Jump to content
interpassive

Looking For Blocks To Mass Transit Gentrification.

Recommended Posts

An investment in mass transit will cause people to move from the suburbs to the cities inevitably rising house prices

Martin 2k10 (Gerg St. Martin, Writer for Coalition on Sustainable Transportation, New Transit May Cause Unintended Gentrification, http://www.costaustin.org/jskaggs/?p=1333)

A Northeastern report warns of the unintended consequences of first-time expansion of transit into some metropolitan neighborhoods. Extending public transportation to a metropolitan neighborhood for the first time can, in some cases, raise rents, bringing in a population of wealthier residents who would rather drive than take public transportation.  That’s the conclusion of a report by the Kitty and Michael Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy, which found that new public transit investments can sometimes lead to gentrification that prices out renters and low-income households—people considered core public-transportation users—working against the public goal  of boosting transit ridership.  The study, released today, urged planners and policymakers to consider the unintended consequences of neighborhood gentrification when expanding or improving public transit, given the risk that transit investment can cause undesirable neighborhood change.  “Transit planners frequently speak of the need for transit-oriented development to support ridership, but what transit stations need is transit-oriented neighbors who will regularly use the system,†said Stephanie Pollack, the report’s lead author and associate director of the Dukakis Center.  “In the neighborhoods (around the country) where new light rail stations were built, almost every aspect of neighborhood change was magnified,†added Barry Bluestone, director of the Dukakis Center and the report’s coauthor. “Rents rose faster; owner-occupied units became more prevalent. Before transit was built, these neighborhoods had been dominated by low-income, renter households.†The report, “Maintaining Diversity In America’s Transit-Rich Neighborhoods: Tools for Equitable Neighborhood Change,†was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. It includes new research analyzing socioeconomic changes in 42 neighborhoods in 12 metropolitan areas across the United States first served by rail transit between 1990 and 2000. The report’s findings, researchers said, also raise concerns about equity. Core transit riders are predominantly people of color and/or low-income who disproportionately live in transit-rich neighborhoods. Researchers calculated that transit-served metropolitan regions are currently home to over half of all African Americans, 60 percent of all Hispanics and 70 percent of all immigrants in the United States.  The report’s recommendations include advising policymakers to get ahead of the issues using coordinated and community-responsive planning tools, and designing policies that attract core and potential transit users to these now transit-rich neighborhoods. To moderate increases in rents, future housing policies should include funding for land and property acquisition, preservation of existing affordable housing, and creation of new affordable housing, researchers said.

An increase in house prices will cause people living in poverty to greater subjugation and causes racism

Sanchez at al 03 (Thomas W. Sanchez, Rich Stolz, and Jacinta S. Ma, homas W. Sanchez is an associate professor of Urban Affairs and Planning and research fellow in the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech in Alexandria, Virginia. Rich Stolz is Senior Policy Analyst at Center for Community Change. Jacinta S. Ma is a Legal and Policy Advocacy Associate at The Civil Rights Project at Harvard, “Moving to Equity: Addressing Inequitable Effects of Transportation Policies on Minoritiesâ€)

Another housing-related impact of transportation policies is gentrification. Gentrification is commonly characterized as a transformation of neighborhood conditions that encompass physical, economic, and demographic dimensions and can be defined as “the process by which higher income households displace lower income residents of a neighborhood, changing the essential character and flavor of that neighborhood.â€122 It occurs for a number of reasons, including increased desirability of an area due to a transportation investment such as extension of a commuter rail line, new or improved train service or station, or addition of a highway ramp or exit. Most commonly, gentrification has been portrayed in terms of residential location patterns, such as “back to the city†flows of middle-income households from the urban fringe or suburbs or elsewhere within a metropolitan area. Gentrification, however, manifests itself through reinvestment and rehabilitation of previously degraded neighborhoods, improving the physical condition and appearance of both residential and commercial properties. Due to the perception that increased property values, increased safety, and improved neighborhood amenities signal neighborhood revival, middle- income households upgrade housing conditions for their personal consumption. While owner- occupied single-family residences replace renter occupancy, businesses that target the demographic group of middle-income homeowners transform older, traditional commercial locations through reinvestment and rehabilitation of structures. Thus, the gentrification process entails physical property improvements, a demographic change to higher income levels, more “yuppie†(young, urban professionals) households, and property value increases. Some neighborhood gentrifications absorb vacant properties, while others involve replacement (or displacement) of households no longer able to afford housing due to housing cost (price/rent) appreciation. While some consider property value increases resulting from gentrification to be positive, such changes have also been criticized for worsening the well-being of low-income persons, especially in neighborhoods of color. Some have argued that increases in property values are capitalized in rent increases, which then push households that are less able to pay to other neighborhoods or to undesirable housing arrangements.123 In particular, some argue that certain antisprawl land use policies that direct housing development away from the urban fringe reduce housing affordability and limit housing choice, especially for low-income households. Others have argued, in addition to causing displacement, that gentrification is undesirable because it leads to homogenous neighborhoods that are not socioeconomically or culturally diverse.124 However, there is insufficient data to draw specific conclusions about the net social and economic impacts of transportation investments on gentrification and displacement. 

 

 

Gentrification destroys the communities of socially excluded groups.

Powell and Spencer 03, John A. Powell, National Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union founder of the Institute on Race and Poverty at the University of Minnesota Law School and Gregory H. Williams Chair in Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law and Marguerite L. Spencer, A.M.R.S., J.D., Senior Researcher at the Institute on Race and Poverty at the University of Minnesota Law School and Adjunct Lecturer in Theology at the University of St. Thomas, 2003, Howard Law Journal 46.3, “Giving Them the Old ‘One-Two’: Gentrification and the K.O. of Impoverished Urban Dwellers of Color,†p. 435-436, HeinOnline (ED)

Byrne focuses on two negative outcomes of gentrification: displacement (which we take up later) and the changing essence of a neighborhood, both of which he discounts.10 But there are many other negative consequences associated with gentrification including changes in power structures, institutions, voting power and losses of local businesses, social networks and services.11 It is much too easy, however, to appropriate these changes by claiming that “no neighborhood remains frozen in some ethnic or class essenceâ€12 or that “great moments of neighborhood vitality may occur at unpredictable points during a transition†as Byrne does.13 Rather, as University of Chicago Policy Analysis John J. Betancur argues in a study of West Town Chicago, gentrification is really a struggle between community and accumulation for which we must assume responsibility:14 [T]here is an aspect of gentrification that mainstream definitions ignore. Descriptions of gentrification as a market process allocating land to its best and most profitable use, or a process of a replacing a lower for a higher income group, do not address the highly destructive processes of class, race, ethnicity, and alienation involved in gentrification . . . . [T]he right to community is a function of a group’s economic and political power . . . [T]he hidden hand is not so hidden in the process of gentrification and that in fact, it has a face—a set of forces manipulating factors such as class and race to determine a market outcome . . .  The most traumatic aspect of this analysis is perhaps the destruction of the elaborate and complex community fabric that is crucial for low-income, immigrant, and minority communities—without any compensation.15

 

 

 

I've also attached some of my other DAs against Urban Transit.

 

 

Urban transit causes urbanization

David King is Assistant Professorof Urban Planning in the Graduate School of Architecture,PlanningandPreservationatColumbiaUniversity,NewYork 2011 “Developing densely†https://www.jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu/article/download/185/175

Two hypotheses about the development of New York City’stransit system along with residential and commercial densi-ties were tested.e first hypothesis is that subway develop-ment preceded residential development throughout the city.While it is certain that subway construction preceded residen-tial development in some areas (Figure 1), analysis performed in this research does not confirm any correlation between sub-way growth and residential densities, suggesting that placeswhere the subway system was built first were uncommon.e second hypothesis tested is the converse of the first,namely that land development was a leading indicator of sub-way growth.e analysis in this research suggests that thishypothesis is partially confirmed, but rather than residentialgrowth, it is commercial land use that is correlated with the density of subway stations.e conventional narrative oftran-sit development o en assumes that transit growth precededland development.is paper argues that the conventionalnarrative is incomplete in the context of New York City, andthat the growth of the subway system was partially dependent on land uses, and in particular that transit network growth largely followed land development.is is especially true for commercial land uses, the growth of which is associated with the increasing density of subway stations. While residential densities were not found to be significantly correlated with subway growth, they were found to be positively associated with commercial densities. Two additional issues may have affected subway network growth and land development. First, the subway system was largely completed in the absence of substantial competition from automobiles. In fact, because of the underground and elevated characteristics of the New York system, the trains did not compete for road space with automobiles, as was the casein Los Angeles and in most other streetcar cities. Private au-tomobile ownership did ourish in New York, but not at the expense of rapid rail transit. Second, land development was loosely regulated through the zoning code in most parts of the city. Developers were largely able to pursue speculative activi-ties and could relatively easily receive variances to build more densely or more intensively than allowed under law in areas where they saw demand.is allowed developers to pursue commercial activities in areas where they perceived demand. One generalizable implication from this research is that transportation networks are in uenced by developed land. While transportation improvements increase the value of land by enhancing accessibility, under the right circumstances ex-isting land development enhances the value of transportation investments. In New York, the subway was built partly as a response to existing demand, and the result is a dense subway network that continues to be a symbol of the city.

Urbanization causes lots of problems – laundry list

Jitendra K. Trivedi, Himanshu Sareen, and Mohan Dhyani Indian J Psychiatry. 2008 Jul-Sep; 50(3): 161–165. “Rapid urbanization - Its impact on mental health: A South Asian perspective†http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2738359/

However, rapid and often unplanned urban growth is often associated with poverty, environmental degradation, and population demands that outstrip service capacity. These conditions place human health at risk. Reliable urban health statistics are largely unavailable throughout the world. Disaggregated intra-urban health data, i.e., for different areas within a city, are even rarer. Data that are available indicate a range of urban health hazards and associated health risks: substandard housing, crowding, air pollution, insufficient or contaminated drinking water, inadequate sanitation and solid waste disposal services, vector-borne diseases, industrial waste, increased motor vehicle traffic, stress associated with poverty and unemployment, among others. Local and national governments and multilateral organizations are all grappling with the challenges of urbanization. Urbanization has brought its own set of problems pertaining to mental health and well-being. Mostly because of increased speed and decreased costs of communication and transportation, cities are growing increasingly diverse in their population. Consequently, cultural factors have taken center stage in the understanding of urban mental health. It is often thought whether the increased scale and proportion of the cities are exceeding human capabilities to live under conditions of security and mutual support and concern. Some feel the sheer scale of urban life is forcing individual identity to yield to anonymity, indifference, and narrow self-interest. Commentaries on the growing fear, powerlessness, and anger of urban residents are numerous. The multiculturalism of today's cities contributes to increased tolerance, better quality of life, and sociocultural stimulation; at the same time, it often contributes to heightened social tensions, interethnic striving, and cultural conflicts - all of which undoubtedly carry mental health ramifications. The range of disorders and deviancies associated with urbanization is enormous and includes psychoses, depression, sociopathy, substance abuse, alcoholism, crime, delinquency, vandalism, family disintegration, and alienation. Such negative impact often results in unreasonable means which may result in communal violence.[3] Negative impact is also experienced by behavior constraints practiced or imposed upon the urban people. If behavior is unduly suppressive, it may result in learned helplessness leading to stress-related disorders.[4] Conflicts, wars (e.g., in Afghanistan), and civil strife (e.g., in Pakistan and Myanmar currently) in the deprived countries cause higher rates of mental health problems (as reflected in increased rates of post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD], anxiety, and depressive disorders). Migration to cities has increased dramatically over the past few decades. Most migrants come from rural areas, bringing values, beliefs, and expectations about mental health that are often very different from the ones they encounter in their new location. In many instances, people coming from rural areas have endured years of isolation, lack of technologic connection, poor health, poverty, unemployment, and inadequate housing. They need to acculturate and adapt not only to a new challenging urban environment, but also to alternative systems of symbols, meanings, and traditions. There have been suggestions that social deviance could be traced to many of the social processes accompanying urbanization, including competition, class conflict, accommodation, and assimilation. 

 

 

Compact cities increase poverty, turning their poverty impact.

Michael Neuman, (is an associate professor of urban planning at Texas A&M University) 2005, “The Compact City Fallacy,†http://courses.washington.edu/gmforum/Readings/Neuman_CC%20Fallacy.pdf

Preliminary evidence testing the compact city vis-à-vis sustainability suggests that the relation between compactness and sustainability can be negatively correlated, weakly related, or correlated in limited ways. In this section, I review the empirical evidence. In her study of twenty-five English cities, Burton found that social equity, as measured by forty-four social equity indicators, was more often than not negatively affected by urban compactness (measured by fourteen indicators). “When looked at in its entirety—that is, as a combination of all the different indicators—social equity has a limited relation with compactness†(Burton 2000, 1987).

 

 

 

Auto industry up now

Huffington Post 7/9/12 Ford, GM and Volkswagen Top List Of Fortune's List Of World's Most Profitable Companies Posted: 07/09/2012 5:18 pm Updated: 07/09/2012 7:27 pm http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/09/ford-gm-volkswagen-fortune-profitable-companies_n_1659939.html

Things are looking up for the auto industry: Just three years after the car industry's future seemed bleak and unredeemable, signs of a comeback are all around. Fortune's Global 500 ranking, released on Monday, listed three automakers among the world's most profitable companies. Volkswagen and Ford landed in the 13th and 14th spots, respectively, with General Motors ranked as 48th. This is the first time in at least a decade that more than one carmaker made the top 50 list.

Increased mass transit investment crowds out the auto industry – we are on the brink now

Ernst 9 staff analyst and principal report author and data expert at Tri-State Transportation Campaign; formerly worked at the Surface Transportation Policy Project (Michelle, 26 January 2009, “Gas Prices Fall, But Auto-to-Transit Shift Continues,†Tri-State Transportation Campaign, http://blog.tstc.org/2009/01/26/gas-prices-fall-but-auto-to-transit-shift-continues/)

How times have changed. As of today, the national average for a gallon of regular gasoline is $1.85. This may be just a temporary drop, but it’s nevertheless relatively cheap to drive again. And yet Americans are continuing to cut back on driving. According to just released figures from the Federal Highway Administration’s Traffic Volume Trends report, Americans drove almost 13 billion fewer miles in November of 2008 than in November 2007, a decline of 5.3 percent. That is the second biggest drop in driving of any month this year, and it came even as gas prices were falling to the $2 per gallon range. Through the first eleven months of 2008, driving has fallen an astonishing 102 billion miles, a drop of 3.5 percent over the same period in 2007. Assuming that trend holds true through the end of the year, it would represent the biggest decline in driving since World War II. Meanwhile, transit systems across the country are reporting record ridership. Nationwide, ridership grew by 5 percent through September of 2008 compared to the same period last year, according to the American Public Transportation Association. APTA doesn’t yet have nationwide data for October and November, but cities as diverse as Albany, Kansas City, Boston, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Dallas and Portland, Oregon all saw continuing ridership gains in November. Within the tri-state region, preliminary numbers from NYC Transit show modest, but continuing November growth on buses and subways. It seems that even as gasoline prices are starting to come down, the economic recession is suppressing driving. Vehicle miles traveled typically fall with the GDP, but what differs this time around is that transit ridership is not suffering — and, in fact, is even growing in most places. An APTA official told MTR that as Americans shifted to transit to save on gas, they “discovered†the benefits and convenience of transit. Significant unemployment could dampen the growth in transit ridership in coming months, but for now Americans are still piling onto buses and trains. Obviously this is a trend the new Obama administration should support. Significant investments in transit operations and capital improvements, as part of the federal stimulus bill and beyond, could help catalyze a major shift in the way Americans get around.

Auto industry is key to the economy – multiplier effect

AP, ’12 (4/3/12, http://www.ohio.com/business/u-s-automakers-post-best-monthly-sales-since-2007-1.291157, JD)

If car sales stay at the same rate as March, they would end the year at 14.4 million, up from 12.8 million in 2011. While that’s still below the 17 million of the booming mid-2000s, it’s far higher than the industry’s downturn in 2009, when 10.6 million vehicles were sold. Jesse Toprak, vice president of industry analysis at car buying site TrueCar.com, expects continued strong sales this year, thanks to compelling new products, improvements in consumer confidence and the stock market and low interest rates. “The good news is that the recovery has legs,†he said. He expects total sales of 14.5 million in 2012. That would be a faster pace than many were predicting at the start of the year, and it builds on a strong performance in January and February. As recently as October, J.D. Power and Associates lowered its 2012 forecast from 14.1 million vehicles to 13.8 million because of high gas prices and continuing economic uncertainty. The auto sector’s recovery is helping the entire economy. “Auto is important because it creates so many other jobs,†said Sung Won Sohn, an economics professor at California State University. “Think about the things that go into an auto: glass, textiles, rubber. There’s a lot of financing activity. We are talking about a very significant portion of job creation.†Sohn said a lot of pent-up demand remains in the U.S., from people who couldn’t afford cars during the recession to those who waited for Japanese inventories to improve after last March’s earthquake. The average age of a vehicle on U.S. roads has reached 10.8 years, and many need to be replaced. GM’s U.S. sales chief, Don Johnson, says pent-up demand will continue to fuel sales well into next year. Sohn said high gas prices are actually helping persuade people to trade in older, less-efficient vehicles. High car prices don’t seem to be holding buyers back, either. TrueCar said the average vehicle price reached a new record of $30,748 in March, around $2,000 more than the same month last year. Even though drivers are switching to smaller cars, they’re appointing them with expensive luxuries such as leather seats and navigation systems, Toprak said.

Economic decline causes global war

Royal 10 [Jedediah, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction – U.S. Department of Defense, “Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crisesâ€, Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectives, Ed. Goldsmith and Brauer, p. 213-215]

Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict. Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of economic decline and the security and defence behaviour of interdependent states. Research in this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels. Several notable contributions follow. First, on the systemic level, Pollins (2008) advances Modelski and Thompson's (1996) work on leadership cycle theory, finding that rhythms in the global economy are associated with the rise and fall of a pre-eminent power and the often bloody transition from one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as economic crises could usher in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin. 1981) that leads to uncertainty about power balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation (Feaver, 1995). Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power could lead to a permissive environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a declining power (Werner. 1999). Separately, Pollins (1996) also shows that global economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles impact the likelihood of conflict among major, medium and small powers, although he suggests that the causes and connections between global economic conditions and security conditions remain unknown. Second, on a dyadic level, Copeland's (1996, 2000) theory of trade expectations suggests that 'future expectation of trade' is a significant variable in understanding economic conditions and security behaviour of states. He argues that interdependent states are likely to gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future trade relations. However, if the expectations of future trade decline, particularly for difficult to replace items such as energy resources, the likelihood for conflict increases, as states will be inclined to use force to gain access to those resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade expectations either on its own or because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent states.4 Third, others have considered the link between economic decline and external armed conflict at a national level. Blomberg and Hess (2002) find a strong correlation between internal conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic downturn. They write: The linkages between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually reinforcing. Economic conflict tends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the favour. Moreover, the presence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to which international and external conflicts self-reinforce each other. (Blomberg & Hess, 2002. p. 89) Economic decline has also been linked with an increase in the likelihood of terrorism (Blomberg, Hess, & Weerapana, 2004), which has the capacity to spill across borders and lead to external tensions. Furthermore, crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government. "Diversionary theory" suggests that, when facing unpopularity arising from economic decline, sitting governments have increased incentives to fabricate external military conflicts to create a 'rally around the flag' effect. Wang (1996), DeRouen (1995). and Blomberg, Hess, and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic decline and use of force are at least indirectly correlated. Gelpi (1997), Miller (1999), and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that the tendency towards diversionary tactics are greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are generally more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has provided evidence showing that periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak Presidential popularity, are statistically linked to an increase in the use of force. In summary, recent economic scholarship positively correlates economic integration with an increase in the frequency of economic crises, whereas political science scholarship links economic decline with external conflict at systemic, dyadic and national levels.5 This implied connection between integration, crises and armed conflict has not featured prominently in the economic-security debate and deserves more attention. 

 

 

 

 

 

War turns case

 

 

Wars employ institutional racism to fuel foreign exploits

Cynthia Peters, No Date, Life After Capitalism Essays. U.S. Anti War Activism

This is a new element of war -- one that the anti-war movement needs to be more conscious of. And that is that the war isn't limited to the bombings, nor even the economic sanctions and the free trade agreements (which also kill and destroy), but it continues on with the waves of immigrants who come to our country out of desperation only to do our dirty work and expose themselves to yet new ways of being exploited by the empire beast of the north. Now they're in the belly of the beast, facing racist and sexist institutions that humiliate them and use them as pawns in our own domestic race and class wars.  In Massachusetts, now, as well as many other communities in the United States, failing schools are being blamed on brown Spanish-speaking people from Latin America. It's easy for the government and the privileged to use Latin American immigrants as scapegoats because our society and our popular culture supports the idea that you can blame what is wrong on minority communities rather than on the powerful institutions that actually orchestrate what happens. Domestic racism makes it possible for states to get rid of bilingual education, and allow urban schools to deteriorate to the point where even the army finds they cannot recruit from communities of color because the kids in those communities have not been taught how to read and write. For those people of color who can't escape the ghetto via the military, there's always incarceration, where no education is required. Where you simply rot inside one of the main growth industries in the United States -- prisons -- the destination for a hugely disproportionate number of those people of color.  We live in a world where the lucky immigrants in El Norte are the ones who are taking out the trash for those that sent down the helicopters and machine guns and financial planners tasked with systematically dismantling their homes, their native economies, their way of life.  So you see, the U.S. anti-war movement has to have fighting domestic racism on its agenda as well. Racism at home not only destroys lives inside our borders, it props up a foreign policy that needs to be able to kill brown people with impunity. Part of the reason -- let's be frank -- that there isn't more grassroots pressure against the is war is because N. Americans are so thoroughly steeped in racism that we are trained to believe that brown people's lives are not worth as much. Even if, for some reason, U.S. institutions did not need racism to help protect power and privilege for the few, we would still need racism because it is integral to rationalizing our foreign policy. The same is true of sexism.  As I was leaving Boston a few days ago, there was an article in the paper about the ongoing defunding of the UN Family Planning Agency and Bush's imposing of the Global Gag Rule on health clinics that receive U.S. funding. That means they're not allowed to talk about abortion as an option for pregnant women. Does Bush really care whether women in other countries have access to abortion? No. What he cares about is having mechanisms in place that allow for the control of populations. He cares about undermining democracy and building alliances with oppressive fundamentalist regimes that have their own reasons for limiting women's reproductive choices.  To enhance social control, Bush has to daily construct and support patriarchal and social and cultural practices at home. Why? Partly because men don't want political participation of women domestically, and partly because they have to create the rationalizations for the alliances they are building with elites from other countries.  By the way, I just want to texture what I am saying here by adding that the women served by these agencies are poor women. It's poor women who won't get the abortions. George Bush doesn't want his own daughters to have to resort to back-alley abortions. And they won't have to because they have money and they would be able to find other means.  Racism and sexism and U.S. global wars came together rather poignantly recently. For months, in the States, the corporate media has been eagerly following the fate of Guatemalan Siamese twins who were born joined at the head. They were brought to the UCLA Mattel hospital for months of surgeries and treatments, and Mattel picked up the bill. For those of you who don't know, Mattel is the toy company that makes dolls for little girls. There are dolls that actually drool and pee, and give little girls early lessons in the joys of cleaning up baby's body fluids. There are Barbie dolls with impossibly huge and gravity-defying breasts that give girls early lessons in how inherently flawed they are. So while 200,000 peasants died in the 1980s in Guatemala at the hands a of U.S.-armed and trained military, many of these peasants brutally tortured and killed, and all of it very easily avoidable with a few minimum policy changes in the United States, you won't hear too much talk about that in my country. We don't know the first thing about Guatemalan peasants except that there are two lucky beneficiaries of the charitable Mattel.

War increases racism

Federal News Service, May 3, 1991, LN

As Talat has indicated, during the Second World War, when I was 10 years old, I was interned in a prison camp by the United States government for only one reason: my heritage. By accident of birth, I am an American of Japanese ancestry. But when the Japanese empire attacked Pearl Harbor, they attacked every American, including Americans of Japanese ancestry. But in times of war facts are too often waived in favor of hysteria and racism. That was a fact during World War II. It's a lesson of history that I believe our nation has learned. But it is a lesson that must be remembered and practiced to have true meaning. That's why I spoke out when the FBI began interviewing Americans of Arab ancestry during the Middle East crisis. Loyal Americans of Arab ancestry targeted solely on the basis of their ethnic heritage were being asked about their political views. They were being asked, "Are you a loyal American?" They were being asked for the names of, quote, "disloyal," unquote, Americans of Arab ancestry. In all, it was a specter of a new McCarthyism that was too obvious and dangerous to be ignored. If the FBI or any other government agency chooses to tear indiscriminately at the thread or at any thread of our tapestry, then every American must be concerned.

War causes racism

Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA), March 18, 1991, LN

Unfortunately, in times of war it is common to demonize one's enemies and to slide into the kind of racism of which our treatment of Japanese Americans in World War II is one of the most shameful examples. It is no small irony that one of my Saudi graduate students receives hate calls because of his Arab family name, even though Saudi Arabs have risked their lives as our allies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An investment in mass transit will cause people to move from the suburbs to the cities inevitably rising house prices

Martin 2k10 (Gerg St. Martin, Writer for Coalition on Sustainable Transportation, New Transit May Cause Unintended Gentrification, http://www.costaustin.org/jskaggs/?p=1333)

A Northeastern report warns of the unintended consequences of first-time expansion of transit into some metropolitan neighborhoods. Extending public transportation to a metropolitan neighborhood for the first time can, in some cases, raise rents, bringing in a population of wealthier residents who would rather drive than take public transportation.  That’s the conclusion of a report by the Kitty and Michael Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy, which found that new public transit investments can sometimes lead to gentrification that prices out renters and low-income households—people considered core public-transportation users—working against the public goal  of boosting transit ridership.  The study, released today, urged planners and policymakers to consider the unintended consequences of neighborhood gentrification when expanding or improving public transit, given the risk that transit investment can cause undesirable neighborhood change.  “Transit planners frequently speak of the need for transit-oriented development to support ridership, but what transit stations need is transit-oriented neighbors who will regularly use the system,†said Stephanie Pollack, the report’s lead author and associate director of the Dukakis Center.  “In the neighborhoods (around the country) where new light rail stations were built, almost every aspect of neighborhood change was magnified,†added Barry Bluestone, director of the Dukakis Center and the report’s coauthor. “Rents rose faster; owner-occupied units became more prevalent. Before transit was built, these neighborhoods had been dominated by low-income, renter households.†The report, “Maintaining Diversity In America’s Transit-Rich Neighborhoods: Tools for Equitable Neighborhood Change,†was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. It includes new research analyzing socioeconomic changes in 42 neighborhoods in 12 metropolitan areas across the United States first served by rail transit between 1990 and 2000. The report’s findings, researchers said, also raise concerns about equity. Core transit riders are predominantly people of color and/or low-income who disproportionately live in transit-rich neighborhoods. Researchers calculated that transit-served metropolitan regions are currently home to over half of all African Americans, 60 percent of all Hispanics and 70 percent of all immigrants in the United States.  The report’s recommendations include advising policymakers to get ahead of the issues using coordinated and community-responsive planning tools, and designing policies that attract core and potential transit users to these now transit-rich neighborhoods. To moderate increases in rents, future housing policies should include funding for land and property acquisition, preservation of existing affordable housing, and creation of new affordable housing, researchers said.

An increase in house prices will cause people living in poverty to greater subjugation and causes racism

Sanchez at al 03 (Thomas W. Sanchez, Rich Stolz, and Jacinta S. Ma, homas W. Sanchez is an associate professor of Urban Affairs and Planning and research fellow in the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech in Alexandria, Virginia. Rich Stolz is Senior Policy Analyst at Center for Community Change. Jacinta S. Ma is a Legal and Policy Advocacy Associate at The Civil Rights Project at Harvard, “Moving to Equity: Addressing Inequitable Effects of Transportation Policies on Minoritiesâ€)

Another housing-related impact of transportation policies is gentrification. Gentrification is commonly characterized as a transformation of neighborhood conditions that encompass physical, economic, and demographic dimensions and can be defined as “the process by which higher income households displace lower income residents of a neighborhood, changing the essential character and flavor of that neighborhood.â€122 It occurs for a number of reasons, including increased desirability of an area due to a transportation investment such as extension of a commuter rail line, new or improved train service or station, or addition of a highway ramp or exit. Most commonly, gentrification has been portrayed in terms of residential location patterns, such as “back to the city†flows of middle-income households from the urban fringe or suburbs or elsewhere within a metropolitan area. Gentrification, however, manifests itself through reinvestment and rehabilitation of previously degraded neighborhoods, improving the physical condition and appearance of both residential and commercial properties. Due to the perception that increased property values, increased safety, and improved neighborhood amenities signal neighborhood revival, middle- income households upgrade housing conditions for their personal consumption. While owner- occupied single-family residences replace renter occupancy, businesses that target the demographic group of middle-income homeowners transform older, traditional commercial locations through reinvestment and rehabilitation of structures. Thus, the gentrification process entails physical property improvements, a demographic change to higher income levels, more “yuppie†(young, urban professionals) households, and property value increases. Some neighborhood gentrifications absorb vacant properties, while others involve replacement (or displacement) of households no longer able to afford housing due to housing cost (price/rent) appreciation. While some consider property value increases resulting from gentrification to be positive, such changes have also been criticized for worsening the well-being of low-income persons, especially in neighborhoods of color. Some have argued that increases in property values are capitalized in rent increases, which then push households that are less able to pay to other neighborhoods or to undesirable housing arrangements.123 In particular, some argue that certain antisprawl land use policies that direct housing development away from the urban fringe reduce housing affordability and limit housing choice, especially for low-income households. Others have argued, in addition to causing displacement, that gentrification is undesirable because it leads to homogenous neighborhoods that are not socioeconomically or culturally diverse.124 However, there is insufficient data to draw specific conclusions about the net social and economic impacts of transportation investments on gentrification and displacement. 

 

 

Gentrification destroys the communities of socially excluded groups.

Powell and Spencer 03, John A. Powell, National Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union founder of the Institute on Race and Poverty at the University of Minnesota Law School and Gregory H. Williams Chair in Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law and Marguerite L. Spencer, A.M.R.S., J.D., Senior Researcher at the Institute on Race and Poverty at the University of Minnesota Law School and Adjunct Lecturer in Theology at the University of St. Thomas, 2003, Howard Law Journal 46.3, “Giving Them the Old ‘One-Two’: Gentrification and the K.O. of Impoverished Urban Dwellers of Color,†p. 435-436, HeinOnline (ED)

Byrne focuses on two negative outcomes of gentrification: displacement (which we take up later) and the changing essence of a neighborhood, both of which he discounts.10 But there are many other negative consequences associated with gentrification including changes in power structures, institutions, voting power and losses of local businesses, social networks and services.11 It is much too easy, however, to appropriate these changes by claiming that “no neighborhood remains frozen in some ethnic or class essenceâ€12 or that “great moments of neighborhood vitality may occur at unpredictable points during a transition†as Byrne does.13 Rather, as University of Chicago Policy Analysis John J. Betancur argues in a study of West Town Chicago, gentrification is really a struggle between community and accumulation for which we must assume responsibility:14 [T]here is an aspect of gentrification that mainstream definitions ignore. Descriptions of gentrification as a market process allocating land to its best and most profitable use, or a process of a replacing a lower for a higher income group, do not address the highly destructive processes of class, race, ethnicity, and alienation involved in gentrification . . . . [T]he right to community is a function of a group’s economic and political power . . . [T]he hidden hand is not so hidden in the process of gentrification and that in fact, it has a face—a set of forces manipulating factors such as class and race to determine a market outcome . . .  The most traumatic aspect of this analysis is perhaps the destruction of the elaborate and complex community fabric that is crucial for low-income, immigrant, and minority communities—without any compensation.15

 

 

 

I've also attached some of my other DAs against Urban Transit.

 

 

Urban transit causes urbanization

David King is Assistant Professorof Urban Planning in the Graduate School of Architecture,PlanningandPreservationatColumbiaUniversity,NewYork 2011 “Developing densely†https://www.jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu/article/download/185/175

Two hypotheses about the development of New York City’stransit system along with residential and commercial densi-ties were tested.e first hypothesis is that subway develop-ment preceded residential development throughout the city.While it is certain that subway construction preceded residen-tial development in some areas (Figure 1), analysis performed in this research does not confirm any correlation between sub-way growth and residential densities, suggesting that placeswhere the subway system was built first were uncommon.e second hypothesis tested is the converse of the first,namely that land development was a leading indicator of sub-way growth.e analysis in this research suggests that thishypothesis is partially confirmed, but rather than residentialgrowth, it is commercial land use that is correlated with the density of subway stations.e conventional narrative oftran-sit development o en assumes that transit growth precededland development.is paper argues that the conventionalnarrative is incomplete in the context of New York City, andthat the growth of the subway system was partially dependent on land uses, and in particular that transit network growth largely followed land development.is is especially true for commercial land uses, the growth of which is associated with the increasing density of subway stations. While residential densities were not found to be significantly correlated with subway growth, they were found to be positively associated with commercial densities. Two additional issues may have affected subway network growth and land development. First, the subway system was largely completed in the absence of substantial competition from automobiles. In fact, because of the underground and elevated characteristics of the New York system, the trains did not compete for road space with automobiles, as was the casein Los Angeles and in most other streetcar cities. Private au-tomobile ownership did ourish in New York, but not at the expense of rapid rail transit. Second, land development was loosely regulated through the zoning code in most parts of the city. Developers were largely able to pursue speculative activi-ties and could relatively easily receive variances to build more densely or more intensively than allowed under law in areas where they saw demand.is allowed developers to pursue commercial activities in areas where they perceived demand. One generalizable implication from this research is that transportation networks are in uenced by developed land. While transportation improvements increase the value of land by enhancing accessibility, under the right circumstances ex-isting land development enhances the value of transportation investments. In New York, the subway was built partly as a response to existing demand, and the result is a dense subway network that continues to be a symbol of the city.

Urbanization causes lots of problems – laundry list

Jitendra K. Trivedi, Himanshu Sareen, and Mohan Dhyani Indian J Psychiatry. 2008 Jul-Sep; 50(3): 161–165. “Rapid urbanization - Its impact on mental health: A South Asian perspective†http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2738359/

However, rapid and often unplanned urban growth is often associated with poverty, environmental degradation, and population demands that outstrip service capacity. These conditions place human health at risk. Reliable urban health statistics are largely unavailable throughout the world. Disaggregated intra-urban health data, i.e., for different areas within a city, are even rarer. Data that are available indicate a range of urban health hazards and associated health risks: substandard housing, crowding, air pollution, insufficient or contaminated drinking water, inadequate sanitation and solid waste disposal services, vector-borne diseases, industrial waste, increased motor vehicle traffic, stress associated with poverty and unemployment, among others. Local and national governments and multilateral organizations are all grappling with the challenges of urbanization. Urbanization has brought its own set of problems pertaining to mental health and well-being. Mostly because of increased speed and decreased costs of communication and transportation, cities are growing increasingly diverse in their population. Consequently, cultural factors have taken center stage in the understanding of urban mental health. It is often thought whether the increased scale and proportion of the cities are exceeding human capabilities to live under conditions of security and mutual support and concern. Some feel the sheer scale of urban life is forcing individual identity to yield to anonymity, indifference, and narrow self-interest. Commentaries on the growing fear, powerlessness, and anger of urban residents are numerous. The multiculturalism of today's cities contributes to increased tolerance, better quality of life, and sociocultural stimulation; at the same time, it often contributes to heightened social tensions, interethnic striving, and cultural conflicts - all of which undoubtedly carry mental health ramifications. The range of disorders and deviancies associated with urbanization is enormous and includes psychoses, depression, sociopathy, substance abuse, alcoholism, crime, delinquency, vandalism, family disintegration, and alienation. Such negative impact often results in unreasonable means which may result in communal violence.[3] Negative impact is also experienced by behavior constraints practiced or imposed upon the urban people. If behavior is unduly suppressive, it may result in learned helplessness leading to stress-related disorders.[4] Conflicts, wars (e.g., in Afghanistan), and civil strife (e.g., in Pakistan and Myanmar currently) in the deprived countries cause higher rates of mental health problems (as reflected in increased rates of post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD], anxiety, and depressive disorders). Migration to cities has increased dramatically over the past few decades. Most migrants come from rural areas, bringing values, beliefs, and expectations about mental health that are often very different from the ones they encounter in their new location. In many instances, people coming from rural areas have endured years of isolation, lack of technologic connection, poor health, poverty, unemployment, and inadequate housing. They need to acculturate and adapt not only to a new challenging urban environment, but also to alternative systems of symbols, meanings, and traditions. There have been suggestions that social deviance could be traced to many of the social processes accompanying urbanization, including competition, class conflict, accommodation, and assimilation. 

 

 

Compact cities increase poverty, turning their poverty impact.

Michael Neuman, (is an associate professor of urban planning at Texas A&M University) 2005, “The Compact City Fallacy,†http://courses.washington.edu/gmforum/Readings/Neuman_CC%20Fallacy.pdf

Preliminary evidence testing the compact city vis-à-vis sustainability suggests that the relation between compactness and sustainability can be negatively correlated, weakly related, or correlated in limited ways. In this section, I review the empirical evidence. In her study of twenty-five English cities, Burton found that social equity, as measured by forty-four social equity indicators, was more often than not negatively affected by urban compactness (measured by fourteen indicators). “When looked at in its entirety—that is, as a combination of all the different indicators—social equity has a limited relation with compactness†(Burton 2000, 1987).

 

 

 

Auto industry up now

Huffington Post 7/9/12 Ford, GM and Volkswagen Top List Of Fortune's List Of World's Most Profitable Companies Posted: 07/09/2012 5:18 pm Updated: 07/09/2012 7:27 pm http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/09/ford-gm-volkswagen-fortune-profitable-companies_n_1659939.html

Things are looking up for the auto industry: Just three years after the car industry's future seemed bleak and unredeemable, signs of a comeback are all around. Fortune's Global 500 ranking, released on Monday, listed three automakers among the world's most profitable companies. Volkswagen and Ford landed in the 13th and 14th spots, respectively, with General Motors ranked as 48th. This is the first time in at least a decade that more than one carmaker made the top 50 list.

Increased mass transit investment crowds out the auto industry – we are on the brink now

Ernst 9 staff analyst and principal report author and data expert at Tri-State Transportation Campaign; formerly worked at the Surface Transportation Policy Project (Michelle, 26 January 2009, “Gas Prices Fall, But Auto-to-Transit Shift Continues,†Tri-State Transportation Campaign, http://blog.tstc.org/2009/01/26/gas-prices-fall-but-auto-to-transit-shift-continues/)

How times have changed. As of today, the national average for a gallon of regular gasoline is $1.85. This may be just a temporary drop, but it’s nevertheless relatively cheap to drive again. And yet Americans are continuing to cut back on driving. According to just released figures from the Federal Highway Administration’s Traffic Volume Trends report, Americans drove almost 13 billion fewer miles in November of 2008 than in November 2007, a decline of 5.3 percent. That is the second biggest drop in driving of any month this year, and it came even as gas prices were falling to the $2 per gallon range. Through the first eleven months of 2008, driving has fallen an astonishing 102 billion miles, a drop of 3.5 percent over the same period in 2007. Assuming that trend holds true through the end of the year, it would represent the biggest decline in driving since World War II. Meanwhile, transit systems across the country are reporting record ridership. Nationwide, ridership grew by 5 percent through September of 2008 compared to the same period last year, according to the American Public Transportation Association. APTA doesn’t yet have nationwide data for October and November, but cities as diverse as Albany, Kansas City, Boston, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Dallas and Portland, Oregon all saw continuing ridership gains in November. Within the tri-state region, preliminary numbers from NYC Transit show modest, but continuing November growth on buses and subways. It seems that even as gasoline prices are starting to come down, the economic recession is suppressing driving. Vehicle miles traveled typically fall with the GDP, but what differs this time around is that transit ridership is not suffering — and, in fact, is even growing in most places. An APTA official told MTR that as Americans shifted to transit to save on gas, they “discovered†the benefits and convenience of transit. Significant unemployment could dampen the growth in transit ridership in coming months, but for now Americans are still piling onto buses and trains. Obviously this is a trend the new Obama administration should support. Significant investments in transit operations and capital improvements, as part of the federal stimulus bill and beyond, could help catalyze a major shift in the way Americans get around.

Auto industry is key to the economy – multiplier effect

AP, ’12 (4/3/12, http://www.ohio.com/business/u-s-automakers-post-best-monthly-sales-since-2007-1.291157, JD)

If car sales stay at the same rate as March, they would end the year at 14.4 million, up from 12.8 million in 2011. While that’s still below the 17 million of the booming mid-2000s, it’s far higher than the industry’s downturn in 2009, when 10.6 million vehicles were sold. Jesse Toprak, vice president of industry analysis at car buying site TrueCar.com, expects continued strong sales this year, thanks to compelling new products, improvements in consumer confidence and the stock market and low interest rates. “The good news is that the recovery has legs,†he said. He expects total sales of 14.5 million in 2012. That would be a faster pace than many were predicting at the start of the year, and it builds on a strong performance in January and February. As recently as October, J.D. Power and Associates lowered its 2012 forecast from 14.1 million vehicles to 13.8 million because of high gas prices and continuing economic uncertainty. The auto sector’s recovery is helping the entire economy. “Auto is important because it creates so many other jobs,†said Sung Won Sohn, an economics professor at California State University. “Think about the things that go into an auto: glass, textiles, rubber. There’s a lot of financing activity. We are talking about a very significant portion of job creation.†Sohn said a lot of pent-up demand remains in the U.S., from people who couldn’t afford cars during the recession to those who waited for Japanese inventories to improve after last March’s earthquake. The average age of a vehicle on U.S. roads has reached 10.8 years, and many need to be replaced. GM’s U.S. sales chief, Don Johnson, says pent-up demand will continue to fuel sales well into next year. Sohn said high gas prices are actually helping persuade people to trade in older, less-efficient vehicles. High car prices don’t seem to be holding buyers back, either. TrueCar said the average vehicle price reached a new record of $30,748 in March, around $2,000 more than the same month last year. Even though drivers are switching to smaller cars, they’re appointing them with expensive luxuries such as leather seats and navigation systems, Toprak said.

Economic decline causes global war

Royal 10 [Jedediah, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction – U.S. Department of Defense, “Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crisesâ€, Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectives, Ed. Goldsmith and Brauer, p. 213-215]

Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict. Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of economic decline and the security and defence behaviour of interdependent states. Research in this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels. Several notable contributions follow. First, on the systemic level, Pollins (2008) advances Modelski and Thompson's (1996) work on leadership cycle theory, finding that rhythms in the global economy are associated with the rise and fall of a pre-eminent power and the often bloody transition from one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as economic crises could usher in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin. 1981) that leads to uncertainty about power balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation (Feaver, 1995). Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power could lead to a permissive environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a declining power (Werner. 1999). Separately, Pollins (1996) also shows that global economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles impact the likelihood of conflict among major, medium and small powers, although he suggests that the causes and connections between global economic conditions and security conditions remain unknown. Second, on a dyadic level, Copeland's (1996, 2000) theory of trade expectations suggests that 'future expectation of trade' is a significant variable in understanding economic conditions and security behaviour of states. He argues that interdependent states are likely to gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future trade relations. However, if the expectations of future trade decline, particularly for difficult to replace items such as energy resources, the likelihood for conflict increases, as states will be inclined to use force to gain access to those resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade expectations either on its own or because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent states.4 Third, others have considered the link between economic decline and external armed conflict at a national level. Blomberg and Hess (2002) find a strong correlation between internal conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic downturn. They write: The linkages between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually reinforcing. Economic conflict tends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the favour. Moreover, the presence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to which international and external conflicts self-reinforce each other. (Blomberg & Hess, 2002. p. 89) Economic decline has also been linked with an increase in the likelihood of terrorism (Blomberg, Hess, & Weerapana, 2004), which has the capacity to spill across borders and lead to external tensions. Furthermore, crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government. "Diversionary theory" suggests that, when facing unpopularity arising from economic decline, sitting governments have increased incentives to fabricate external military conflicts to create a 'rally around the flag' effect. Wang (1996), DeRouen (1995). and Blomberg, Hess, and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic decline and use of force are at least indirectly correlated. Gelpi (1997), Miller (1999), and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that the tendency towards diversionary tactics are greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are generally more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has provided evidence showing that periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak Presidential popularity, are statistically linked to an increase in the use of force. In summary, recent economic scholarship positively correlates economic integration with an increase in the frequency of economic crises, whereas political science scholarship links economic decline with external conflict at systemic, dyadic and national levels.5 This implied connection between integration, crises and armed conflict has not featured prominently in the economic-security debate and deserves more attention. 

 

 

 

 

 

War turns case

 

 

Wars employ institutional racism to fuel foreign exploits

Cynthia Peters, No Date, Life After Capitalism Essays. U.S. Anti War Activism

This is a new element of war -- one that the anti-war movement needs to be more conscious of. And that is that the war isn't limited to the bombings, nor even the economic sanctions and the free trade agreements (which also kill and destroy), but it continues on with the waves of immigrants who come to our country out of desperation only to do our dirty work and expose themselves to yet new ways of being exploited by the empire beast of the north. Now they're in the belly of the beast, facing racist and sexist institutions that humiliate them and use them as pawns in our own domestic race and class wars.  In Massachusetts, now, as well as many other communities in the United States, failing schools are being blamed on brown Spanish-speaking people from Latin America. It's easy for the government and the privileged to use Latin American immigrants as scapegoats because our society and our popular culture supports the idea that you can blame what is wrong on minority communities rather than on the powerful institutions that actually orchestrate what happens. Domestic racism makes it possible for states to get rid of bilingual education, and allow urban schools to deteriorate to the point where even the army finds they cannot recruit from communities of color because the kids in those communities have not been taught how to read and write. For those people of color who can't escape the ghetto via the military, there's always incarceration, where no education is required. Where you simply rot inside one of the main growth industries in the United States -- prisons -- the destination for a hugely disproportionate number of those people of color.  We live in a world where the lucky immigrants in El Norte are the ones who are taking out the trash for those that sent down the helicopters and machine guns and financial planners tasked with systematically dismantling their homes, their native economies, their way of life.  So you see, the U.S. anti-war movement has to have fighting domestic racism on its agenda as well. Racism at home not only destroys lives inside our borders, it props up a foreign policy that needs to be able to kill brown people with impunity. Part of the reason -- let's be frank -- that there isn't more grassroots pressure against the is war is because N. Americans are so thoroughly steeped in racism that we are trained to believe that brown people's lives are not worth as much. Even if, for some reason, U.S. institutions did not need racism to help protect power and privilege for the few, we would still need racism because it is integral to rationalizing our foreign policy. The same is true of sexism.  As I was leaving Boston a few days ago, there was an article in the paper about the ongoing defunding of the UN Family Planning Agency and Bush's imposing of the Global Gag Rule on health clinics that receive U.S. funding. That means they're not allowed to talk about abortion as an option for pregnant women. Does Bush really care whether women in other countries have access to abortion? No. What he cares about is having mechanisms in place that allow for the control of populations. He cares about undermining democracy and building alliances with oppressive fundamentalist regimes that have their own reasons for limiting women's reproductive choices.  To enhance social control, Bush has to daily construct and support patriarchal and social and cultural practices at home. Why? Partly because men don't want political participation of women domestically, and partly because they have to create the rationalizations for the alliances they are building with elites from other countries.  By the way, I just want to texture what I am saying here by adding that the women served by these agencies are poor women. It's poor women who won't get the abortions. George Bush doesn't want his own daughters to have to resort to back-alley abortions. And they won't have to because they have money and they would be able to find other means.  Racism and sexism and U.S. global wars came together rather poignantly recently. For months, in the States, the corporate media has been eagerly following the fate of Guatemalan Siamese twins who were born joined at the head. They were brought to the UCLA Mattel hospital for months of surgeries and treatments, and Mattel picked up the bill. For those of you who don't know, Mattel is the toy company that makes dolls for little girls. There are dolls that actually drool and pee, and give little girls early lessons in the joys of cleaning up baby's body fluids. There are Barbie dolls with impossibly huge and gravity-defying breasts that give girls early lessons in how inherently flawed they are. So while 200,000 peasants died in the 1980s in Guatemala at the hands a of U.S.-armed and trained military, many of these peasants brutally tortured and killed, and all of it very easily avoidable with a few minimum policy changes in the United States, you won't hear too much talk about that in my country. We don't know the first thing about Guatemalan peasants except that there are two lucky beneficiaries of the charitable Mattel.

War increases racism

Federal News Service, May 3, 1991, LN

As Talat has indicated, during the Second World War, when I was 10 years old, I was interned in a prison camp by the United States government for only one reason: my heritage. By accident of birth, I am an American of Japanese ancestry. But when the Japanese empire attacked Pearl Harbor, they attacked every American, including Americans of Japanese ancestry. But in times of war facts are too often waived in favor of hysteria and racism. That was a fact during World War II. It's a lesson of history that I believe our nation has learned. But it is a lesson that must be remembered and practiced to have true meaning. That's why I spoke out when the FBI began interviewing Americans of Arab ancestry during the Middle East crisis. Loyal Americans of Arab ancestry targeted solely on the basis of their ethnic heritage were being asked about their political views. They were being asked, "Are you a loyal American?" They were being asked for the names of, quote, "disloyal," unquote, Americans of Arab ancestry. In all, it was a specter of a new McCarthyism that was too obvious and dangerous to be ignored. If the FBI or any other government agency chooses to tear indiscriminately at the thread or at any thread of our tapestry, then every American must be concerned.

War causes racism

Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA), March 18, 1991, LN

Unfortunately, in times of war it is common to demonize one's enemies and to slide into the kind of racism of which our treatment of Japanese Americans in World War II is one of the most shameful examples. It is no small irony that one of my Saudi graduate students receives hate calls because of his Arab family name, even though Saudi Arabs have risked their lives as our allies.

Thanks, but he asked for blocks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, but he asked for blocks?

I've always thought blocks are extensions/cards. Maybe i'm wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ran a mass transit aff for a lot of the year. I have a couple cards, but first i'd need to see a plan and advantages. You can win the gent. debate right there.

 

probably some killer analytics- 

 

1. their evidence presumes the status quo, where we don't have mass transit options everywhere in the city. The plan allows for mass transit everywhere in the city, which takes out the logic of gentrification because the whole idea is that people move to the new transit-served neighborhoods. If everyone in the city has it, nobody moves to get it.

 

2. their cards don't take into consideration the jobs that you provide to minorities/low income residents. So if the whole idea of gent. is displacement, then then it takes out the impact because the low income minorities who would be forced to move out now have access to jobs. Thus, even if there's moderate rent increase, it's offset by the fact that they can pay for the rent with a job that mass transit allows them to have. 

 

edit: you really don't need cards, don't waste time in the 2ac...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...