I found this week’s readings, Sanjek’s chapters 12 and 13 and Gregory’s chapter 7, quite dizzying from all the different civic activists and civic neighborhood or ethnic associations. However, I learned that all these civic associations do more than just pass out flyers or have fundraisers every so often, but actively and passionately fight for the rights of the neighborhood or ethnic group. What surprised me the most was how much power these people could wield if they were able to use and benefit from the powers of networking and communication. It really proves true that there is strength in numbers and with political figures and their pro-business lobbyists banking on keeping the lower classes separated, it is important for the people to unite and fight for their rights as one force. This way, at least, we have a chance to win this class war.
The importance of communication within neighborhoods and ethnic enclaves was underscored immediately when I read about the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey’s (PANYNJ) plans to build a train system that connected LaGuardia and JFK to Manhattan’s business district and their blatant tactic of trying to “divide and conquer” the opposing, affected neighborhoods of Queens. Of course, it came as no surprise that the Port Authority completely disregarded the concerns of the community and how their Automated Guideway Transit system (AGT) would lower the “quality of life” of Corona and East Elmhurst specifically. Their excuse for the AGT was purely economic: to maintain New York City’s global competitiveness. We’ve heard it all before, but the Port Authority knew that it could exert its power without threatening opposition if it kept the community civic associations and community boards separate and confused by only releasing bits of information to each. However, once the civic associations held a public meeting, later to be referred to as the “La Detente” meeting, residents were becoming educated and formulated complex concerns about the environmental impact, noise pollution, water quality, and most importantly the quality of life for all the affected neighborhoods instead of adopting the “not in my backyard” mindset. This meeting, with more to follow, was the pivotal point of empowering the neighborhoods and articulating a legitimate position to combat the Port Authority. In the end, the civic boards were able to move the PANYNJ into a compromise, but they continued to fight. Barbara Coleman explains that the compromise should not be regarded as a victory or a loss, but as a step in the right direction. “You have to learn to look at a situation and recognize that you’ve pushed about as far as you can, and that this is all you’re gonna get. Then you come back and fight the next day ” (Gregory, 216).
Sanjek’s chapters also displayed the importance of the unification of residents, not only across neighborhood lines, but across ethnic lines as well. He starts with the problem of the disconnect felt by city residents between their community needs and the mayoral power. “We don’t have no political push” (Sanjek, 256). The people of Corona and Elmhurst decided to take matters into their own hands and tried to resolve issues themselves. People would complain to their wardens who contacted authorities about everything from garbage issues to illegally parked cars to even cracking down on prostitution locations. Warden Bob Tilitz even saved his Elmhurst Branch Library from becoming defunct and transforming it into “contemporary version of a turn-of-the-century settlement house” (Sanjek, 261). These are things that the authorities should be taking care of themselves, of course.
Civic associations usually represented a specific neighborhood and worked to better the quality of life in their own communities. However, ethnic integration was important for the people of Corona and Elmhurst if they wanted to flex their political muscles. Carmela George, founder of the 97th Place Block Association, saw the importance of uniting the community across ethnic boundaries. When it came to real estate agents harassing her neighbors when house prices skyrocketed, George collected 192 letters that included white, Latin American, Chinese, and African American homeowners. Lucy Schilero also knew the importance of getting to know her neighbors, “I have new ethnic friends: Hindu, Spanish, Chinese…I like the diversity of the area” (Sanjek, 287). With a vast network, Schilero was able to reach many people in her coalition and tackled many problems such as getting teenagers off the street corners and causing trouble, eradicating drug dealing, and other “quality of life” threats. All coalitions and civic associations start with a neighborhood that feels it is not getting the attention it deserves from their local government and as neighborhood ties become stronger, the coalition becomes empowered and networks to work alongside other boards. Established residents and newcomers are welcomed into the associations because beyond the ethnic and cultural differences, they share the same rung on the economic ladder. In a way, government negligence has only strengthened the voices of the working class (in this case, anyway) by forcing them to unite and attempt to level the battlefield in this class warfare. I can only imagine how our “quality of life” would be without the civic associations.
I think it’s interesting that you brought up the Port Authority only releasing certain information to certain civic groups and different ethnicities coming together. When ethnicities stay separate, as they are often inclined to do, it can lead to a schism in the community. This makes it easier for corporations, or any organization, to leave the citizens of a town confused and out of the loop. By stopping the different ethnicities from interacting with each other, you can stop information from spreading. For this reason, it is really in everyone’s best interest to unite.
Additionally, by being united, each person’s voice can be heard. What everyone wants is very important when going up against a larger organization. Additionally, each person or group might add ideas or skills that can be helpful to rallying against a business.
Aww Ana! No one’s commenting on your blog! Me to the rescue! *realizes Nicki commented first* never mind….
So this week’s readings were mainly about the opposition civic associations presented against the city in defense of the people. The main argument seemed to be the quality of life that citizens wanted to uphold. They owned a certain amount of property and went about their lives a certain way; no matter the benefit or importance, people didn’t really want to change their living situation much, coining the term “not in my backyard.” That is all well and good, but I believe that when it comes to certain issues, such as the airport situation Gregory explains, safety overrides the comfort of the neighborhood. It takes discretion when it comes to siding with the civic associations versus making way for the needs of the city and its facilities. When it comes to the city and the peoples’ safety, when lives and not the quality of lives are at stake, the obvious answer is safety. But if, for example, a school or apartment building is being shut down to make room for something irrelevant in comparison, such as a hotel or even a park, this is where civic associations/boards (in my opinion) have a right to rally and protest. It’s about priority, which I understand only spurs discussion and disagreement for the order, but the situation is relative.
I found Ana’s particular example of the PANYNJ to be quite interesting. Unfortunately, it is clear that the Port Authority largely ignored the concerns of the neighborhood. While there are obvious reasons as to why the train system shouldn’t be built, which includes noise pollution and water quality, there are the reasons for safety of the airplane passengers. Like other compensations, not everyone will be happy with the new changes. Thus, the only way to really solve these problems is to look for the greater good. Another point I found interesting about the PANYNJ example was that the Port Authority was able to have a better influence if it kept the community civic associations and community boards separate. Because of a divided cause, instead of a united community, it was even easier for Port Authority to exert its power. Furthermore, by releasing only so few information, these small communities are left confused.
Having enough of the government’s carelessness of neighborhood problems, many tend to bond together to solve these kinds of problems. If people are able to come and work together, there is a higher chance of success. Using Ana’s example of Lucy Schilero, she was able to deal with problems such as disruptive teenagers, drug dealing, etc. simply by having a large network, which would constantly communicate with each other.
Yes, this week’s readings were pretty dizzying. I too found it hard to keep track of all the organizations, associations, groups, etc. that were mentioned, but you did a really good job clearing things up so thank you!
I found the PANYNJ controversy confusing and even disheartening. I was sickened a bit (a lot) to read about the wiliness of the PANYNJ in dealing with the civic associations, and the La Guardia residents’ blinding self-interest – I might be beating a dead horse at this point, but I still cannot believe how we can act in such a way. You can say, as many have, that it’s built into the fabric of capitalism and virtually every form of government under the sun, but I persist in saying that we can do better than this! So long as we remain people who believe in our ability to choose, we are not stuck to repeat the errors and injustices of the past. Sure, it often seems like we’re in a never ending cycle of deceit and exploitation but like I suggested before in class, it’s precisely that attitude that perpetuates that “cycle.” We anoint our very own selves with defeatism but what we fail to realize is that we can make a difference (often through fairly small steps). But then come the inevitable cynics who say “You’ll never succeed. At least not in our lifetime.” But is that really a reason not to try? I’m glad you mentioned the Barbara Coleman quote, because I think she points to an interesting response: human progress is cumulative insofar as we pass on the idea of progress. By passively accepting defeat, we are unknowingly suppressing the idea that we can improve and, to borrow a phrase from Jonathan Sacks, “heal a fractured world.” We are denying future generations the right to assume the duty of fixing the injustices of the world – but that is what colors our lives, what rescues our “mundane” actions and transforms them into heroic feats. Without it as an ideal, what are we? (Sorry – again – for being overly pensive and idealistic, but I can’t help it!)
It’s the civic associations and all those other organizations that insist on doing just that – bettering the lives of their constituents. Of course, they do not quite represent the ideal I want and speak of only because they focus more on their own selves. The kind of thing I am referring to is more altruistic and “neighbor”-oriented but hey, it’s still a start, isn’t it?
In a “democracy”, and i use that term lightly, the power comes from the many, the people. Though the more we read the more we learn that the power does come from the people, though the people here usually represent a small minority that likes to infringe their “superiority” upon others. It is kind of appalling when you hear of the negative side affects a small group of people wants to lay on a whole community. At the same time, sometimes the benefit of a greater population can only be viewed through someone else’s view (usually of a politician’s). I will not try to argue for either side because there is no perfectly clear right or wrong here. It is a hard trade off, something that could benefit a plethora of people, though you will be causing greater noise population and it would have a negative impact on the quality of water and overall “life”. It is impossible to please all, and in order to make an improvement; sometimes a sacrifice has to be made. At the same time, why should we lower the standard of living for a whole population in order to just make something more convenient, when people are ok with the status quo? The most amazing part about this whole story was the unification of a community against a common goal. It is only the common enemy that united such a diverse community.
There is no reason to go through specific detail right now, as my predecessor have already so beautifully done so. Although the ethnic political groups are much needed in order to instill a watchdog over the rights of minorities, their need should only be temporary. I personally think that the extended longevity of a certain ethnic political group can give rise to potential racism. If one particular group takes part in something that another group looks down upon, it might result in ethnic warfare, and honestly I don’t think friends should be turning on one another. It is with these extended organizations that communities can be divided into blacks, Asians, Latinos, and other minorities. We then wonder why there is very rarely a full integration; it is because our backward system fights against something they desire; they fight for integration, yet cause their own division.
It was Lucy Schilero that exemplified this idea of unity the most. Seeing that there was an issue in her community (cross-ethnically), Schieloro created a coalition tat helped get teenagers off the street and helped eradicated drug dealing. It didn’t matter Lucy’s own ethnicity, it was the idea of the community that she was fighting for.
The community got the most accomplished when the unified together against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey as a community rather than just a bunch of small ethnic groups. Maybe all we need to create a better, more unified community is to have a single board, rather than many little ones with no power that all hate each other. There are definitely powers in numbers, and only when unifying all our numbers can we successfully take down the few that hold the artificial power; because the true power relies in the people.