What would it actually take to stop gentrification?
How attempts to resist gentrification miss the broader forces that make it inevitable.
Gentrification.
A word that invokes Big Feelings.
Gentrification is frequently protested against. There are people and organisations that devote the entirety of their activism to it. There are countless lectures, books, articles and even songs about it. It is taught in universities. Hell, it was taught to me in university. The words written on the topic could probably fill a library.
Maybe 95% of this discourse lambasts gentrification as being a net negative in terms of classism, racism, colonialism and the rest of the abominable 'isms of the Current Year — with the remaining 5% being contrarians arguing something to the tune of "Gentrification's not that bad" or, "Gentrification's good, actually".
I want to sidestep such a debate because it's been done to death, and I have nothing new to add. I instead want to take the idea that Gentrification is bad, as a given assumption, and then ask the follow-up question: What would it actually take to stop it?
But first, let's establish some basic definitions.
What is gentrification?
Gentrification:
The process whereby the character of a poor urban area is changed by wealthier people moving in, improving housing, and attracting new businesses, often displacing current inhabitants in the process.
To build on this definition, the anti-gentrification narrative typically goes as follows: When a city's population increases, this places pressure on existing housing supply, particularly in the most desirable areas. NIMBYs block new development in established wealthy suburbs so the excess demand for housing spills over into poorer working-class (in some cases racially coded) neighbourhoods, where cash-poor creative types (hipsters) are priced out of the wealthier neighbourhoods they grew up in.
Over time, these wretched hipsters eventually reach a critical mass that gives the middle class normies a sense of permission to move into what may have previously been considered to be a Bad Neighbourhood.
Once the normies are in, it's all over. Corporate franchise stores move in and undercut the Mom & Pop small businesses. Distinct local character is eroded and homogenised into the soulless global corporate melange that’s indistinguishable whether you’re in New York or Wagga Wagga. Property values go up and most importantly for the narrative, low-income renters get priced out, forcing them to relocate. When there is a racial or ethnic overlay to the neighbourhood in question, this has the added effect of displacing people from what was once a specific community.
That last sentence I think is really the crux of why I think gentrification has become such a red meat issue as the racial discourse has heated up over the past 10-15 years. Nobody really cares when middle class whites move into a historically working-class white area. It's mostly when the racial overlay is present that the whole thing takes on the appearance of a kind of invasion, or as the kids say these days, Colonialism.
So, whether you call it gentrification, Colonialism, or just plain old urban renewal — it is a phenomenon taking place within a system, and that system is Capitalism. But to understand what it would take to stop gentrification, we first need to understand the base conditions that gentrification takes place within, as determined by Capitalism.
But first... What is Capitalism?
Capitalism:
An economic system in which private actors own and control property in accord with their interests, and demand and supply freely set prices in markets.
The most important thing to emphasise in this definition is the centrality of private property ownership, and the inherent right to buy and sell private property. Without this, there is no Capitalism; it's the single most important pillar of the whole shebang.
Now hold this in your mind as we return to the definition of gentrification and break that down in terms of Capitalism's fundamental preconditions and mechanisms.
Gentrification:
The process whereby the character of a poor urban area is changed by wealthier people moving in (i.e. People buying private property), improving housing (i.e. People renovating private property that they bought), and attracting new businesses (i.e. People buying private property), often displacing current inhabitants (i.e. Current owners selling private property) in the process.
As you can see, at each step of the way, every element of gentrification is a function of the buying and selling of private property, i.e. a function of Capitalism.
Capitalism is inherently destructive to communities
Imagine an idyllic village, where you and everyone you've ever known and loved lives. Your family has always lived here as long as anyone can remember, and you know your children will live here too. You know everyone on a first name basis, and everyone knows each other's business. It is a true community in the purest possible sense. You have the same job as your father, who had the same job as his father before him. In fact, you work for the same family as your father worked for, and his father before him. Your sons will work for his sons, as he is your liege lord, and you are his serf... Wait... This is Feudalism!
Yes, there once was a world that was blissfully free from the scourge of gentrification. A world where you didn't have to worry about some hipsters moving in and driving the rent up. That world was Feudalism.
Sure, your liege lord might gamble away his wealth and some frilly-collared second son of a Northumbrian duke might take over his lands, but then you’d just work for (and belong to) him. As a feudal serf, you were the property that came with the property. No amount of latte-sipping hipsters could make you leave, because you weren't allowed to leave. Serfs were literally bound to the land by law. In some instances, serfs even needed permission to get married. If you married a serf that belonged to a different lord, there were rules that determined which lord your children would belong to. The geography of your life and community was not up for discussion.
Now contrast this with how Capitalism interacts with the idea of community. Let's look at this very same village, but this time under Capitalism.
As the villagers reach working age, each of the villagers pursues a different career according to their strengths and interests, sorting them into different earning brackets according to the preferences of the market.
Under Capitalism, the villagers are free to move and invest wherever they can afford, and therefore the ones who earn the most are able to purchase the best properties in the most desirable locations. Everyone else purchases properties that correspond with their respective income bracket, creating a geographical sorting effect according to wealth.
So, while Capitalism undoubtedly offers more freedom of movement and choice, the simple act of pursuing your earning potential has the effect of separating you from your friends and family in geographical terms, because they often don't make the same amount of money as you.
Rather than choosing to live near your friends and family, instead the market decides where you can live and therefore decides what your relationships shall be — therefore defining your community.
Fellow parents of young children will sympathise that I am often forced to know the parents of my children’s' friends, because those are the people that are actually around me, who earn roughly the same amount of money as me, who are at a similar life stage to me. They are the community that Capitalism has assigned to me.
Capitalism requires gentrification
Again, my reason for writing this is not to make a judgement that any of this is good. I'm just saying that it is what it is.
Gentrification and all its negative externalities are part and parcel of Capitalism. Without gentrification, Capitalism simply wouldn't be Capitalism. They are so inseparable that they might as well be the same thing.
Gentrification is to Capitalism, what diarrhoea is to Ice Break — an unfortunate byproduct that we must nevertheless expect and endure. It's like being surprised that you’re hungover after a three day bender. It's like a Communist being sad that there isn’t 12 different brands of toilet paper to choose from.
Dearest Comrade, this is the deal! This is what it is! This is Capitalism; warts and all. Love it or leave it (you can't leave it).
Everything causes gentrification
Once you scratch the surface, it's actually quite hard to find a societal factor that doesn't contribute to gentrification.
When people age, they tend to downsize and move somewhere else, selling their homes to new buyers → hey pal, that's gentrification.
When people progress in their careers and make more money, they can afford better housing and move to more desirable locations, selling their home to new buyers → oops! Gentrification again.
When new migrants come to a country, they tend to congregate in areas they can afford → gentrifiers, the lot of 'em.
When the population increases, land values in desirable locations go up → still gentrification.
When people renovate their homes, they become more desirable and therefore more expensive → that's gentrification, brother.
When governments invest in improving public spaces and infrastructure, property values go up → Always was, always will be, gentrification.
As far as I can tell, the only thing that doesn't cause gentrification is eating a (homemade) salad by yourself, on a submarine — and even then, I’m not confident.
Failing to appreciate the inseparability of gentrification from Capitalism causes opponents of gentrification to make strange arguments like "we are protesting against improvements to public space, planting trees, new bike lanes and better public transport because this will improve property values → which will cause people to want to live here → which will price renters out".
Yes, you heard that correctly, in service of the gentrification narrative, improving neighbourhoods is now bad (and maybe even a little bit racist).
It also confuses new housing developments to be the engine of gentrification itself, when really they are the one thing that actually has the potential to accommodate demand driven by the dreaded yuppies, allowing existing renters to stay. In fact, stopping new housing from being delivered is the single most powerful way to accelerate gentrification.
Important to note here is that because cities are always in flux, the choice is never between Change and No Change. Rather, it is between Good Change and Bad Change.
What would it actually take to stop gentrification?
Now let us look to the forces that actually do thwart gentrification — or those factors that create complete and utter pathos and undesirability as a place to live, keeping rents blissfully low. That’s right, we’re talking joblessness, drugs, abuse, homelessness, broken families, disease, death, terrible schools, crime, decay, gang violence, food deserts, sex offenders and poor access to infrastructure — all worthy crosses to bear to stop a vegan cupcake store from opening.
So, to all the anti-gentrification activists out there, rather than protesting the construction of new bike lanes, you might see better results if you became a fentanyl dealer. Vandalise a playground while you're at it! Loot a liquor store! Engage in human trafficking! Burn down a train station! Make your neighbourhood as close to the Mad Max universe as possible, because only when your neighbourhood is a smouldering crater ruled by roaming bands of chainsaw wielding cannibals will the cursed hipsters be kept at bay.
A world without gentrification is a fantasy world where everything stays the same forever — at best, a UNESCO world heritage listed village and at worst, an open-air prison.
If you're not prepared to overthrow the government, it might be time to make your peace with gentrification
So, I guess my whole point is that if you're one of these people that is really mad about gentrification, while you have every right to your unhappiness — I do think you are misdirecting your efforts.
You are raging against an untreatable symptom instead of the disease. So dust yourself off, put that balaclava on and get busy seizing the levers of power to create your gentrification-free utopia. You must not rest until the Czar is firmly tied up in the basement.
Or — if you're like me and violent revolution is a bit much (I like to stay indoors), then it might be time to make your peace with the fact that we live under a system where gentrification has always happened and will always happen. There's no way to stop it, because gentrification is just another word for the inevitability of change under Capitalism.
I'm reminded of the phrase, "You can never go home" — meaning nothing lasts forever, because time changes everything. You can never go home because the place you remember is something different now. So, enjoy your beloved neighbourhood for what it is today, because now is the only time it will be this way — and I think that actually makes the present moment quite special.
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.
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”