All posts by briannanaizir

Project Update: May 12th-22nd

Updates - Envr Justice

The final project update will surround the events concluding the project on environmental justice, including the presentation at the Macaulay event, as well as the creation of our popular education product. An important aspect of the project that we worked on was the PowerPoint presentation for the Macaulay student conference. The most helpful resource when creating this presentation was actually our white paper, as it provided a clear outline on how we should present our project. As a result, the creation of the presentation was quite seamless.

Our experience at the Macaulay Seminar 4 student conference was a wonderful one. We were placed in the “urban environmentalism” category, also grouped in a panel with projects in the “future of labor” category. Presenting in front of peers was an interesting way to gain insight into both current events and issues that are important to New York City, but also into different aspects of presenting that made each group either successful or unsuccessful at getting their points across. One thing that I noticed was that each campus had its own personal take on Seminar 4. Although we were all concerned with different aspects of life in the city that are shaping the future of New York, different groups were concerned with different issues, which were typically linked with the concentrations of their respective campuses. For instance, many groups from Baruch were focused on topics like spreading awareness of the importance of having bank accounts. I found this aspect of the event quite interesting and I felt that each of us learned a lot from other groups.

Overall, I believe that our group’s presentation was clear, concise, and successful at presenting our main points. Perhaps the major advantage that our group had was the access to community contacts. While the other groups presented their projects well, they relied entirely on secondary data sources. Including information obtained from direct contact with organizations involved in our topic added not only something engaging to the audience, but also an element of credibility (in my opinion). In addition, our group was successful at pacing ourselves and presenting within the given time constraint. A major issue with many of the groups was that they were unable to conclude their presentations within the 10 minute slots that each group was designated. Their presentations were very thorough and detailed, perhaps to the point where there was an overload of information. Once again, utilizing our white paper helped us avoid this issue. By only including the major points of each part of our white paper onto the presentation, we were able to finish at 8 minutes.

Although our presentation did proceed smoothly, I feel as if there were some things that could be improved upon. We faced some minor technical difficulties because a few of the photos on our slides were overlapping with the text, which was probably the result of a glitch when the file was downloaded from Google Docs. In addition, perhaps we could have gone into greater detail since we did have almost two minutes remaining. However, finishing early was the safer option. This experience was definitely a great learning experience above all else and we all gained valuable presentation skills that will be put to use in the future.

In addition to the presentation, we also completed our popular education product. As a group, we decided that a video would be a great way to spread awareness of this issue because videos spread quite rapidly on the Internet and if we could present the issue in an engaging way, we may be able to actually achieve our goal. We decided that the target audience of the video would be the general public of New York City. Therefore, we had to frame the video in a way in which people would feel interested partially due to the fact that they would be affected in some way. Our plan was to combine various video clips of the South Bronx that we filmed on one of our visits, along with other forms of media like photos and voiceover audio.

One of the greatest difficulties faced was editing the video. Although our first draft of the video was decent, changes needed to be made in order to make it more engaging. This was when we realized that making a video would not be so simply as to simply compile video clips and audio. A great challenge was to not only get the audience engaged, but to also keep them engaged throughout the course of the five minute video. Using the helpful feedback from classmates and the professor, we made some changes to the video in order to make it more entertaining. Animated graphs were added to display statistics. Although creating these graphs was initially a challenge, they definitely add something interesting to the video. In addition, on-screen text was added to highlight important concepts, which were being discussed. Overall, we learned that there are so many things one must consider when trying to create a popular education piece to raise awareness of the issue. It is not simply bombarding an audience with statistics and research findings, but ensuring that they are engaged for the duration of the video.

Although the course and our project have come to an end, I believe that our work is not yet done. As a group, we are currently still striving to raise awareness of this issue because it has not yet been resolved. By contacting South Bronx Unite and Friends of Brook Park and sharing our white paper and our popular education product, we are still hoping that we will be able to make a difference in this community in some way. Working on this project has taught us about the importance of taking the time out to get involved in issues within our community because we are all affected by issues like environmental racism. Hopefully, the use of our popular education product will inform more people of this issue and have some kind of impact on the future of environmental justice in New York City.

Is There a Future for Public Intellectuals?

Research-in-Action

The underlying point being stressed in Robin’s article is the importance of an intellectual’s ability to not only present her ideas to a public, but to most crucially, create an enduring public that is currently nonexistent. I found this article quite confusing because of the somewhat philosophical and almost cryptic writing style and explanations. For instance, it is stated that “She never speaks to the reader as he is; she speaks to the reader as he might be. Her common reader in an uncommon reader.” A public intellectual must present novel ideas, which summon a unique public that is interested in getting involved with the intellectual’s core values.

A way in which a public intellectual is able to mobilize a public is by presenting an idea which unifies a group of individuals who were previously not associated with one another. The example provided in the text is that something as simple as shouting, “workers unite!” will subsequently result in the creation of a new public of those interested in this issue. I found this point quite interesting, due to the fact that it asserts that the concept of a “public” is quite malleable and fluid in the fact that “publics” can be created around virtually any idea. Previously, I had believed that the term “public” was a vague term used to simply describe a general group of people or audience. However, this article stresses the fact that there are different “publics” and that it is the intellectual’s job to create new ones through the presentation and deliverance of their ideas.

As an example, one concept introduced in this article is the concept of “liberitarian paternalism”, proposed by a public intellectual, which argues that the state should guide citizens to make better decisions, rather than have them simply argue their own beliefs. The government would essentially push citizens to choose options that would be most beneficial to society. Although this concept seems great on the surface, I feel as if this would be quite a problematic system in practice. For instance, the government’s responsibility to dictate what is “good” would prove to be an issue, due to the fact that the term is subjective. Although I do not entirely agree with the intellectual’s ideologies, I suppose he was definitely successful in creating a public, due to his beliefs’ ability to stratify and therefore, establish “publics” based on peoples’ opinions of his ideas.

As for the future of public intellectuals, the article states that they currently fail at creating a public since they simply rely on speaking to audiences that already exist. However, Robin stresses the importance of public intellectuals in society. If there are no public intellectuals, new publics will not be created, which will hinder the intellectual growth of society.

Question: Will public intellectuals of the future be able to mobilize new publics or has this trend died off forever?

The Importance of Community

Clarifying Key Concepts

Perhaps the most important concept I learned from the two texts was the distinction between what constitutes a neighborhood versus a community. Having read “Communities Develop: The Question is How?” first, I was actually surprised by the emphasis that the author placed on the importance of communities in building not only relationships between people, but in also developing aspects of individual personalities. Growing up in a semi-suburban, semi-urban neighborhood in Queens, I had never really experienced the concept of a tight-knit community and was somewhat skeptical of this viewpoint. However, upon reading DiRienzo’s piece, I realized that there is in fact a great difference in the definitions of communities and neighborhoods. While neighborhoods basically describe the infrastructure and organization of housing plans, communities focus more on the social interactions that occur within these neighborhoods. Having realized that I was not so familiar with the concept of a community as I was with the concept of a neighborhood, I pondered upon the recent experiences I have has with communities-although not my own-while working on the project for this seminar.

Many concepts highlighted by the authors of these two pieces were incredibly relevant to my group’s project on the future of environmental justice. For instance, DeRienzo places emphasis upon the importance of public space within communities. DeRienzo compares the seizure of public space by a private company to land being overtaken by a totalitarian regime. He argues that the maintenance of public space is a sign of a community’s self-sufficiency. In our project, we are researching a community in the South Bronx that has become taken over by private industry and is striving to gain back public land. Although the concern of pollution is an important one, the community is also driven by the desire to improve their quality of life. Being overtaken by private companies has taken a mental toll on the residents of Mott Haven because they feel as if they have no influence in the future of their own community. I believe that the residents of this particular area of the South Bronx truly exemplify the meaning of community because they have all come together with similar interests in mind, in hopes of regaining their land for the best interest of all South Bronx residents.

 

Social Injustice in the New York City Real Estate Market

The Capital of Capital

Perhaps one of the most shocking aspects of the history of New York City urban planning is the institutionalized segregation that has been the driving force of community development. New York City is known as one of the most ethnically diverse cities in the world, often being described as a melting pot of residents of numerous nationalities and socioeconomic classes. However, Angotti stresses the fact that real estate in New York City is something of a “racial apartheid” that perpetuates economic and racial inequality (Angotti, 50).

Historically, New York City real estate has been guided by a questionable moral compass. Ethical issues pertaining to real estate have not simply been by chance, but have been the result of deeply engrained values that promote monetary gain while disregarding the concerns of those affected. Angotti discusses the history of displacement in New York, comparing it to displacement of the Native Americans during the conquest of the New World. In both of these cases, the conquerors (in this case, those in high positions in the real estate market) have promised benefits, but have only caused the hardship of dislocation. Through the process of gentrification, many have lost their homes because of the market’s desire to change the value of the land for monetary gain.

Gentrification is not the only way in which the real estate market has perpetuated social inequality. Contrary to popular belief, Angotti states that “This is one of the most segregated and unequal metropolises in the world, the fact related to its role as a global city.” (Angotti, 48). The common trend of segregation of ethnic groups by neighborhood is not only attributed to residents’ personal preference, but also to real estate practices such as “blockbusting” and “racial steering”. I am personally shocked that these practices are widely used, especially in a city like New York that is known as progressive and culturally diverse. However, the fact that real estate developers are driven by monetary gain rather than social justice is- although appalling- not very surprising when thinking about the importance of financial success in a city like New York.

 

 

Filling the Gap?

The Roots of Community Planning

The overarching theme that is present throughout what seems to be the history of urban planning is the incredible impact that gentrification and one-sided decision making have had on community development. Throughout the chapter, the author makes his stance on the topic of urban planning quite clear: power is disproportionately distributed among the wealthy. Over the course of this city’s history, neighborhoods have been developed and redeveloped to suit the needs of the times. As various social movements gained steam, communities had to reconstruct themselves in order to keep up. Along with this came the inevitable: master builders like Robert Moses lost influence and became irrelevant. So what happens next?

The main issue with the history of urban planning seems to be the fact that those with the greatest authority tend to disregard the needs of those who are actually residing in these communities. Numerous social movements and riots plans had erupted in opposition to community development plans. Although these events- in addition to other national social movements- did have some influence on development, conditions for community residents continued to be far from ideal. At some points in time, it seemed as if issues in lower-income communities were going to be eradicated, only to be met with backlash from whites. For instance, although African Americans saw some (little) improvement in their communities as a result of social change, it still proved to be an incredible challenge to have their voices heard in areas dominated by white elites (such as the school system, as well as everything else).

Community planning in New York City can be viewed as somewhat of a rollercoaster. For instance, consider the War on Poverty. As initiatives which intended to gain firsthand participation from residents of low-income communities in the planning of their own neighborhoods began to take off, the election of conservative presidents brought these plans to an end.

What does this mean for the future of community development in New York City? In my opinion, the trend that this city has been following for the entirety of its history-in which urban planning favors the elite-will be perpetuated. Although many more groups-including minorities- have gained influence, the same “social elite” are still such a powerful and prevailing group that it will be so difficult to undermine their power in favor of the “average man’s” needs. As time goes on, the gap between the influence of the rich and the poor shrinks in size, but I do not believe it will ever truly be filled.

The Paradoxical City

Situating New York City

New York City is a hustling, bustling paradox. As explained in the first section of this chapter, North American cities were built upon and are constantly influenced by economic forces. While this had led to the creation of thriving American cities, as we know them today, it has also created a huge divide between socioeconomic classes. To further delve into this issue, let us examine the residential makeup of the city over time, as described by the chapter. Major sections of the city were first home to the working class; members of society who took on blue collar jobs that created and maintained the infrastructure of the city. However, as jobs in the city transitioned from being almost entirely blue collar, to having a greater percentage of white collar jobs, more affluent workers started coming into the city and residing there. Of course this also led to the creation of suburbs as technology advanced, as well. As living conditions of the city improved, many neighborhoods gained better reputations. We can still see this occurring today with gentrification. To what extent is the rebuilding of these neighborhoods beneficial? To what extent is it leading to a greater increase in the polarization of New York’s socioeconomic groups? New York seems to be becoming only more of a paradox over time.

It seems to be the case that in today’s housing market, many of those who work in the city can hardly even afford to reside in the here. I find this shift both incredibly interesting and troubling. New York City, which was once a place of residence for the working class people who built this city, is now a place in which the working class can no longer afford to live. The city’s ever-changing character is attributed to its ever-changing residents. However, one thing that won’t change is the city’s incessant need for the labor of the working class. As stated in the chapter, “The city is home to the richest and poorest of North Americans. Some of the worst social problems stand, literally, in the shadow of the proudest cultural achievements” (p. 92). Gentrification plays a huge role in this issue. At what point does improving the city’s neighborhoods lead to destruction of its character? With a city built on economic forces, it is incredibly difficult to accommodate both the richest of the rich, as well as the poorest of the poor. Due to the fact that both socioeconomic classes play huge roles in the city, it seems that New York will maintain its paradoxical nature for years to come.