This week’s reading showed how much inequality exists in our society. Authority always have power and control and people of color are segregated against. “Reel Time/ Real Justice” further proves what we read last week about LA policing and cruelty.This reading brought up an even bigger issue of videotaping that has recently been thought of as a solution to document what the police do. However, even with King’s incident being caught on tape, the judge still ruled in the favor of the police. Even though the video seemed to show otherwise, King was still seen as a threat rather than the victim. The jury ignored clear evidence of brutality to acquit the police. Even though there is supposed to be legal equality, there is actually racial power. This just further shows and was stated in the reading that “blacks in LA live in a different world from whites, they and the police are foreign to each other.” Instead of this point of view, the police need to be part of the community. The issue of inequality is further discussed in “The Prison Fix” where the author shows the reality of what prison really is. He shows that people are in there for non serious such as drugs and don’t get released as promised and instead get abused by correction officers.

Do people feel protected or more fearful of the police/ authority?

I found the Bushwick Daily to be an interesting website that provides insight about the community. For starters they have a section called “letters to Bushwick” where people can express their opinions, thoughts and concerns about important matters related to the community. One post that left an impression was a posted letter by a man who realized that he is part of the gentrification happening in Bushwick and as a result, sought out to speak to those who have lived there for a while. Gill, the neighborhood liquor store owner described how the area used to be filled with drugs and crime. Now, it is young people not from New York trying to survive in an already over populated city. He described it as “drunk post college kids running around where you grew up, forcing your mom and grandmother out of their homes.” Gill stresses that gentrification has made the area beautiful but difficult to afford when making minimum wage. (This point is proven in another post that describes a protest over a new build building that does not provide housing affordable for those already living in the community.)In the end, he posed the question of “What’re you bringing here?”

Can the new comers/ gentrification bring something positive to those already living there?

http://bushwickdaily.com/2015/04/letter-to-bushwick-at-the-intersection-of-the-gentrifier-and-the-gentrified-in-bushwick/

I was appalled by this week’s readings. Never have been to LA and only being exposed to the glamorous side of the city on television, I had no idea that LA functioned in such a harsh way. As described in the reading, the city is divided into stark like life versus broadway chaos. This means that part of the city is rich and flourishing while the other part is dysfunctional. The reading stressed how the military and rich people strive to keep those two worlds separate. I was shocked at how they have attempted to isolate the poor and how cruel the city is to them. What stood out most was when the author described how the city replaced the seats at terminals with barrel like chairs and how the sprinklers were programmed to go off to scare away the homeless sleeping on park benches. Furthermore, restaurants made sure they were unable to go through the trash cans and the government eliminated most public bathrooms. Such isolation and cruelty broke my heart when reading this. In addition, this information is hidden since the area looks appealing on brochures.

How much regulation should be forced upon the homeless?

This week’s reading continued to discuss the topic of quality of life specifically focusing on the Greenwich Village area and touches upon Times Square. In this reading the author automatically expresses a negative point of view on Neoliberalism. Also, police brutality is brought up once again. In comparison to last week’s readings, this article could’ve included some personal accounts regarding the issue of police brutality to make the argument stronger. However, unlike the last reading, this article seems to have a slightly different perspective and actually requested more police presence and quality of life responsiveness. Community board two supported the police and blamed prostitution for resident discomfort and for attracting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth. They believe that Greenwich Village attracts the LGBT population and as a result, they get mixed up in activities such as drugs and prostitution. In reality those activities attract police violence, resident vigilance and anti LGBT threats. In response the LGBT community has formed groups such as Fierce to promote change and fight against discrimination. Unfortunately, they still face hard times when youth of color get ignored at meetings and aren’t taken seriously. This effects community planning and promotes discrimination.

How do we insure that community planning is fair when not everyone’s voice is being heard?

I found this week’s readings particularly interesting since I have briefly learned about zero tolerance and broken windows concepts in my social psychology class. While these policies administer order they can be too strict and take away freedom. As a result, police officers become seen as a threat instead of as a source protection. While reading I found some of the stories unbelievable and shocking. It seems as though the more power one has, the more likely they are to abuse it. Furthermore, this reading reminded me of a personal instance of when I received a ticket for crossing from one subway cart to another. It was on the 5 train in Flatbush and I was simply in a rush. The officers ran my ID and saw that I had no felonies or any other offences but still chose to give me the ticket instead of a warning. Therefore, people committing “small crimes” are not necessarily criminals even though there are those rare cases. I agree that when the city looks better you feel better about it as well, but people shouldn’t always be punished for minuet crimes.

Question: At what point does the control become too much?

I agree with Nicole, this week’s readings are perfectly timed. Beginning with Party of Wall Street Meets it’s Nemesis, the author holds a negative point of view and claimed that only the wealthy have power and control of politics. That was further proved in the other readings, especially in Patricia Cohen’s New York Times article when she stated that 80 wealthy people own more than 3.5 regular people do. This showed the severity of the issue. The New York Times article by Callahan, on the other hand, did not seem as important. I failed to see why investing into a park would have such a negative impact. After all, it is their money and they may invest it as they please. However, the last reading by Cindi Katz showed that there are far more important issues out there that are being ignored. Also, something as small as investing in a park can give the wealthy more control than imagined. This leads me to wonder is the only way to have a voice is to have a “collective power of bodies in a public space” which Party of Wall Street Meets it’s Nemesis suggests is the most effective instrument of opposition.

Is there really anything we can do to control how and where the wealthy invest their money?

This weeks readings seemed a bit contradictory. The author mentioned many types of community planning but then proceeded to argue why they haven’t worked out. Initially, I believed this reading would provide a solution to the displacement and gentrification problem but it didn’t. Additionally, at certain times I felt as if the author hadn’t explained each approach, such as grass root planning and rational comprehensive planning, properly. However, this was a well written introduction to the book. The author thoroughly provided a background history of each planning approach. Furthermore, this was a useful insight. I learned that displacement and gentrification is a major issue not only in New York City but all around the world. I was surprised that the housing act in the United States doesn’t specify about housing and security of tenure in comparison to housing laws in other countries. This explained why these issues have risen, Also, learning all of the various approaches will be useful in our community planning solution proposal. The author was successful in comparing and contrasting the various approaches. I think the book will achieve the author’s goal of providing a better understanding of how community land can prevent those issues while concentrating on noxious land use.

The author mentioned many approaches to community planning, which one is most efficient?

The article about environmental racism and environmental justice proved the point from last week’s reading that the lower class were neglected before and after the storm. This point was further analyzed in the movie we watched in class, where we were able to see documentaries on those specific people who were greatly effected by this tragedy. This week’s article showed that not only were they neglected during the storm but before that as well, since they were living near toxic pollution, which creates hazardous conditions. What stuck out to me in this reading was that the author compared this natural disaster to the heat wave in Chicago. I was personally unaware of this event and by comparing the two, the author proved that the government is partially responsible for these causes and it’s more than “just a natural disaster” which is how politicians explain the situations. Furthermore, I was surprised that after so many instances the government still fails to efficiently help everyone after hurricane Sandy.

There seem to be more than one issue involved when discussing these situations so what is the real problem.. housing? poverty? rescue and relief system? capitalist society? The entire system just seems corrupt when evaluating the causes and effects of natural disasters.