Response to Week 13 Readings – Izabela Suster

There were so many elements of the “Reel Time/Real Justice” article that I appreciated and admired, including the clever title. The first element was the author’s assertion that even if the two explanations given for the unjust verdict were to be “fixed” (change of venue and the failure of the prosecution to humanize Rodney King), it is wrong to assume that Rodney King would have been granted a fair trial. He further supports his assertion by pointing out that because narratives are artificially built in the courtroom, the King verdict was not extraordinary but typical. In the second half of the piece, the author presents his argument for why “reasonable force” and “equal force” need to be socially constructed, through narratives of time and space. The last element I want to mention is the rhetoric of “rule of law” vs. “no justice, no peace” and the translation of the two into reasonable and emotion, respectively. Even today, the media coverage surrounding public riots presents the participants as emotional and the riot itself to be an overreaction. In doing so, the media devalues the injustice being protested and weakens the movement. In conclusion, the philosophically dense arguments presented in the article were well thought out and remain relevant.

Alt. Assignment to Bushwick Walking Tour

A little under two years ago, the Nation published an article entitled “Make the Road New York: Success Through ‘Love and Agitation” about Make the Road New York, an organization with “the largest nonunion immigrant membership organization in New York City.” Our course readings introduce us to a number of NYC organizations, each with very specific mission statements. By contrast, Make the Road New York’s mission encompasses a wide range of social issues (“stop-and-frisk racial profiling, affordable housing, environmental and civil rights, and workplace justice”), which surprisingly has not caused a drop in their success rate. The article elaborates on the organization’s strategy of identifying worker theft, mobilizing the community, informing the affected workers, establishing unions and proposing employee-friendly legislation. The article portrays the organization as the epitome of a people’s organization, with an egalitarian structure and very high participation. Due to its egalitarian structure, I was shocked to learn about the high status political connections the organization has made, since those connections are usually made between two people of power and not one politician and an entire community. In conclusion, the article glorified the successes of Make the Road New York so much so that the reader may think a people’s revolution is on the horizon.

Response to Week 13 Readings – Izabela Suster

“Fortress Los Angeles: The Militarization of Urban Space”  by Mike Davis struck me as being unlike any of the previous course readings. Whereas our other readings addressed social crises, particularly those affecting NYC, Davis’s work addresses a crisis of physical space in LA. Initially, I found the central idea of the piece to be quite abstract but images like that of “fortified garbage” are very powerful and ground Davis’s argument in reality. Adding maps and images of the referenced buildings could have further strengthened Davis’s argument.

Of all the examples provided in the article about security and militarization of public space, I found the use of LAPD helicopters under the Astro program to be the most extreme. Not only is it environmentally detrimental for helicopters to spend circa nineteen hours in the air, this extreme type of surveillance is also wildly inappropriate and unnecessary. Lastly, as I had mentioned in previous blog posts, the phenomena of the militarization of the police force in America has been well documented and studied…and yet, the problem remains largely unaddressed.

Response to Week 10 Readings – Izabela Suster

“Turnstile Jumpers and Broken Windows” by Tanya Erzen is quite a lengthy article, which led me to write this personal opinion heavy response. First and foremost, I found the term the term “visual disorder” to be an insensitive one because it’s used in a discussion the indecency of individuals, not of pornographic images. Secondly, I found hard to believe that everyday commuters were the ones to “demand a safer subway environment”, according to Kelling and Coles. I appreciated that the author points out questions not addressed in quality-of-life literature. The Quality of Life also appears to be riddled with ignorant arguments such as that made by Kelling who “emphasizes that  homelessness is not a result of structural issues like poverty or unemployment, but exists as a choice for many people”. Lastly, I am outraged not only by how the AVP is practiced but by the vague and complex legal wording as well. This point is illustrated well in the provision that states: “In the event of a member of the service, because of lack of experience, is unable to determine if the reason of the excessive noise emanating from a motorcycle is because of “straight pipes”, an Environmental Control Board Notice of Violation may still be issued”.

Response to Week 9 Readings – Izabela Suster

“The Billionaires’ Park” by David Callahan read, very obviously, like an op-ed piece since the author’s argument, in my opinion, was a poor one. On the topic of parks philanthropy, I personally felt that the author diminished his argument when he juxtaposed Diller Island and Central Park with other parks falling into disrepair around the city. The disrepair of other parks is due to a lacking Parks department budget. It is only logical that wealthy donors choose the parks they wish to fund rather than financing the whole Parks department, a government agency (which would further blur the lines between the public and private sector).

“#OWS: The Party of Wall Street Meets its Nemesis” by Henry David begins with a damnation of the “Party of Wall St” delivered in with a religious tone. This religious tone develops into a strong military and war-like one as the author persuades the 99% to join Occupy Wall St in “another American revolution”. Personally, the language and tone of the article was too aggressive to instill my confidence in #OWS. Lastly, I think the article could have been more persuasive if it were combined with Cohen’s New York Times article that used statistics to put global economic inequality in perspective.

Response to Week 8 Readings – Izabela Suster

Roughly a year ago, the Honors English 1012 class watched a film about Robert Moses’s legacy as an NYC urban planner. The film portrayed Frances Goldin as the leader of the protest against construction of the Lower Manhattan Expressway and the success of this campaign made her a working class hero. Watching the film then and reading about Goldin now, it’s hard to believe that a grass roots movement could have effectively challenged the city government.

Perhaps due to my familiarity with the subject matter, this week’s reading did not appeal to me. I have several criticisms, the first of which is that the first ten pages seem as if they were written to meet a word count rather than provide any useful information. The substantive chunk of the work only begins on page 10. Even still, the author refers to later chapters so frequently, throughout the first chapter, that I’m more interested in reading chapters 2, 3, 4… However, I personally, I found the subsection on rational comprehensive planning to be the most informative. The subsection begins with an explanation of the thought behind this kind of planning, then the author describes the process itself. The author goes on to discuss its application during the Keynesian era followed by the neoliberal era.

Response to Week 7 Readings – Izabela Suster

The author of “Toxic Soup Redux: Why Environmental Racism and Environmental Justice Matter after Katrina” not only introduces “environmental racism” to the reader but also does such a good job at presenting evidence of the practice that one does not even question the legitimacy of this phenomena. As a chemistry major hoping to enter the research field, the idea of areas like “Cancer Alley” arising because of chemical industries, is unsettling.

Personally, I found “Law Enforcement Violence & Disaster” to be structured and read like a fact sheet, which took away from the seriousness of the subject matter. The subject matter was one in which I have a particular interest since reading “The New Jim Crow” by Michelle Alexander and attending several talks on mass incarceration. The construction of a makeshift jail immediately after Katrina is evidence of the high priority government places on incarceration, especially in predominantly African American communities.

Response to Week 6 Readings – Izabela Suster

Initially I expected PlanNYC’s “official statement” to be long multiple page PDF. Instead, I was disappointed by the brevity of the statement and it’s lack of substantive scientific data. The 2020 and 2050 projections listed, fail to place the problem of climate change in the present. The year 2050 is the year people reference when predicting that flying cars will be the norm. Lastly, despite being an official statement of an NYC organization, there is no mention of any agenda/policy the city has adopted with regards to climate change.

I absolutely LOVED Stephen Graham’s “Cities Under Siege: Katrina and the Politics of Metropolitan America”, primarily because I agree with the political tone of the piece. Secondly, Graham does an excellent job of laying out the political errors of the Bush administration prior to and in the aftermath of Katrina.

“Taking a Call for Climate Change to the Streets” by Lisa Foderaro lacks any real substance. The writer emphasizes the the size of the march via analogies and estimates made by a mathematician but she fails to present any scientific data or the demands of the marchers’.

Community Board Meeting Report – Izabela Suster

On Thursday, February 12th, I attended a meeting of Community Board No. 8 at the Weeksville Heritage Center in Crown Heights. The venue appeared to be out of place in relation to the larger Crown Heights neighborhood and a visual misrepresentation of the area. The meeting began as scheduled with a call to order, roll call, acceptance of minutes and correspondence. It was when the “action items” were introduced that audience members began to vocalize their opinions. During the first hour of the meeting, for which I was present, the primary topic was the construction of a hospital facility. This proposal was introduced by two white males, who appeared to be corporate puppets and wildly out of place. According to the two men, construction of the facility would be complete in eighteen months. Upon completion, the men boasted that the facility would create 150 jobs in addition to current staff. In response, audience members began to question the permanence of such jobs and who would hold these jobs. Older, African American residents posed the majority of questions. The audience members posed questions quicker than the two men could answer. In response, one audience member was told to “Wait to be recognized by the chair.” This strikes me as a futile effort to bring order to the responses of residents who obviously feel passionate about this issue. In an ideal world, dispassionate residents would voice their concerns in a uniform, “one at a time” manner. This exchange of important questions and empty answers continued and hostility from residents continued to escalate. At one point, a community board official passively remarked, “Community board members did not read the packet.” The topic was left unresolved with a community board official stating that further questions and opinions could be communicated via email. The meeting was what one who watches Parks and Recreation could expect. However, the ideal government employee Leslie Knope would not leave any questions unanswered. Upon my departure, the community board had only addressed half of the items on the agenda. This begs the question of what time the meeting ended and were there any topics as time-consuming as first? Did the audience members receive any direct answers about later questions they may have raised?

Lacking any background information about this facility and the political make-up of Crown Heights, I am unable to really understand the significance of this facility. Some questions that could have helped me better understand are: When had the audience members first heard of the facility? Was it at an earlier community board meeting? Did those audience members who spoke out, belong to a larger neighborhood association? If so, is there any one specific association spear heading this opposition? Will there be any future protests at the construction site or community board meetings?

Response To Week 5 Readings – Izabela Suster

As a member of the Crown Heights group, the “Brooklyn Tenants Battle Gentrification on Many Fronts” article by Ian Marsh was a worthwhile read. The article briefly introduced the reader to those associations and organizations working against gentrification in Crown Heights like Make the Road and the Urban Homesteading Assistance Board. Beyond these introductions, I found the article to be oddly specific and its short length makes it difficult for the uninformed reader to really understand the depth of the problem. To better understand the article, I would recommend the author include a brief bio of each politician mentioned, especially his/her stance and work on gentrification.

While reading the article, I noticed the techniques, used by landlords to harass Crown Heights tenants, are similar to those used in Barnsbury, London, a primary focus of “The Birth of Gentrification” article.

Question: Has “Make the Road” published any research on housing discrimination since the publication of the article?