy not to sell homes to minorities” (Hales) Ultimately, the goal of the suburbia was to keep the housing cost high and the neighborhoods safe. Sadly, the agents listed above mistakenly realized that racial minorities were the problem to these ... ... middle of paper ... ... Racial minorities could not receive any loan benefit to go into these nicer graded areas. The outcome of the government programs was substantial. These programs explicitly and implicitly banned minorities from entering the neighborhood. FHA’s underwriting manual stated that inharmonious racial groups cannot be together. This manual was practiced for 15 year in which many minorities were rejected housing. Only two percent of all FHA insured housing were given to minorities. (Nicolaides) Additionally, HOLC disadvantaged certain minority family by not providing them with necessary housing mortgage loans. This prevented the minorities from moving to better and nicer neighborhood. Levittown was a dream for minorities. William Levitt adamantly supported the underlying practices of government programs and promoted these practices to local businessmen and homeowners.
Michelle Boyd’s article “Defensive Development The Role of Racial Conflict in Gentrification” also focuses on gentrification addressing the failure to explain the relationship between racial conflict and its effect on gentrification. This article adds a new perspective to gentrification while studying the blacks as gentrifiers.
Ethnicities wanted to be with their own race. This began the movement of the development of ethnic neighborhoods. Although many et...
Prior to this, I had never heard of any benefit of gentrification; rather, I had the typical preconceived notion that Freeman discusses: gentrification is a demonic force that inflicts suffering in all poor people in a gentrified neighborhood. However, reading excerpts from “There Goes the ‘Hood” encourages me to rethink my position. One of my questions from the reading pertains to the “race” part of the author’s argument. Although Clinton Hill and Harlem are both predominantly comprised of African Americans, I wonder how low-income white residents feel about gentrification. I am curious about this because a friend of mine, a white Irish, was displaced from her home in Sunnyside, Queens last summer because of increasing rent. From this experience, I think that seeing low-income whites’ outlooks on white gentry would be interesting. Furthermore, I question the validity of the author’s selection on some of the participants for his interview, particularly those whom he recruited in a conference on gentrification (page 12). One could imagine that community members who attend such a conference would hold strong opinions about gentrification. However, would not this contradict his earlier point that “the most active and vocal residents are not necessarily representative of the entire neighborhood and are likely different” (page 7) and thus undermining the integrity of some of his
The loss of public housing and the expanse of the wealth gap throughout the state of Rhode Island has been a rising issue between the critics and supporters of gentrification, in both urban areas such as Providence and wealthy areas such as the island of Newport, among other examples. With the cities under a monopoly headed by the wealth of each neighborhood, one is left to wonder how such a system is fair to all groups. Relatively speaking, it isn’t, and the only ones who benefit from such a system are white-skinned. With the deterioration of the economic status of Rhode Island, and especially in the city of Providence, more and more educated Caucasians are leaving to seek a more fertile economic environment.
Charles, Camille (2003). The dynamics of racial residential segregation. Annual Review of Sociology, 167. Retrieved from http://jstor.org/stable/30036965.
The United States’ government has always had a hand on our country’s housing market. From requiring land ownership to vote, to providing public housing to impoverished families, our government has become an irremovable part of the housing market. The effects of these housing policies can affect American residents in ways they might not even recognize. As several historians have concluded, many housing policies, especially those on public housing, either resulted in or reinforced the racial segregation of neighborhoods.
Newark began to deteriorate and the white residents blamed the rising African-American population for Newark's downfall. However, one of the real culprits of this decline in Newark was do to poor housing, lack of employment, and discrimination. Twenty-five percent of the cities housing was substandard according to the Model C...
Goetz, Edward G.. New Deal ruins: race, economic justice, and public housing policy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013. Print.
Herbert Gans piece on the mass production of suburban styled homes like Levittown with its homes on the outskirts of the city and mixed land uses closer within the core “ analyzes the suburbs and makes it evident that they are not a utopia” no matter the societal segregation they represent (Herbert Gans). These areas have their burdens resulting in physical and social isolation, no access to transportation, the start of gender roles, and inadequate decision making. In comparison, Pleasantville was a society of segregation due to the land constraints and urban planning of the society. Its visible that there is an increase in segregation between the suburban population and inner city. The higher class living in the suburbs would remain in that area unless it was for work.
In contrast to popular assumption, discrimination in public housing is becoming more prevalent than ever before. Testing done by the Fair Housing Center of Greater Boston has found that today people of color are discriminated against in nearly half of their efforts to buy, sell, finance, or rent property (“1968-Present Housing Discrimination). The statistics are even worse when considering colored people who have families as the testing found that they are discriminated against approximately two thirds of the time (“1968-Present Housing Discrimination”) In addition to facing great difficulty in property affairs, people of color are less likely to be offered residence in desirable locations. 86 percent of revitalized
To appreciate a row house neighborhood, one must first look at the plan as a whole before looking at the individual blocks and houses. The city’s goal to build a neighborhood that can be seen as a singular unit is made clear in plan, at both a larger scale (the entire urban plan) and a smaller scale (the scheme of the individual houses). Around 1850, the city began to carve out blocks and streets, with the idea of orienting them around squares and small residential parks. This Victorian style plan organized rectangular blocks around rounded gardens and squares that separated the row houses from major streets. The emphasis on public spaces and gardens to provide relief from the ene...
This is known as de jure segregation which essentially states that the segregation was implemented by public policy and law instead of private discrimination practices held by individuals (Rothstein). Thus, “racial segregation in housing was not merely a project of southerners in the former slaveholding confederacy [but instead] it was a nation-wide project of the federal government in the twentieth century, designed and implemented by its most liberal leaders” (Rothstein). With this nation-wide project, numerous racially explicit laws and government practices were combined in order to develop a system of urban ghettos where African Americans were designated to live (Rothstein). Moreover, highlighting that while privately held discrimination did play some role on the residential segregation of African Americans, the government primarily played a crucial part in reinforcing the racially explicit laws that inevitably led to racial discrimination in
The South Bronx, New York City: another northern portrait of racial divide that naturally occurred in the span of less than a century, or a gradual, but systematic reformation based on the mistaken ideology of white supremacy? A quick glance through contemporary articles on The Bronx borough convey a continuation of less-than-ideal conditions, though recently politicians and city planners have begun to take a renewed interest in revitalizing the Bronx. (HU, NYT) Some common conceptions of the Bronx remain less than satisfactory—indeed, some will still express fear or disgust, while some others have expressed the fundamentally incorrect racial ideas studied here—but others recall the Bronx with fondness, calling it a once “boring” and “secure” neighborhood.(BRONX HIST JOURNAL, p. 1) What are we to do with such radically different accounts between The Bronx of yesterday, and the impoverished borough of today? If we speak in known, contemporary cultural stereotypes, then segregation is strictly a Southern design, but natural otherwise—but to record this as a natural occurrence, no different than a seasonal change or day turning to night, would be to ignore the underlying problem. The changing role of white Americans from majority to population minority in the Bronx, coupled with the borough’s title of “poorest urban county in America” (as of 2012), is the result of careful orchestration and a repeating story of economic and political gain superseding civil rights. (GONZALES, BRONX) (BRONX HIST JOURN, HARD KNOCKS IN BRONX @ poorest note ) It is not coincidence.
In many areas of our country, there is still neighborhood segregation. Realtors and homeowners that conspire to sell only to white in order to keep black and other races out.
While, Coates focus on Chicago’s struggle for rights in housing in terms of blacks and whites, there are more diverse examples of this in other cities. New York City is home to many neighborhoods of varying backgrounds and races. New York City has everything from Little Italy to Chinatown, but are those places restricted to people of that ethnic background? Legally, the answer is no. You cannot be denied housing because of your background or beliefs. However, this does not stop people from being denied anyway. New York City, while the most culturally diverse city, is also the most segregated. Many may see this isn’t a issue but it