The first chapter “Communities Develop” by James DeFilippis and Susan Saegert brought up some very interesting ideas that I had thought about before as well. The first theory mentioned was that communities do not truly exist in urban settings. That is a debatable concept because although cities, like New York, are more individualistic than collectivistic, communities still form within neighborhoods in parts of cities. These communities are groups of people who associated with each other, based on similar ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Jane Jacobs may argue that community development cannot flourish in New York because of the continuous zoning and rezoning that takes place. I think that is why she emphasized how neighborhoods should be preserved and sidewalks should maintained for many years since they used to be the meeting point where small groups of communities could enjoy each other’s company. However, gentrification disrupts the growth of communities by introducing outsiders to an area that they may not feel like they belong in right away. Therefore, it may appear as if communities are nonexistent, but they do exist and they do matter. This chapter also discussed the significance of communities because in a capitalist society, one may believe that communities do not contribute to the economic and social progress within a city. However, there are instances in which communities come together to fight against urban renewal and gentrification through protests, with organizations like Picture the Homeless, and protests we saw in Harlem, in the film “Whose Barrio?” Furthermore, the chapter states that communities “play the vital role of reproducing the labor power that is needed for capitalism to survive” (DeFilippis & Seagert, 2012). This highlight of how communities are essential to a capitalist society would be the strongest argument that anyone could provide against urban renewal and the relocation/ breaking up of many communities because gentrification has been used as a tool for finding more space for private investors to build. Therefore, they would care about the harm that tearing down communities produces if it is a fiscal matter.

The second chapter “Swimming Against the Tide” by Alice O’Connor focused on the history of federal policy changes pertaining to communities in poverty. She pointed out policy contradictions, in which small-scale interventions are supposed to revive poor communities, but large-scale federal policy does not allow those communities to survive. I believe that zoning is one of the large-scale strategies that focus on rebuilding and building larger, which drives up land values, so it essentially pushes poor people out of their homes. Moreover, as the years pass by in this post-industrial city, New York continues to become more commercialized and it seems as if there will be no place for poor communities to reside in after a few more decades. Perhaps, the problem is the way that the American federal government aspires to work with local organizations and activist groups to benefit everyone without directly providing for the poor, as an ideal. However, in reality, that is not always the case. In terms of our project relating to homelessness and the shelter industrial complex, the Picture the Homeless is working hard to bring about change and stop the criminalization of the homeless. The federal government allows certain spaces to be used to build homeless shelters, but if more direct help was provided to this group of people, many of them would be able to get back on their feet and contribute to society.

Chapter three “Community Control and Development” by James DeFilippis discussed the history of federal laws that aimed to fight “The War on Poverty,” which were deemphasized in the later years. Therefore, community development corporations (CDCs) formed in order to advance community development by putting more control in the hands of the community. However, the Model Cities Program was designed to give control over poor communities to city governments. This shows a battle between who should decide what happens over communities: the government or the people who make up those communities. It is a very interesting debate that is relevant to this day, and I can understand why certain communities want to empower their people, such as the “black power” movement. However, when private developers run out of space to build and contribute to the economy, they turn to poor communities to refurbish them with little regard for the people. At the end of this chapter, DeFilippis brought up challenges that communities face in order to fend for themselves. However, I feel that most people are not educated enough on the issues, such as race associating with poverty or the history of federal government policy, to achieve the goals of using race as a strategy to shape policy decisions and promote antipoverty policy in general.

Discussion Questions: How can communities become more educated to come up with resourceful solutions to the issues of gentrification and poverty? What would community development look like in New York if the trends of urban renewal continue to raise land value and the poor are forced out of the city altogether?