First off, why in the world did women set the food on fire and destroy it all instead of keep it?

Food Riots Brownsville: We know that rioting has happened many times in this city, but I wonder what is the significance of such violence (e.g. beating up innocent women that bought the chicken or “shooting the messenger” who I believe in this case is the pushcart owners)? Is violence in fact more effective in getting the attention of and sending a message to our political leaders? Or do examples like Martin Luther King Jr. and the power of his speeches prove that peaceful resistance can be just as successful?

Pushcart Peddling: Can you guys imagine New York without pushcarts and street merchants? I really love the idea that pushcarts were a key aspect of bringing ethnicity to the Lower East Side because I think its true. If we just look at QC we have quite a few carts around campus that bring different foods to our little community, so what if we did not have them? Do you guys think pushcarts encourage an openness to exotic and different cultural foods that we may not otherwise have?

The readings raised serious concern on the effect of policy making. Dissatisfied with the peddlers for creating unsanitary conditions, and blocking space on the street, the merchants believed they would benefit if they could eradicate the pushcarts. With the help of the campaign by LaGuardia they were able to achieve their goal. However much to their discontent, they found that it didn’t reduce competition but only managed to shun away their customers. I wonder, (in this case, and in general) whether it could be better to follow a laissez faire market system? All these market regulation, end up benefitting the select few, and even reduce some to unemployment.
The idea of free market system comes under scrutiny when the war tempted the merchants to raise the prices, which eventually resulted in riots. To me, it seemed like there was a monopoly of the food, and the imbalance of exportation to importation. What can the government do to prevent monopolization of the market? And if there is no one group in complete control of the market, wouldn’t that force the marketer to consider the interest of the consumers since they would be competing with other sellers?

The food riots resulted in bloody injuries and deaths. Yet the people rioting were starving and felt this was the only way for them to get food for their families. Today, there is far less absolute poverty because of various factors (example: we have food stamps, so even when food is expensive, low income people have some way of getting food, and are not starving). But maybe there are some other scenarios in our society that might not be as pressing as having food to eat that night, but which could grow into some sort of rioting. An example in another part of the world would be the recent events in the Ukraine/Crimea/Russia. What do you think are factors that might cause riots to create social or political change in our American society? Or are there none? How do you think society as a whole would react? What about the government?

At the end of the reading, “War Prosperity and Hunger: The New York Food Riots of 1917″. Congressman Meyer London, stated, “it takes a formal declaration of war, it takes war, famine and pestilence before the Democrats and Republicans get any sense in their heads.” Why is it that it took extreme measures for politicians to take the issues of poverty and hunger seriously enough to take actions against those issues? Were there any ways the people could have gotten the attention of the politicians without riots and violence? Would the politicians have listened?

The readings describe how both Mayors LaGuardia and Giuliani crusaded against the pushcart markets in the Lower East Side in the 1930s, and the farmer’s markets on 125th Street in the 1990s, respectively. Was this an attempt to further Americanize them (under the pretense of promoting cleanliness and orderliness in the city) by taking away from the ethnic cultures of both peoples living in these neighborhoods?

One of the readings for this week discusses markets and its impacts on society. Particularly, it points out gender roles and how women have come to be associated with merchants, a position that used to be stereotypically of men. Relating the other reading that discussed the food crisis for the lower class during WWI, the question of how women affect the market scene arises. Sure, one can simply state that riots and boycotts of lower class women have disrupted the food economy of the lower class during WWI and that women have become merchants because of their financial circumstances. But surely there is a much deeper, complex assertion for the presence of women as both consumers and sellers at markets. Women are also the prominent ones who cook the food that they buy, so ultimately it is women who have significant influence on the financial flow in the markets. How does that reflect on the female merchants and how marketplaces are run (e.g. items that are sold, displays and advertisements, etc.)?

Also, “food deserts” is tied as much to the economy as it is to the environment. How can NYC treat this serious condition through markets? Would it be possible to subsidize and encourage the buddings of farmers’ markets throughout the city so that people will have more access to and buy more from local markets? How would major corporations that deal with food distributions and selling respond?

While it was not a completely fresh idea, it was interesting to read a suggestion to have a pattern book for the organizing of markets, similar to how architects and designers have pattern books. Fusing the idea of pattern books and markets as artistic venue, how can live performances become incorporated into the “market pattern book” so that they benefit the performers, the merchants, the administrators, and the consumers?