This week the reading we primarily engaged with is by Laura R. Barraclough, titled “South Central Farmers and Shadow Hills Homeowners: Land Use Policy and Relational Racialization in Los Angeles.” As the title states, this article focuses on the social movements of the South Central Farmers, who fought to defend the fourteen-acre community garden, in conversation with a social movement much more north in Los Angeles, particularly in the San Fernando Valley, which is the Shadow Hills homeowners. The two social movements as articulated by Barraclough give us an understanding of urban planning and how land use policies reify the “reproduction of racial categories” (167). The article also discusses not only how land use policies shaped the realities of these communities, but also how the media reinforced some of these narratives as a majority of the coverage was given to the South Central Farmers. A quote that I think really summarizes the relational racialization and its impacts on the communities as a more broader process is the following; “The protection of privilege in one community, Shadow Hills, demands the concentration of poverty and pollution in another, South Central” (167) This quote helps us understand the relational racialization in this case as a process which understands the uplift of a community and the detrimental stakes in others. Furthermore, I think in reading this article what really stood out to me was the actual geography and location of the South Central Farm on 41st and Alameda Streets. When reading the street names in the article, I thought about it and had noticed that I most likely had been in that area at some point. To my surprise the location was blocks away from where my grandma and uncle currently live. I find it especially ironic, how the area has developed and its connection to land usage, as food production and distribution has made itself an industry in and surrounding that area, with a larger focus on mass distribution for places such as restaurants. I think the move away from community-sustaining uses of land is a clear picture of understanding the reproduction of racial and economic inequalities when it comes to projects on land development, sustainability, and usage, and broadly gentrification, as a larger racial project that prioritizes white and affluent communities.
Author: Taylor Colorado Merino
-
Taylor Colorado Wk 7 Response
-
Taylor Colorado Wk 6 Response
The materials that we have engaged with this week – the readings by Peter Moskowitz & Alfredo Huante, the film The Last Black Man in San Francisco, and the interactive Mapping Inequality Redlining in the New Deal America website – speak more broadly to the process of gentrification, not only as an economic shift within communities, but also as a racialized process and a process of the commodification of neighborhoods and resources. More specifically, Peter Moskowitz’ chapter “San Francisco” in How to Kill a City, details the social and legal construction of gentrification in San Francisco. The author first opens with a contextualization and conversation of the film we watched and Jimmy Fails. An important theme that this text presents is the connection between a city and a native of the city, as he describes how Jimmy feels like an anomaly within the city as it has changed over time, becoming a distinct version of what he once knew. The article by Alfredo Huante specifically talks about gentrification within the Los Angeles barrio of Boyle Heights. Huante emphasizes gentrification beyond its economic shift and impact, providing an understanding of the racialization which simultaneously occurs, given part of the Mexican-American community and their proximity to whiteness. I think that both of the readings can be simplified by a statement I found interesting from the film, which considers gentrification as the “final frontier of manifest destiny.” Gentrification is a process which I believe inherently fosters inequality. In a class I took Fall 2023 with Dr. Jessica Stewart on Housing Politics, we explored a lot of what the readings, film and website cover, and in one of our conversations we talked about if housing developments could be ethical and not cause mass displacement of entire communities. Considering the statement made in the movie and what I learned in that class, these modern day housing developments can not be ethical as the very underlying legal construction of neighborhoods does not allow the process to be. The different zones created– single-family, multi-family, commercial and industrial – inherently create divisions in cities that in turn have greater effect on the health & available resources of communities. Another interesting concept that I think plays an important role in gentrification as an economic and racial project is NIMBYism (Not in my backyard) specifically for the opposition of affordable housing.
-
Taylor Colorado Wk 4 Response
The materials for this week emphasize educational inequalities specifically among Latinx students’ attainment of degrees and provide potential solutions to addressing such disparities. The reading, Still Falling Through the Cracks, and the movie Precious Knowledge both provide critical insight to the educational inequalities Latinx students’ face in California and Arizona respectively. The reading primarily focuses on providing a statistical report and analysis of the educational pipeline from K-12 education to higher education that is constituted by the parameters of California, Los Angeles County and the Los Angeles Unified School District. Based upon the data, the authors of the report suggest solutions such as changes in pedagogical practices and more structural elements such as the actual curriculum (e.g. offering ethnic studies courses). Precious Knowledge particularly focuses on ethnic studies in the state of Arizona as a point of contention. Many of the students and their families in the film express content with an ethnic studies curriculum as it reinforces the claim made in the Hubert et. al report in which a curriculum that reflects the students’ experiences as students of color can positively impact their academics and achievement. On the other hand, the film also shows how politicians have gone against an ethnic studies curriculum as it is deemed “anti-American.” As a product of LAUSD, Los Angeles County and California, I could really relate to and understand within my own experiences and observations, the findings and recommendations provided by the report. I attended K-12 schools all located across distinct areas of the city; elementary a couple blocks down the road, middle school in Glassell Park, and high school near Downtown LA. My experience across all three schools were animated by a profound connection to the large Latinx student population within LAUSD, and it hasn’t been until much later that I realized how as the 2nd largest school district in the nation and the largest in the state, the district lacks in providing quality and equitable educational opportunities to one of its largest student communities. More specifically, an example that appears with my own experience is the talk of academic and college counseling in which my small Highschool of approximately 800 students shared 2 academic counselors, split by last names A-L and M-Z, and 1 college counselor. Also ethnic studies for the most part are pretty nonexistent within the curriculum. I only came to learn about the term in college.
-
Taylor Colorado Wk 3 Response
Cheryl I. Harris’ Whiteness as Property as a foundational piece of scholarship for critical race theory, provides an enhanced understanding of how whiteness has evolved from “color to race to status to property” (1714). As the namesake of the article, Harris pays particular attention to the legal and social realities that have made way for whiteness to go from an intangible concept to a tangible entity, citing various court cases that have upheld and developed the construction of race in conversation with white supremacy. Harris broadens our understanding of whiteness by articulating the entity in relation to racial otherness and conceptualizing “property” – as it pertains to appropriation of labor (Blacks) and appropriation of land (Native Americans). Racial subordination and economic domination, in conversation with the shared premise of exclusion held by whiteness and property become even more relevant as Harris goes on to connect this the reification of this concept through the Supreme Court cases of; Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education. Both cases deal with whiteness as it manifests through the “separate but equal” doctrine; however, the former upholding said doctrine, and the latter’s challenge ultimately overturning it. In essence, these cases emphasize the structural nature of “whiteness” as it is “something that can be both experienced and deployed as a resource” (1734). She finally goes into affirmative action and underlines the process as it mediates the racialized privileges associated with whiteness and “whiteness as property.” I had two main pre-read impressions of Harris’ article; this reading is really long, and this reading must be dense with legal jargon (given that it is housed in the Harvard Law Review). After reading the article, Harris’ articulation of “whiteness as property” in conjunction with the conceptualization of my own independent research project, has provided a much needed area of discussion to consider not only brownness’ relationship to blackness, but brownness to whiteness, given the implications of property that this article presents. I agree with Harris’ argument of whiteness and property in connection to exclusivity/exclusion, especially as it relates to my project. Given that the article was published in 1993, I think it would be interesting to examine how whiteness and/as property manifests in much more contemporary legal cases.