It's bizarre how a society built on property rights and rule of law would be so obsessed with gentrification. I suppose it's no coincidence that this zoning and urban planning fad came about after WW1 and WW2.
Totally agree but I guess the people who are obsessed with gentrification aren't the same people who love property rights haha. Very bizarre and confused ideas though - total intellectual cul-de-sac.
Not going to lie, there are parts of your thesis I disagree with, but I am happy to over look them for now because you make a nice case against NIMBYS. Also, the better drug dealers are often found in gentrified neighborhoods. Perspectives on the gentrification process can change when a 10 year old Aboriginal kid in Redfern asks you if you want 50 bag. I learnt a lot about marketing from that kid.
I am looking forward to your next entry on how to avoid creating victims of gentrification. It’s been my experience that people in communities need to work together to avoid the maladaptive outcomes protesting against gentrification brings. This was the dream of a more inclusive planning process and Social Planning. Unfortunately people are still yet to embrace the saying, “Beware of false profits”
Hey mate - to be clear, I'm not saying that gentrification is fine, or good or that I like gentrificaiton. I'm saying that it is an unavoidable and wholey natural byproduct of Capitalism - and when you live under capitalism, it is what it is. I don't think it can be avoided so long as you have private property rights.
I've heard people say that community land trusts can help, but I honestly don't know anything about it.
To me the only answer is to build mass publicly-delivered housing and to rent it to people at an affordable rate.
Well written article with a convincing thesis. Was it Cam Murray who pointed out that setting fire to cars in the street is about the only way to deflate property prices? People who argue against improvements to the public domain to discourage gentrification aren’t far off implementing that strategy.
Thanks for reading Guy and yes it’s a mind boggling logical dead end - truly bizarre that it’s as mainstream as it is.
And just the idea that after all the change cities go through over the course of centuries, we are to pick *this* particular moment to say “nothing is allowed to change from *this* point on”. No sense of history or time!
Good article. It reminded me of that quote from Churchill about democracy, only this time it is repurposed to be about capitalism.
But you are right, we all contribute towards gentrification in some shape or form. I am currently living in a suburb that will eventually be transformed from a once working class suburb into a thoroughly middle class suburb, one knock down at a time (no hipsters were harmed in this process, but the blue singlets are rapidly disappearing from the clothes lines). I contributed towards this gradual transformation through my act of buying a hived off backyard and building a bloody big house.
The social justice warrior hidden deep within me does not believe in complete displacement. But the family historian in me also remembers the photos of Surry Hills around 1900 that was similar to the photo in this article, which WAS the housing and living environment for a few of my ancestors. Virtually everyone wants or desires a better life and after seeing those photos and reading newspaper articles from around those times, I fully appreciate and eternally thank them for escaping to the boring suburbs. But I recognise for some people this dream will always remain a dream, so that old shabby knock down remains their castle, until such time as they can afford to move on.
The more I think about it, the more I believe we have to make room within the capitalism system to allow for more gentler models. To that end I think co-operatives and in particular Community Land Trusts may be one alternative that could be more fully supported in helping to facilitate a kinder, more gentler, redevelopment model in established suburbs, especially where wholesale changes are being proposed.
When working at Logan Council I often dreamed of gentrification for some suburbs as a way to help them see and experience an alternative life. But again, full displacement of the existing residents was not the solution, although I could fully understand some newer residents not wanting to have the gentile life they were expecting being shattered by the chaos and madness that often existed there. I am not sure I could have handled it! But then again, from my meetings with existing residents over time – they weren’t exactly thrilled by the going on by some, but they were mostly economical prisoners to these areas.
Your article also reminded me of the, now lost, battle by local Aboriginals living in Redfern at the beginning of gentrification of this area. They had a very good grasp on the economics and its implications for the loss of their low cost housing. So they used to go around burning the front doors of renovated house as a means to discourage any further gentrification. But they lost that battle and I believe the remaining Aboriginal Housing Trust homes are now being sold off to private ownership. Capitalism wins again.
Thanks Neil - agree regarding community land trusts, would be great to see a lot more of that kind of thing. I do think the YIMBYs are right about this particular point where most of the displacement can be avoided if a diverse range of housing is able to be built.
It's bizarre how a society built on property rights and rule of law would be so obsessed with gentrification. I suppose it's no coincidence that this zoning and urban planning fad came about after WW1 and WW2.
Totally agree but I guess the people who are obsessed with gentrification aren't the same people who love property rights haha. Very bizarre and confused ideas though - total intellectual cul-de-sac.
Not going to lie, there are parts of your thesis I disagree with, but I am happy to over look them for now because you make a nice case against NIMBYS. Also, the better drug dealers are often found in gentrified neighborhoods. Perspectives on the gentrification process can change when a 10 year old Aboriginal kid in Redfern asks you if you want 50 bag. I learnt a lot about marketing from that kid.
I am looking forward to your next entry on how to avoid creating victims of gentrification. It’s been my experience that people in communities need to work together to avoid the maladaptive outcomes protesting against gentrification brings. This was the dream of a more inclusive planning process and Social Planning. Unfortunately people are still yet to embrace the saying, “Beware of false profits”
Hey mate - to be clear, I'm not saying that gentrification is fine, or good or that I like gentrificaiton. I'm saying that it is an unavoidable and wholey natural byproduct of Capitalism - and when you live under capitalism, it is what it is. I don't think it can be avoided so long as you have private property rights.
I've heard people say that community land trusts can help, but I honestly don't know anything about it.
To me the only answer is to build mass publicly-delivered housing and to rent it to people at an affordable rate.
Well written article with a convincing thesis. Was it Cam Murray who pointed out that setting fire to cars in the street is about the only way to deflate property prices? People who argue against improvements to the public domain to discourage gentrification aren’t far off implementing that strategy.
Thanks for reading Guy and yes it’s a mind boggling logical dead end - truly bizarre that it’s as mainstream as it is.
And just the idea that after all the change cities go through over the course of centuries, we are to pick *this* particular moment to say “nothing is allowed to change from *this* point on”. No sense of history or time!
I found this a useful primer, thank you!
Cheers Tim thanks for reading!
Good article. It reminded me of that quote from Churchill about democracy, only this time it is repurposed to be about capitalism.
But you are right, we all contribute towards gentrification in some shape or form. I am currently living in a suburb that will eventually be transformed from a once working class suburb into a thoroughly middle class suburb, one knock down at a time (no hipsters were harmed in this process, but the blue singlets are rapidly disappearing from the clothes lines). I contributed towards this gradual transformation through my act of buying a hived off backyard and building a bloody big house.
The social justice warrior hidden deep within me does not believe in complete displacement. But the family historian in me also remembers the photos of Surry Hills around 1900 that was similar to the photo in this article, which WAS the housing and living environment for a few of my ancestors. Virtually everyone wants or desires a better life and after seeing those photos and reading newspaper articles from around those times, I fully appreciate and eternally thank them for escaping to the boring suburbs. But I recognise for some people this dream will always remain a dream, so that old shabby knock down remains their castle, until such time as they can afford to move on.
The more I think about it, the more I believe we have to make room within the capitalism system to allow for more gentler models. To that end I think co-operatives and in particular Community Land Trusts may be one alternative that could be more fully supported in helping to facilitate a kinder, more gentler, redevelopment model in established suburbs, especially where wholesale changes are being proposed.
When working at Logan Council I often dreamed of gentrification for some suburbs as a way to help them see and experience an alternative life. But again, full displacement of the existing residents was not the solution, although I could fully understand some newer residents not wanting to have the gentile life they were expecting being shattered by the chaos and madness that often existed there. I am not sure I could have handled it! But then again, from my meetings with existing residents over time – they weren’t exactly thrilled by the going on by some, but they were mostly economical prisoners to these areas.
Your article also reminded me of the, now lost, battle by local Aboriginals living in Redfern at the beginning of gentrification of this area. They had a very good grasp on the economics and its implications for the loss of their low cost housing. So they used to go around burning the front doors of renovated house as a means to discourage any further gentrification. But they lost that battle and I believe the remaining Aboriginal Housing Trust homes are now being sold off to private ownership. Capitalism wins again.
Thanks Neil - agree regarding community land trusts, would be great to see a lot more of that kind of thing. I do think the YIMBYs are right about this particular point where most of the displacement can be avoided if a diverse range of housing is able to be built.