Category: WK10: Racial Banishment

The text, Digital Nomads and Settler Desires: Racial Fantasies of Silicon Valley Imperialism by Erin McElroy, gives an analysis of the emergence of “digital nomads,” which arose due to the rapid adaptation of newer technologies during the 2010s. McElroy mentions San Francisco uses San Fransico as an example, primarily due to its influence from technology. One of these enablers that McElroy makes mention of is Airbnb. The fact that Airbnb uses homes rather than hotels creates a high demand for real estate, which targets the local people in an area and drives them away. 

McElroy also makes mention of Airbnb’s One Less Stranger Campaign. At iface value, it encourages people to interact with others who they would call strangers. But Airbnb’s role in displacement of minority communities exposes a darker meaning behind the campaign. One Less Stranger could be seen as a statement to the local communities, that they’re the strangers, and an eviction would subsequently result in one less stranger. I took a look at the ad, and read the comments underneath it, and for the most part they were encouraging this. A lot of the comments mentioned how they started Airbnb to support their businesses, and they were able to connect with the travelers. However, I find it strange that those who travel and use Airbnbs frequently, are those that possess the privilege of whiteness, and this campaign blinds them interacting with the community that is being affected, and that is around them.  

The text also made me think back to the gentrification that is happening in Mexico due in large part to the emergence of these digital nomads. More specifically in Mexico City, where the locals are being driven out by these “freedom seekers” and changing the infrastructure of the city’s culture. An argument that is often used to justify this behavior, as described by McElroy, is that digital nomads want to explore new cultures. However, on the contrary we see a destruction of culture, as more white people mean whiter accommodations, like English signage and yoga studios. Many of us have seen TikTok tourists mad at local Mariachis playing music on a beach. Now this is happening on a wider and permanent scale due to digital nomads. It’s honestly sad to see, and it makes me wonder if it’s even possible to move to a different country without dismantling the culture.  

This week we read “Digital Nomads and Settler Desires: Racial Fantasies of Silicon Valley Imperialism” by Erin McElroy. The article introduced a term I had never heard before: Digital Nomads, wealthy individuals who work and live in cities like San Francisco but who fantasize about being “global citizens” or “gypsies” and travel the world all while continuing to hold down homes and jobs in big cities. These fantasies represent a fundamental misunderstanding and romanticization of Roma people and their displacement. As young white men, tech corporations biggest demographic of employees, flood the city and surrounding areas, it is disproportionately working class Black and Latinx residents facing evictions. Notably “over two-thirds of evictions transpire within four blocks of “Google Bus” stops.” This demonstrates how, just as mentioned in “How to Kill a City,” the presence of tech corporations in cities like San Francisco is directly leading to displacement of working-class people of color who have lived there for years. It is even more unjust that these tech employees are gentrifying these neighborhoods only to live there part-time while they see the world and work remotely.  

The article also discussed the role of companies like Airbnb which turn “long-term, affordable housing into short-term expensive accommodations.” Long-term residents have been displaced from their homes on a large-scale, only for that home to remain unoccupied for the majority of the time. Airbnb’s users and marketing team circulate “the corporation’s multicultural colonial aspirations through campaigns like #OneLessStranger and their Pineapple periodical. These campaigns aim to ignore criticism about the displacement the company causes and fuel the neoliberal multicultural fantasies of its users.  

I found this article very compelling. It uses a mixture of direct quotes from “digital nomads” data from the Anti-eviction Mapping Project to explain this phenomenon. I did notice, however, that this was written before the pandemic. Work from home – a term not even mentioned in this article because it was not widely used yet – is now vastly more common than it was at the time this was written. I would be interested to read updated analysis of this displacement, as I imagine it has become even worse.  

The article “Digital Nomads And Settler Desires: Racial Fantasies Of Silicon Valley Imperialism” by Erin Mcelroy explores the intersectionality between indigeneity, gender queerness, and multispecies relationships while covering these intersections in relation to settler colonialism. The writing reflects the history of gender queer relationships and how they often go against the common and conventional constructs of sex, gender, and relationships. The tie between this and indigeneity lies in its lack of necessarily “conventional” heterosexual constructs, and rather its emphasis on the love and emotions of a relationship regardless of gender. The writing also emphasizes multispecies relationality and how the development of relationships between humans and non-humans, such as animals, was a concept that went against the general values of settler colonialism, but not of the indigenous peoples. The writing also depicts the importance of relationships between humans and the nature/environment around them, and how it is detrimental for them to be separated from having that type of relationship. 

Overall, the article is a large critique of settler colonialism in not just its practices, but more so in regards to its values and the way that relationships were viewed in specific. The article is critical of how settler colonialism contributed to a stagnation of relationships and a decrease in overall relationship health, as bounds and expectations were placed on humans that excluded both non-heterosexual and multispecies relationships. Settler colonialism is controlling, and it does not give freedom for human expression or true choice in relationships. It is important to do our best to maintain the indigenous values of relationships, as limits should not be placed on human abilities and permissions to have true relationships with both other humans and non-human life in our environments and in nature. 

The article does a great job at tying everything together and really emphasizing the intersectional aspects of the concepts covered. While each issue is different in some way from one another, they all root back to the same struggle and overarching problem, and they all are part of the same discussion of struggle within the unfair constraints placed on human relationships. 

I agree with the general message of the article. It is important to unpack how settler colonialism has affected social norms and constructs revolving around relationships, and how it is important to take a step back from societal expectations of human relationships and to allow for freedom of relational expression and connection with nature. 

The article “Digital Nomads and Settler Desires: Racial Fantasies of Silicon Valley Imperialism” by Erin McElroy discusses and critiques the methods that digital nomads navigate spaces that work through a capitalistic society and fail to consider the impacts of the community. One of the key points in the article is the idea that digital nomads have a high priority of freedom of mobility, however many of the owners of the companies are limiting the freedom of the community members due to their companies leading to displacement of families. To view large companies as a method of colonialism is plausible as they are able to gather information across cultures and monetize it, and overall take over a space that may have once been occupied by another. 

An important company discussed in the article is the impacts of Airbnb as the mission drives off the ability to temporarily occupy spaces across the globe. This idea of promoting freedom is appealing to many as it is a highly used app within the industry today, however there is no consideration of how this affects the housing status to community members as they have to find ways to afford high cost housing prices. Companies including Airbnb, while they can expand accessibility for some it instills a level of disconnection to the community members residing in these homes. The author noted “These magical abilities to transgress time and space, arguably a dream of any empire, were constructed through colonial sexual and racial fantasies”(235). This quote is impactful as it stresses one to consider the origins of digital nomads and the way everyone in society navigates spaces that are not their own or a system that prioritizes monetization over the advancement for all community members. Acknowledging the history of the U.S. and its discriminatory policies and colonial mindset is important to understand as we have done in our class as it provides context for the ways large companies strategize today in prominent areas including Silicon Valley. Failure to understand the historical context and the present situation can lead to lack of accountability for the effects companies have in the present day especially when it regards technical advancements. 

In the text, ““Digital Nomads and Settler Desires: Racial Fantasies of Silicon Valley Imperialism,” Erin McElory analyzes the new and controversial identity of “digital Gypsies”, a term which wealthy digital nomads have stolen from a marginalized traveling group who faces ethnic biases because of their traveling culture to describe their desire to explore the world and different cultures while maintaining a high paying American job. This accumulation of wealth is built off of unjust societal structures such as imperialism, appropriation, displacement, and more topics with other racial bias undertones. 

The desire of white males to appropriate the Roma identity reminds me of the text “Decolonization is Not A Metaphor” in which the same group romanticized and tried to adopt Indigenous culture for their aesthetic purposes. Both marginalized groups are regarded as a mystical identity that breaks free from the individual ownership of property and land divisions that Western countries use with Indigenous communities seeing land as a community commodity and the Roma people traveling across countries without regard for imposed borders. While the “rule breaking” aspect of these cultures are admired, the actual practice by minority groups is not, leading to the cultural appropriation seen in which the white males participating in this are admired. One important aspect of adapting these cultures is the inability to commit to this identity fully and let go of Western ideas about land. When adopting the Native American identity, the white male thinks he has a claim to their land as defined by the individualists American values. Similarly when he is adopting the Roma culture, he still has claims to his corporate job and wealth in America. 

This text reminded me of an expat who I had seen on Tik Tok a while back who didn’t consider herself an immigrant and had moved to a country where birthright citizenship was practiced and planned on having children there in order to give them a new nationality for predominantly aesthetic reasons. When an immigrant who came from a lower income background does this, their children are called “anchor babies” and their gained nationality is seen as controversial and not a quirky and unique story like those of expats. This example shows how wealth can make a difference in immigrants’ experiences and perspectives and minimizes struggles in adapting to a new country that lower income immigrants may have, leading to the adaptation of a new identity. 

In Digital Nomads and Settler Desires: Racial Fantasies of Silicon Valley Imperialism, McElroy compares how digital nomadism intersects with settlers’ behaviors and contributes to new forms of exploitation and gentrification.

Before I read this article, I was surprised by how the seemingly distant terms came together, as digital nomadism is the polished incentive for tech industry workers, where workers can explore the world while working online. Yet, McElroy goes on to show that digital nomadism is rooted in 19^th-century Orientalist and Gypsy narratives, appropriating another culture without really understanding it and dispossessing local homes through racialized fantasies. Additionally, as the author references in Thomas Sutherland’s argument, “the fetishization of digital nomadic identity is concerning,” as real nomads in need are overshadowed by the romanticized notion of “digital nomads.”

Digital nomadism has not only contributed to the displacement and gentrification of homes in other countries as digital nomads travel the world but has also exacerbated homelessness in San Francisco. As digital nomads work both at home and abroad, they intensify a cycle in which poor people become poorer as rent prices rise globally and locally.

It was interesting how Airbnb entered the discussion. Airbnb serves as a platform where digital nomads settle in other countries and “create a global community.” However, as McElroy notes, Airbnb and its users “have circulated the corporation’s multicultural colonial aspirations.” Digital nomads living in these spaces exist within a bubble of privilege, consuming a filtered version of the local culture without engaging in meaningful interactions.

McElroy’s discussion challenged my understanding of platforms like Airbnb. I used to believe that staying in an Airbnb could benefit the local community by giving homeowners an opportunity to earn money through temporary stays. However, McElroy illustrates how Airbnb can instead be “Airdnd”—death and displacement—intensifying gentrification by forcing poorer residents out of their homes due to rising rent prices.

Ultimately, this reading really pushed me to critically engage in what I believe was a good thing as a traveler. It made me wonder: How should I travel in the future? Should I use Airbnb? How can I really engage with the locals as I am traveling?

This week we engaged with Erin McElroy’s “Digital Nomads and Settler Desires: Racial Fantasies of Silicon Valley Imperialism.” This article explores digital nomadism, an identity that describes the lifestyles for many tech workers in the Western world, specifically looking at the tech industry of the Silicon Valley. Furthermore, McElroy posits these nomadic fantasies as technologies of gentrification in a new frontier. As McElroy develops this genealogy, the speculation of a digital future by Arthur C. Clarke becomes a very important conceptual grounding in digital nomadism as it is emphasized that in this future; “computer dependence enables location independence, but only for businessmen and executives.” In tandem with the problematic self-ascription of “Gypsy” go to further the idea of fantasy spaces, which some come to realize and in turn contribute to the gentrification of these places. When reading this article, the role of Airbnbs particularly stood out to me, and it reminded me of the controversies and impact of digital nomads in Central America, I believe during the mid-point/end of the COVID-19 pandemic. I think at face value this lifestyle is perceived to do a lot more good to the local economies than harm, however, as mentioned in Clarke’s speculation this lifestyle primarily is for and by the businessmen and executives that can afford such a luxury as to work remotely. Reading this article specifically reminded me of the controversies that I had seen appear in the news about special digital nomad communities forming in Guatemala, specifically overlooking Lake Atitlan. I think the role of digital nomads, specifically looking at the role and impact of infrastructure such as Airbnb, gives us a clearer understanding of the true detrimental impact that it has to these communities. I think the case of Airbnb both in physical occupation of the space and culturally speaking is present in cases such as Puerto Rico, where both the legal and social construction of the archipelago’s status and citizenry has facilitated the merging of travel, work and play. I also think the idea of digital nomads coming to “recreate their home’s everywhere” is really interesting as it brings up key points of capital and access, given that home in this case often means the physical structure by which they have the means to purchase a new life in a new destination.

The paper Digital Nomads and Settler Desires: Racial Fantasies of Silicon Valley Imperialism highlights how “digital nomads” is simply a new term for settlers within another colonial system. Oftentimes, we believe that gentrification is something new, but in reality, it is just another name for imperialism or colonialism. With that in mind, Silicon Valley promotes the idea that technology—along with platforms like Airbnb—creates more freedom, similar to the ideas of Manifest Destiny that were presented during the formation of the U.S. Both narratives falsely frame this expansion as necessary progress that benefits everyone.
Additionally, this connects to the guest lecturer’s discussion by shedding light on the forces that enable the foreclosure and displacement of people from their homes. The so-called “mobility” and “freedom” of some (digital nomads, wealthier settlers) come at the expense of others (low-income tenants, displaced locals, and marginalized communities). Both the lecture and the paper contribute to a similar story: the lecture focused on those directly impacted by gentrification caused by digital nomadism, the rise of technology-driven capitalism and other factors, while the paper highlights how the concept of “digital nomadism” itself perpetuates these issues.
Both the lecture and the paper challenged my thinking by highlighting that things I once saw as helpful were actually harmful. For example, I work for a non-profit, but I never realized that the nonprofit industrial complex (NPIC) functions as a form of soft surveillance for the government. It limits the mobility of activism because you can only be as radical as the government allows—which is nothing at all.
Additionally, I have used Airbnbs in the past without realizing the broader impact the company has on local communities. I was constantly fed the idea that Airbnb helps the local economy. However, after learning more about its effects, I now see how this narrative is shaped by a savior complex—one that presents Airbnb as a force for good while ignoring the deeper economic inequalities that allow it to thrive. By focusing only on the idea that Airbnb “boosts the local economy,” I had overlooked the full story: its success often comes at the expense of the communities it claims to support.
I don’t believe technology is the sole problem, but rather a tool that has allowed imperialism to grow rapidly in conjunction with other factors.

In Digital Nomads and Settler Desires: Racial Fantasies of Silicon Valley Imperialism by Erin Mcelroy we look at how the tech industry of silicon valley is influencing modern day colonialism. Particularly focusing on tech workers aka “Digital Nomads” and how their lifestyle leads to displacement and exploitation of others. Particularly in Silicon valley where their economic and technological power is extending to global cities leading to more gentrification movements. The digital nomads see themselves as free and independent but they rely on economic inequalities and are a major driving factor in gentrification.They also say that they can work from anywhere but this only applies to a small minority of the population with the majority still having to travel to work. All of this gentrification from the digital nomads is mainly being taken out on the low income Black, Women, LatinX, and elderly with them catering to rich tech workers. Mcelroy challenges the idea that technology is creating a fair economy and says that silicon valley is ignoring the negative effects it has on the community around the area and the people that lose their livelehood. Mcelroy then advocates for a better understanding of how technology and global inequalities are related and disagrees with the statement of technology being beneficial for everyone. I agree with most of the claims which Mcelroy is providing as if the owners were paying the tenants money to get them off of the property then it is fine, but because they are using legal loopholes, evictions, and various gentrification methods then the landlords are at fault. The part where I would disagree with Mcelroy is his absolute blame on tech for everything. As we read in previous articles like “A Lighter Shade of Brown?” by Alfredo Huante we saw their were many causes for gentrification and you cannot pin it on one single thing. Although tech isn’t the sole cause it definitely quickens growing inequalities and makes a bad situation worse. One question which could be raised when talking about this topic is how does digital nomadism compare to historical colonialism that we saw and are their any similarities.