Jane Jacobs

I don't think dead people can run for office. I might of voted for her anyway.

she also spent most of her life in the west village, which was a bohemian well-to-do neighborhood prior to her moving there. not sure i'd say the same about our 'hood. clayfilms, she also knew how to spell.

catwalkertexasranger wrote: gentrifires

And just like that, catwalker unwittingly coined a new gem.

C. Any gentriconfrontational flareup on an online message board

I thought it best to use it even if spell check said otherwise. If the definition of gentrifire only applied in the kitchen I don't think there would be such a fuss when they moved to the area. Black gentrifires are those who own Dave Matthews CDs and pants that semi-fit.

catwalker and arches-
please stay on topic. We need an "E"

jeffrey wrote: [quote=arches]Ah, so you are no longer a "moderator" but now a "gentrifire extinguisher"

NICE!

***edited to add:

As in:

Somebody call 911...
gentrifire burnin' on the CH board...
wo-ho-ho....

:-'

I hereby propose that Jeffrey change his title from Lint Collector to "Gentrifire Extinquisher"

modsquad wrote: Maybe you're presuming that a stable neighborhood has some way of administering a "beating" physical or otherwise.

I think that a stable neighborhood can, in a sense, administer a beating. How? Imagine if some kid was bumming around on a street lighting fires (this happened in PH last spring. The kid stopped, don't know why.) Imagine also if, to use one of JJ's favorite ideas, there were several "eyes on the street" or, people keeping a watch out for what's happening on their block. So, now when the kid lights the fire, someone might just happen to a) see the kid and provide a description to the cops b) know the kid and be able to dime him out to his parents.

This is, of course, a rather simplistic view of how that works, and supposes that the parents actually care what this kid is up to. But still, I think that when people in a neighborhood take an active interest in what's happening where they live, it pays off in a safer, more stable place. That's the central point of JJ's thesis.

We had a little impromptu neighborhood watch happening last month on Park Place, trying to get a guy who was snatching iPhones from unsuspecting owners' hands. He might have been caught tonight because someone recognized him and called the police.

The phenomena is well described in the book "Bowling Alone".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowling_Alone

CLAYFILMS wrote: Nah....

I'm saying that when you have a true neighborhood where there is a casual public trust that creates an environment where there is accountability for bad behind teenagers that prevents that from terrorizing men and women as they walk down the street on any given day.

That's why back in the day...said teenagers (and miscreants of all ages) would take their shenanigans to areas with lower adult to miscreant ratios (like parks, alleyways etc..)

So yes..a functional neighborhood has a way making it's residents feels safe even though you live among thousands of strangers..

Sorry, this reads like double-speak BS to me. So the kids in these neighborhoods are only robbing and beating people because they're transients? You and the deceased Ms Jacobs are blaming the victims.

Residents of a "functional neighborhood" feel safe because they know
1) their neighbor's children will NOT be out at all hours beating and robbing them BECAUSE their parents have raised them right or are keeping them in check,
2) if some crazed/stupid neighbor's kid does beat and rob someone the cops'll haul his ass to jail.

Sorry but the asshole who beats and robs people is an asshole who either never learned or ignored all teachings on morality and respect for themselves and others. These assholes were broken long before any high-earning transients came into their nabes.

Its not like on Monday you're a good kid, goes to school, listens to his parents, does his chores, helps little old ladies cross the street and then on Wednesday some stranger walks by w/ an IPhone so you punch them in the face and take their gear. That's not how it works.

Subject: Gentrification, the 'Gentry', and the Lay-Folk They Supplant

I've been living on Sterling Place for nearly three years and in that time I've seen a marked change in the neighborhood. Namely, there are more white people. Also, some things have remained the same, like the dudes who sell marijuana nearby, and the police's obvious awareness of it, but either tolerance or indifference towards the selling. I've thought long and hard about these changes, and lack thereof. For instance, there are more services nearby - a 24 hour grocery store on Franklin and St. John's, but the prices for that convenience rival anything you will find in Manhattan. The folk who have been living in the neighborhood longer than I rarely frequent that store. There's also Bristen's on Franklin, and again, here is another place that the folk who have been living around the neighborhood almost never go to. A recent addition has been two new coffee shops on Franklin Avenue, and again, what you find are the young white bohemian-types going there with nifty thin laptops and their expensive grunge looks sitting, and sipping coffee. You almost never see any Black people in these places. I wonder why? Let me add one more place to the mix: Franklin Park -- a twin bar lounge on St. John's. It's disproportionately white.
I have to admit I get really angry when I see this. There is a great sense of frustration because Black people are yet again being pushed out by other folk (the gentry) who can afford to pay higher prices. Now, I assume that these younger folk with fatter pockets are the 'progressive' types. But here is the irony: White progressives who have access to better jobs in the marketplace because of white privilege are doing more harm to Black people than any conservative ever will. Why can't you white progressive types keep your lily asses in Manhattan? Your progressive rhetoric sounds so hollow given the effect on the realty marketplace your economic choices have. If you sense an antagonism from the Black people who live around here it's because of this. You come in here with your smiles and your well-meaning attitudes about saving the planet, making it green, and all of that ego-fodder, but in reality you are making the world worse for most people. You truly are. If you want to make a better world, in addition to reducing your carbon-footprint, why not reduce your gentry-footprint as well? Realise that you got your job because of your connections, and be 'historically responsible'. Make a commitment not to despoil the Black ecosystem with your fat pocket. You guys have Park Slope now; why not stay there? Do you realize the damage you cause with every apartment you take in Brooklyn? Where are Black pelople going to go? You ever think about that? No, you don't. And that's why I can't stand most of you. Not because you're white, but because most of you are hypocrites, and you express your white progressive spiel for the same reason women wear makeup: to cover flaws and enhance your look. You probably voted for Obama and you let everyone know that you did.

Many of the 'new' shops are black owned and consistently have a racially balanced group hanging out inside. Also, Franklin Park started to attract a more diverse crowd this summer. It's not fair to assume that black CH residents don't want newer places in the neighborhood (or want to preserve your so called 'black ecosystem'). Whether they're new arrivals or not, there is a large contingent of black CH residents that have more in common with the newer whites in the neighborhood. MHA, this is simply not a black/white issue.

Also, while some people do benefit from connections for opportunities, the main reason they are able to find opportunities and meet connections is education. It's not fair to hold the color of a hard working person's skin against them. All boats can rise, but there needs to be an emphasis on education starting at the household level and in the community. I'm saddened that this is not the environment that my fellow brother and sisters grow up in.

Do you realized how utterly racist this sounds? If we replace the word WHITE with the word BLACK you have the black Brooklyn version of Archie Bunker.

I remember when Fort Greene was virtually abandoned during the 1960's and 70's. What were once beautiful brownstones were covered in graffitti. Streets were unsafe and there were no local stores. Some brownstones were literally boarded up and abandoned. Gentrifiers (both White and Black) came in - perhaps due to cheap real estate and possibly capitalistic opportunities to open stores where none existed before - and started to turn the area around.

But what prevented long term residents from this same commitment? OK - perhaps economics prevented some residents from buying real estate - but what then prevented these long term residents from taking pride in their community and homes - whether rented or owned? Oh I guess it was the roving gangs of suburban hoodlums that would come in and trash the area while local residents weren't looking.