With every passing day I become more and more aware of classism as the ultimate poison in society.

 

It reaches toxic levels in my neighborhood–Italian Village (IV)–where affluent professionals have assumed control over an area once known for working class ethnic diversity. It was the intervening period of economic dispair–and the era of urban renewal–that set the stage for the gentrification that has made IV what it is today. IV has been labeled by UO as one of Columbus' top "gayborhoods," and to that, I'll add my conclusion, reached after my first visit to a meeting of the IV Society, that here in IV, diversity is defined as a healthy mix of gays and lesbians.

 

But sexual orientation is the farthest thing from the real problem in IV; it's the undue influence of the upperclass educated, unmarried, single/dual professional income households that has led to the fervent classism that is wielded in neighborhood affairs.

 

The wrecking-ball conversion of Italian Village Park from a city-kid friendly oasis to a "show-piece" dog park is but one example (full coverage of that story to come). The other signs are more subtle.

 

The point is: if you're living in a "nice" urban neighborhood, chances are you're watching classism in action.

 

Anybody else notice this? Example, please.

 

Here's a conversation starter from http://www.classmatters.org: responses to the survey question, "What's the Most Classist Thing You Ever Heard Someone Say?"

 

"Most of the Homeowners Associations wanted in an icky way to "color up" with racial diversity. They were happy to have people of color at the table as long as they were in the minority and didn't get to make any decisions. At one meeting, this one white homeowner was complaining about "why Latinos won't come to our meetings" and she suggested that maybe people should bring their maids! It was too gross!" — Roxana Tynan

 

"There was a fund-raising event that cost $50 and I heard comments about how "anyone can afford that." —Pam McMichael

 

"Several times I've heard social welfare professionals say about poor mothers, "We have to speak for them because they can't speak for themselves." —Theresa Funiciello

 

"A new friend said, 'My neighbor wanted to put up a 15-foot fence that would block my view. He's real redneck low-life trailer trash.' I told her I was offended by that, and we had a big argument that lasted all day." —Betsy Leondar-Wright

 

How does one differentiate between a) this neighborhood is evolving and changing, as all neighborhoods do, and b) this is blue-collar-hating gentrification?

 

if you're living in a "nice" urban neighborhood, chances are you're watching classism in action.

 

OK...and so, what does that mean?  Ought those of us who live in nice urban neighborhoods move out?  Or stay but feel guilty?  Or is it alright as long as we think nice thoughts about others?  Or is it alright if we just keep our mouths shut and not get involved in our neighborhood?  Or is it alright if we get involved, but stay in our place?

 

I'm sorry, that sounds extremely snotty of me, and I really don't intend it that way - I'm wondering how to work out what's good and what's bad.

 

How does one differentiate between a) this neighborhood is evolving and changing, as all neighborhoods do, and b) this is blue-collar-hating gentrification?

 

Watch how the key neighborhood association operates. If it considers its paid membership to be the sole arbiter of communty will, then you're living in a "type b" neighborhood.

 

if you're living in a "nice" urban neighborhood, chances are you're watching classism in action.

 

OK...and so, what does that mean?  Ought those of us who live in nice urban neighborhoods move out?  Or stay but feel guilty?  Or is it alright as long as we think nice thoughts about others?  Or is it alright if we just keep our mouths shut and not get involved in our neighborhood?  Or is it alright if we get involved, but stay in our place?

 

I'm sorry, that sounds extremely snotty of me, and I really don't intend it that way - I'm wondering how to work out what's good and what's bad.

 

The answer to all your questions is: Be involved in your neighborhood but interface with--and act in the interest of--ALL the people in your neighborhood, not just the ones who remind you of you.

Strange, I didn't get that impression of Italian Village as being particularly exclusionary. I think the best thing you can do at the meetings is call people out on their bulls****. Make them look like the elitist people they're being. Remind them that diversity doesnt just mean gay young professionals AND straight young professionals.

Some folks have been trying to make my neighborhood all uppity and high-class for years. I try to do everything in my power to counterbalance their efforts. I even had a non-running pickup truck in my driveway for a while, but I never got around to putting it up on blocks.  :wink:

 

Actually, the neighborhood association includes a pretty wide range of income levels, although it is almost all white. A lot of the property owners have put their own sweat into their restorations, doing them piece-by-piece as they can afford it. When I see an ostentatiously expensive car, it's usually parked in front of a multiple-unit rental.

^^Thus is the irony of classism: I'm an educated white male, but in the local schema, I'm a dozen rungs down because I've got kids. There's a bumper sticker on a car parked across from my house that says "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em." Nice.

 

I've made a splash at meetings, but in as dignified a way as possible. As Dale Carnegie used to say, if you want honey, don't kick the hive. Calling the neighborhood leaders out in front of each other accomplishes nothing but to make me look like the neighborhood crank.

 

Which I probably am. 

Er...ok.  You said if you're living in a nice urban neighborhood, chances are there's classism afoot.  Is it really that sweeping?

 

I guess my real question is, where the rubber meets the road, and where interests conflict - for instance, there are streets here in my neighborhood with a lot of low-cost houses, mostly rentals.  So say a couple folks buy a few homes on Windsor, fix them up and love their neighborhood.  But that raises housing values, and prices the current residents out of the market.  Are those rehabbers classists?  They're certainly not acting in the best interests of the other residents.

 

I think the problem with the area where KFOOW lives, is that it's mostly young single people. The problem isn't so much the wealth coming into the neighborhood but the lack of amenities for families. If home prices in Hyde Park went up from 300k to 400k, it's still going to bring in families, whereas in IV/VV it just brings in young professionals. He wants parks with jungle Gyms, they want dog parks. I don't think it's really happening anywhere in Cincinnati. That's pretty lame IMO, people complain about the cities being unsafe as one of their main reasons for not raising kids there, then when neighborhoods get gentrified, they're not very welcoming to families.

Well, then you'd say, "if you're living in Italian Village, chances are you're watching classism in action" - not if you're living in a "nice" urban neighborhood.  Those are two completely separate arguments.  I live in a nice urban neighborhood, I don't consider myself to be a classist, and I don't believe I'm the exception.  Maybe I'm wrong, maybe wrong on all three counts - but it just seems like condemning all nice urban neighborhoods as probably classist is WAY too broad an accusation.

 

For a good example of classism in action check out the threads about public stairways in Cincinnati.

Particularly the Keys Crescent stairs.

Cincinnati has neighborhood Community Councils that are quasi governmental organizations recognized by the city but they are  not like neighborhood resident organizations at all.

For another example of classism, look at the Cincinnati threads on streetcars where wealthy and middle class college students stress the importance of having special mass transit links between their college campus and entertainment districts but find, at best, secondary, the idea that special mass transit should be used to connect the chronically poor and undereducated West End with the Cinti State vocational college in an attempt to help people out of poverty through education.

Well, then you'd say, "if you're living in Italian Village, chances are you're watching classism in action" - not if you're living in a "nice" urban neighborhood.  Those are two completely separate arguments.  I live in a nice urban neighborhood, I don't consider myself to be a classist, and I don't believe I'm the exception.  Maybe I'm wrong, maybe wrong on all three counts - but it just seems like condemning all nice urban neighborhoods as probably classist is WAY too broad an accusation.

 

Again: watch how your dominant neighborhood organization operates--attend a meeting, listen to their language, identify their priorities and and follow their agenda. In IV it's nakedly classist. Your neighborhood may be a communist utopia. But somewhere inbetween, the cynic in me says that 51% of the time, in successfully gentrified urban neighborhoods, aggressive classist policies are afoot.

People are obsessed with property values. That classism and neighborhood political clout in favor of it is one of the injuries of a free market. Man my mom's next door neighbor said some guy came by and asked him if the metal box on the side of my mom's house was bringing down his property value. He said "umm...no?" then the guy proceeded to take pictures of the metal box on our property. The guy taking pictures is most likely someone involved in the home association. If they're that anal about aesthetics, I can't imagine what they think about all the Mexicans moving in.

There's a neighborhood back home (in Akron) that's having a similar problem-

 

Highland Square in Akron likes to think of itself as a bohemian, gay, artsy neighborhood in Akron. And in all honesty, it is. Right down the center of the Neighborhood is Market Street, and the classes are definatley divided- North is Upper/Middle class and predom white, South is Lower/Middle class and predom Black. Almost dead in the center is Portage Path Elem. School and the Highland theater.

 

The big problem right now is that Portage Path is slated to be demoed in the next year because the building is in Piss poor shape, and because each building has a super-tight budget, it's more feasible to build a new building. (NOTE: I went to school here...I DONT want to see it torn down, but I can't stand to see another winter of kids wearing coats to class of not having gym because of weather) The parents that send their kids from South of Market are ready to get started. However, the parents (and more likely homeowners) North of Market don't want a new building- they would rather have a "historical building," or don't think the building needs to renovated at all.

 

And most, if not all of these parents/homeowners don't even send their kids to public school.

However, the parents (and more likely homeowners) North of Market don't want a new building- they would rather have a "historical building," or don't think the building needs to renovated at all.

 

This is an ongoing issue in Dayton, where the historic preservationists (mostly white) want to save some old schools while the school board (mostly black) wants to tear them down.

 

So there is an (unspoken) racial subtext as well as class issue involved.

 

In fact, there was a recent documentary set in Columbus about the racial/classist/gay-lez issues around gentrification, set on Broad Street in west Columbus.

 

I also recall way back in the early 90s or very late 80s there was an attempt by the working class residents of IV to fight back at the homosexual influx in that neighborhood, at least on one block, where the working class families of the block suceeded in driving out the homosexual gentrifiers via a mix of verbal harrassment and vandalism.  Apparently that was just a temporary victory.

 

 

 

 

 

That's an interesting website Kingfish linked to.

So there is an (unspoken) racial subtext as well as class issue involved.

 

Well, someone said it. :-)

 

It just kills me that they refuse to see the leaking ceilings, inadequate heat, non-ada accessible classrooms, or bad plumbing as a problem.

"It just kills me that they refuse to see the leaking ceilings, inadequate heat, non-ada accessible classrooms, or bad plumbing as a problem."

 

Riiight, because preservation only means keeping the building "as is" :wtf:

I know that :-)

 

But there are so many problems with this building that it would cost a king's ransom (ie. Twice as much) to save it and bring it up to accessiblity standards. Some old buildings are being saved- the ones that can be.

 

I guess what I should have said is this group:

-focuses all their energy in forcing the city to build a grocery store in the area.

-save the 1000 seat Highland theater, which has struggled to exist even as a movie house for years due to lack of parking, yet they don't want ANY additional parking added or use of street parking.

-Wants to tell the school what to do but refuses to send their kids there or volunteer.

 

It's mad I tell you, MAD!

This is an interesting and much-needed thread. Thanks KOOW.

 

An interesting question is how those of us who are white, economically secure (and sometimes gay) build meaningful relationships with residents from different backgrounds? Even for those of us who are very conscious of class and racial histories of a neighborhood, cross-class communication can be difficult when existing residents express mistrust (probably rightly so) of new residents moving into their neighborhoods. Then there's the many in-migrants who really don't have any concerns about gentrification and could care less about neigbhorhood diversity and heritage who set a reputation for all of us. This, coupled with differences in education, political views, careers and life experiences that often present based on income can make meaningful interaction very difficult.

 

Another question I often wonder about is whether gentrification trends can be steered in such a way as to actively improve the lives of existing low-income residents. One way is to preserve low-income housing in perpetuity so these individuals can avail themselves of improvements in local public amenities and infrastructure that typically follow people of money into city neighborhoods, but as has been pointed out, these amenities rarely are built with low-income residents in mind. Do you guys have other examples of how gentrification trends have been steered toward benefiting low-income residents? Are there programs that target workforce development, education opportunities, etc. toward such neighborhoods? Or programs that increase low-income residents ability to purchase property in the neighborhood?

 

In fact, there was a recent documentary set in Columbus about the racial/classist/gay-lez issues around gentrification, set on Broad Street in west Columbus.

 

Shot over four years, "Flag Wars" is a poignant 90-minute account of economic competition between two historically oppressed groups, seen through the politics and pain of gentrification. The setting could be any city with a once stable working and middle class black community, now aging and economically depressed, in danger of losing control of their neighborhoods as wealthier home buyers gentrify block by block. In this case, the neighborhood is in Columbus, Ohio and the home buyers are largely white and gay.

 

The resulting conflicts are a case study of differences in perception. Where realtors and buyers see run-down homes, black residents see evidence of institutional racism that steered resources away from this community ...

 

... More at www.pbs.org/pov/pov2003/flagwars/

"An interesting question is how those of us who are white, economically secure (and sometimes gay) build meaningful relationships with residents from different backgrounds?"

 

I'd say it starts with the most basic day-to-day interactions. When we were slammed with the 13" of snow this past February, rather than just shovel out our driveway I shoveled the sidewalks (on a corner lot) because I know a lot of the residents walk. Along with that, I helped some neighbors shovel their drives/walks as well. This past weekend my block club held a fundraiser for a local black family who lost their house to arson - it was arranged as an outreach effort to let the family (and others) know they are welcome in the neighborhood in spite of someone's act of stupidity.

 

The problem goes both ways though - the onus shouldn't be just on the white/gay/affluent segment of the community. I only speak for myself, but my background and upbringing has much more in common with the working class than the affluent yuppies. But you might not guess that just to look at me.  :|

^ Good observations, MayDay. I think I'm from a very similar background. But I doubt my neighbors would guess that I was a rural farm boy whose family once declared bankruptcy by looking at me.

 

And while the onus may not be on the more affluent segment of the community, we also do need to recognize that in many cases the less affluent residents have typically been in urban neighborhoods for a much longer period of time and have existing social networks. We have to work to overcome the image that we're interlopers and that our arrival is not an indicator that they'll be priced out of their community.

I wonder if they'd have Flag Wars at the Columbus library. I'm gonna check into that.

I only speak for myself, but my background and upbringing has much more in common with the working class than the affluent yuppies. But you might not guess that just to look at me.  :|

Honey, its that fabulous skin  :wink:

 

This is at touchy subject for me and I feel as though if I start writing I'll go on forever. Classism has been a very touchy subject on both my mother and father sides of the family, the street I grew up on; and now as an adult the streets, in Cleveland and NYC, I reside on.

 

I don't know where to begin.

and that our arrival is not an indicator that they'll be priced out of their community.

But if enough gentrification occurs, isn't it inevitable that they will? Greedy landlords raising rent because it's become a more desirable place to live...

^ Absolutely. If communities aren't strategic about how they address potential gentrification, then this is exactly what would happen. That's the nature of my comments.

 

First, how do we overcome our image as harbingers of displacement (rightly or wrongly assigned images)?

 

And, second, how do we target the resources that come from an influx of higher-income individuals in ways that benefit the existing residential population and decrease the likelihood that they'll be displaced? For instance, can we target city resources (paint programs, low-interest rehab loans, etc.) into these neighborhoods so that low-income homeowners will maximize the increase in their property values? Can we increase low-income renters' abilities to purchase either their existing space or other spaces in the neighborhood (through mechanisms like lease-own agreements, limited equity co-ops, etc.) so that they are not priced out of rental units? Can we have open-dialogue planning processes so that neighborhood amenities are accessible and meaningful to residents of all incomes, rather than the transition to a dog park that was mentioned above? Can we target social services (literacy programs, financial education programs, etc.) toward these neighborhoods on the front end of gentrification so that the economic well-being of low-income residents approves alongside gentrification? Can we encourage in-migrants to be active members in their communities (e.g. sharing their often stronger educational backgrounds through tutoring or mentoring efforts with neighborhood children)?

 

Some of these ideas are a little more far-fetched or involved than others ... and some are more likely than others to prevent displacement. My point is that, yes, left to its own devices, gentrification will likely displace residents, but it doesn't have to be a zero-sum game if we plan appropriately. I would love to hear examples of neighborhoods where such initiatives have taken place.

 

I deal a lot with artists seeking space and they often face the double-edged sword of gentrification. Community development organizations often recruit the hell out of them to move into a neighborhood, as they often are viewed as "early adopters" in a neighborhood and a signal to residents, funders, etc. that the neighborhood is poised for revitalization. But artists typically choose such neighborhoods for their low rents and overlooked amenities. But ultimately, they fall victim to the same displacement that other low-income residents face ... unless they've purchased their property, they move on to the next neighborhood. As such, even though many are low-income themselves, they often face a lot of distrust from other low-income residents.

I think another interesting issue here is the fact that gay populations are often associated with gentrification of urban neighborhoods. In addition to the tension that can occur from economic divisions in the neighborhood, there can also be some additional tension caused by moral divisions in the neighborhood ...not only are these in-migrants increasing the potential for economic disruption of the neighborhoood, but they also sometimes challenge the social mores of neighborhood residents. Something tells me that no matter how much I worked to overcome the noticeable awkwardness between me and my Appalachian neighbors, they would not be too cool with me as a gay man. It's really interesting to me how many challenges are tangential components of the gentrification issue. I definitely want to check out Flag Wars too!

But there are so many problems with this building that it would cost a king's ransom (ie. Twice as much) to save it and bring it up to accessiblity standards. Some old buildings are being saved- the ones that can be.

 

I guess what I should have said is this group:

-focuses all their energy in forcing the city to build a grocery store in the area.

-save the 1000 seat Highland theater, which has struggled to exist even as a movie house for years due to lack of parking, yet they don't want ANY additional parking added or use of street parking.

-Wants to tell the school what to do but refuses to send their kids there or volunteer.

 

The grocery store comment reminds me of the Wayne and Wyoming situation in Dayton, but their you have the gentrifiers and the poorer people united in wanting a store.

 

I think preservation is seen as a luxury, sort of an elitist interest.  Goes back to the guy wanting to put on vinyl or aluminum siding vs scraping and repainting the wood.  For me , so what if he uses modern siding materials.

 

 

 

Great post, KFOOW...

 

I have always found it interesting the differing views of what "Class" actually means.  To some, it is monetary.  To others (like me), it is how people act (civilized or like knuckleheads).  And unfortunately to yet others it still means the color of one's skin.  Or it could be all of the above - go to other countries (even "poorer" ones like Mexico) and you will see the exact same phenomenon - sometimes even closer to the surface. 

 

It boils down to the fact that as humans we are like reverse magnets - we are naturally attracted to others like us and at the same time we naturally avoid those who are different than who we see ourselves as.  And it usually comes down to the word "fear".  When we were all cave dwellers, we had to "fear" the tribe over the hill because they probably wanted to kill us.  Nowadays, we "fear" yuppies moving into our neighborhood if we are poor and worry about being displaced.  Or we "fear" different races moving into our neighborhood because we worry about our property values going down.  We fear others that threaten our way of life, and usually that fear is irrational.  Unfortunately so is the fear that sometimes causes the stock market to crash, and irrational fears can become very real disasters for those who are affected.

 

What feeds that fear is isolation, not just in one's life but in who we associate with.  If you associate exclusively with others that are just like you, your fear of those different than you will intensify.  That is one reason why sprawl is bad for our society - it isolates, divides and causes imbalance. 

 

All one can do is reach out to others that may be different than them to try and find common ground.  Sometimes it is the other person's prejudices that stand in the way, making it is a lost cause.  Jeffrey made a good point about both gentrifiers and poor folks uniting for a common goal (a decent grocery store).  It can happen.

 

There is a very good documentary that aired last year on pbs called "People Like Us - Social Class in America".  I highly recommend it to anybody interested in the class phenomenon in our country.

I know I've posted on this before....but the situation fits into the discussion.

 

This goes back (as it usually does) to what I recall from Louisville, from the Butchertown neighborhood.

 

There the interest was neighborhood conservation and historic preservation. 

 

The concept was explicitly stated by some of the gentrifiers as well as by the neighborhood people leading the conservation campaign (Louisville city wanted to clear the neighborhood for industrial uses) that they did not want to save the neighborhood via pushing poor people out and putting yuppies in, but just wanted to preserve the neighborhood.

 

The result was that the place was, until recently, a mixed place, with a lot of working class folks living there as well as a few yuppie gentrifiers. 

 

For awhile there Butchertown was an example of a neighorbood where historic preservation didn't not have to mean pushing all the old-timers out. A lot of this was due to other parts of Louisville becoming hot, hip areas, so there was less pressure to gentrify Butchertown.

 

Unfortunatley, with the urban living really picking up in Louisville, this neighborhood is now seeing the familiar pattern of rising prices and rents and the working class getting squeezed out (though they are probably getting good money for their old shotgun houses). 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Billy and 8Shades for the video recommends. I came across coverage of the The Flag Wars documentary when I was first researching my move to Columbus. Now I have a little more context to enjoy it.

 

Another relevant video would be the episode of Morgan Spurlock's "30 Days" documentary show in which Spurlock and his girlfriend lived in Columbus (Franklinton) as minimum wage slaves for one month. Some hair-raising moments for sure. It's on the Netflix (along with the Flag Wars documentary): http://www.netflix.com/Movie/30_Days_Season_1/70019963?trkid=189530.

 

On a related note, Franklinton is actively courting the artists displaced by the Short North gentrification. Will the big cycle continue in The Bottoms?

 

Crossposted from the Gay Wedding thread--and quite frankly the inspiration for this thread--a documentary clip of a Chav* wedding:

 

[youtube=425,350]9Np9TTzx7rA

 

*Chav is a pejorative term to describe a subset of British working class culture. Compare with "wigger."

 

I think the part of the bottoms closest to downtown will...slowly. I heard there's already some gentrification around Mt. Carmel hospital. But most of the housing stock in the bottoms doesn't really have the kind of character that the other bordering inner city neighborhoods have (Near East/Old Town East, German Village, Short North). It would be nice to have a thread on development going on in Franklinton (if there is that much) to keep track and see if that's what will happen. There are some great restaurants on the W. Broad Street corridor..add some more amenities and I think you could draw a lot of people in.

I think the poster who talked about people prefering to live around people like themselves was quite correct, but "fear" is perhaps a strong word.  "Comfort" might be a better word.

 

Nor is it neccesarily a bad thing.  Ethnic neighborhoods, for example, didn't spring up because of some evil nefarious segregationist plan.  They happened because of comfort.

 

It's a factor that needs to be taken into account, especially if you want to attract people who have options.

 

I would say that culture is a bigger factor than race or even class.  Some cultures are simply not comfortable around each other, and each is freer to conduct themselves with less restraint when they live separately.

Nor is it neccesarily a bad thing.  Ethnic neighborhoods, for example, didn't spring up because of some evil nefarious segregationist plan.  They happened because of comfort.

 

You've obviously never read "The Jungle."

"You've obviously never read "The Jungle.""

 

Sinclair was as capable of error as anyone.  IIRC he was quite impressed with life in the Soviet Union.

 

In any case, comfort can mean many things.  Immigrants lived in like neighborhoods because they preferred to, indeed this was the overwhelming pattern up until suburbia came about.  In NYC, neighborhoods weren't merely Italian, they reflected regions and sometimes even villages.

Sinclair's agenda was obvious, but the little pink kernal of truth is that immigrant enclaves are seldom the result of simple choice and comfort; time and again they exist where they do because the upper crust doesn't want to live there, and they don't make it easy for the lower crust (in my book, "the bread") to leave. i.e., the opposite of choice.

 

But for the purposes of our discussion, what is your take on the classism (or cultural conflict) that occurs when the upperclass deems the immigrant enclave a good investment, and in choosing to move into the neighborhood, implements practices that infringe upon the comfort of the natives?

Here's Italian Village with its increasing classism. Enjoy your bleached Wonderbread hehe.

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=13811.0;topicseen

Depends on the practice.  Usually the complaint from the existing residents is rising rents due to rising property values. 

 

In gentrification situations, the complaints about practices usually come from the new people, and my instinct is to object to NIMBY, especially NIMNBY (Not In My New Back Yard).

 

My initial point was that people clustering among similar types is not by any means inherently evil.  It's a normal human tendency and probably results in less inhibition of personal liberty.

 

One can say the "affluent" try to keep people in "their place", though in reality when the opposite happens its often derided as "sprawl".  But that doesn't explain why the immigrants congregated to begin with.

Nowhere has it been said that immigrants huddling together is evil. Hell, in my book, anything that helps preserve language and culture in the face of mainstream America is a good thing. The evil of classism presents itself when the way of life enjoyed by these huddling masses (hey--didn't I see something like that on a statue somewhere?) is upended by newer folks with more money and influence because all that huddling is supressing property values.

 

As for the causes of sprawl, I'd say the displacement of immigrant populations is probably around #238 on the list of triggers.

Classism is just another form of racism

It can be another form of racism, but it's not "just" another form of racism. Classism can exist within the boundaries of a single race.