Urban affairs writer Aaron Renn asks a squirm-inducing question for self-identified progressive urbanists like me: how come the so-called most progressive cities—the cities that have the best anti-sprawl, density and transportation policies—are also so “white” ethnically? And can an American city really call itself progressive if it lacks diversity?
Renn, who runs a blog called The Urbanophile, has a nuanced answer to this question, but the short version is that because African-Americans and Latino immigrants are disproportionately poor they often have different local planning priorities than upscale whites.
Citing what’s happening in Cincinnati where a coalition of African-Americans and anti-tax Republicans has formed to oppose a proposed streetcar system, Renn cautions that progressive urbanists who take for granted the support of African-Americans and Latinos are in for some rude surprises.
Selections from Renn’s article:
“In fact, not one of these “progressive” cities [Portland, Seattle, Austin, Minneapolis, Denver] even reaches the national average for African American percentage population in its core county. Perhaps not progressiveness but whiteness is the defining characteristic of the group…
This [the fact that African-Americans and Latino immigrants are disproportionately poor and often have different site priorities and sensibilities than upscale whites] may explain why most of the smaller cities of the Midwest and South have not proven amenable to replicating the policies of Portland. Most Midwest advocates of, for example, rail transit, have tried to simply transplant the Portland solution to their city without thinking about the local context in terms of system goals and design, and how to sell it. Civic leaders in city after city duly make their pilgrimage to Denver or Portland to check out shiny new transit systems, but the resulting videos of smiling yuppies and happy hipsters are not likely to impress anyone over at the local NAACP or in the barrios.
We are seeing this script played out in Cincinnati presently, where an odd coalition of African Americans and anti-tax Republicans has formed to try to stop a streetcar system. Streetcar advocates imported Portland's solution and arguments to Cincinnati without thinking hard enough to make the case for how it would benefit the whole community.
That's not to let these other cities off the hook. Most of them have let their urban cores decay. Almost without exception, they have done nothing to engage with their African American populations. If people really believe what they say about diversity being a source of strength, why not act like it? I believe that cities that start taking their African American and other minority communities seriously, seeing them as a pillar of civic growth, will reap big dividends and distinguish themselves in the marketplace.”
Read the full article.
Renn, who runs a blog called The Urbanophile, has a nuanced answer to this question, but the short version is that because African-Americans and Latino immigrants are disproportionately poor they often have different local planning priorities than upscale whites.
Citing what’s happening in Cincinnati where a coalition of African-Americans and anti-tax Republicans has formed to oppose a proposed streetcar system, Renn cautions that progressive urbanists who take for granted the support of African-Americans and Latinos are in for some rude surprises.
Selections from Renn’s article:
“In fact, not one of these “progressive” cities [Portland, Seattle, Austin, Minneapolis, Denver] even reaches the national average for African American percentage population in its core county. Perhaps not progressiveness but whiteness is the defining characteristic of the group…
This [the fact that African-Americans and Latino immigrants are disproportionately poor and often have different site priorities and sensibilities than upscale whites] may explain why most of the smaller cities of the Midwest and South have not proven amenable to replicating the policies of Portland. Most Midwest advocates of, for example, rail transit, have tried to simply transplant the Portland solution to their city without thinking about the local context in terms of system goals and design, and how to sell it. Civic leaders in city after city duly make their pilgrimage to Denver or Portland to check out shiny new transit systems, but the resulting videos of smiling yuppies and happy hipsters are not likely to impress anyone over at the local NAACP or in the barrios.
We are seeing this script played out in Cincinnati presently, where an odd coalition of African Americans and anti-tax Republicans has formed to try to stop a streetcar system. Streetcar advocates imported Portland's solution and arguments to Cincinnati without thinking hard enough to make the case for how it would benefit the whole community.
That's not to let these other cities off the hook. Most of them have let their urban cores decay. Almost without exception, they have done nothing to engage with their African American populations. If people really believe what they say about diversity being a source of strength, why not act like it? I believe that cities that start taking their African American and other minority communities seriously, seeing them as a pillar of civic growth, will reap big dividends and distinguish themselves in the marketplace.”
Read the full article.
Comments