To: kattracks
The problem isn't really exclusion of blacks. It is the systematic exclusion of all but the "elite" of the upper middle class. Not coincidentally these are mostly liberals.
3 posted on
08/05/2002 9:51:01 PM PDT by
BenLurkin
To: BenLurkin
You are so right...gentrification dislocates just as many poor whites, if NOT more, than Blacks or Hispanics. It is a purely economic issue.
4 posted on
08/05/2002 9:58:48 PM PDT by
crazykatz
To: BenLurkin
You know, my experience is that land use issues cut right across ideological lines. I doubt that any local elected official (who wants to stay elected) could run on any more pro-development platform than "limited growth" or "controlled growth". The notion that property rights are worth defending has virtually disapeared, at least in California. At best, most otherwise conservative folks support property rights in the next town over, or on their own little parcel of land, but certainly not for their next-door neighbor.
8 posted on
08/05/2002 10:07:45 PM PDT by
absalom01
To: BenLurkin
I think you nailed it. The liberals get to feel good about themselves as they practice their environmental religion, blithely ignoring the elitism of the end result.
The activist left in my hometown would be shocked to find out that their restrictive land use beliefs are shared by my apolitical, longtime resident neighbors, who are at least honest enough to admit they're scared of "trash." Most of the restrictionists in my town are latecomers who want to slam the door shut behind them while cloaking themselves in platitudes about green space and environmental impact.
13 posted on
08/06/2002 1:06:26 AM PDT by
NYpeanut
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson