Casting the first stone: The Anti-Gentrification Movement

When did it become acceptable again to confront another human being and tell them where they can and can’t live?

Gentrification is a term used for that purpose. A term for labeling the movement of the rich to formerly poor areas. A term that brings to mind the loss of unique cultures being bulldozed by fancy restaurants, expensive apartment complexes and white washed walls. To be frank, it’s about white people moving in on brown peoples territory.

I’ve seen it happen. over the course of 6 or 7 years, I saw Echo Park transition from a slightly dangerous feeling, up and coming neighborhood, into a mostly safe, mall hipster and yuppie haven. Some of the old run down businesses have been replaced by expensive restaurants and bars, the Echo Park Lake was cleaned up and though the city still looks the same, it has, to me, lost some of it’s vibrancy.

Try finding a reasonable place for rent there. It’s too expensive mostly — another hallmark of gentrification. As a result other, cheaper neighborhoods are starting their transitions to be the new hip places to be. Gentrification spreads, people migrate, trends migrate, and sometimes hard working people get displaced.

But it’s happened before. A lot of the neighborhoods being gentrified today were no man’s land 20 or 30 years ago. Places where immigrants, and working class could afford to live and gang violence was a fact of life. But looking further into the past, 50 or 60 years ago, those same neighborhoods were different.

Even the places that have always been thought of as the roughest neighborhoods were not always that way. Compton, Watts, and Inglewood were some of the earliest suburbs for the new middle class that grew out of the 1940's post war boom. Many of these areas were predominately white at first, but like any nice place to live, middle class families of all backgrounds began to move there.

But the United States changed a lot in the mid 20th century socially and economically, and the needs and desire’s of those in the middle class changed. There was urban decay and new suburbs were created to the east and north of Los Angeles. It was a change that was echoed in many of the major US cities — the migration of middle class and rich families away from urban centers. Some would label it white flight.

But starting in the 1990's the trend began to reverse itself and until today the movement has shifted away from the suburbs and back to the cities. Consequently many of the working class, poor and immigrant populations have, at least in southern California have done the reverse, moving to the cheaper outskirts of the suburbs in San Bernardino county.

This presents a common trend about American populations — we tend move to the best situations that are available to us. This is because we all desire similar things. On some levels it’s practical. We want to afford housing, rent at the very least, but homes if we can. On some level it’s about preference. One neighborhood might provide more jobs, or better schools, or, for the rich, livelier nightlife, safer neighborhoods, shorter commutes.

What each person chooses to prioritize is based on individual situation and preference. There is a major caveat to this, however. Money equals mobility in the United States and a man with enough money can choose not to care about a long commute if he cares more about say, a nice view. Or if a young person thinks life is boring in the suburbs and wants an edgier, trendier, and initially cheaper place to live, they will choose not to care about things like safety or space.

All this to say that change is not only common, sometimes it’s practical. The hard part is watching the change happen. Seeing a formerly colorful neighborhood become bland is a loss culturally. But the anti-gentrification movement, especially the anti technology variant in San Francisco seems hell bent on stopping change. They picket outside of Google Employee’s homes and harass them whenever they can. They stage protests at bus stops. They assault people who use certain gadgets. And they feel completely justified.

While they seem to frame their arguments with vague ideas about loss of culture and the working class being forced to serve the rich, the problem is clearly rent. In San Francisco rents are skyrocketing, due largely to the technology boom. The prices have even come to rival New York, another metropolis that has been victim to gentrification. People who have lived in San Francisco for years are being priced out by engineers, developers and startups. As a result the city renowned for it’s diversity and acceptance has finally found a group they can’t tolerate — nerds.

But the writing is on the wall and it has been for many years. For every billionaire made through computer code, there are a thousand employees who just moved up in the world, who want to enjoy their lives and live somewhere new. Somewhere exciting and beautiful. Somewhere like San Francisco, a picturesque metropolis if there ever was one — a city ironically founded by people chasing riches of a different kind in the 1840's.

It’s supposedly the American Dream. Only people don’t want white picket fences anymore, they want brick lofts, quirky dive bars, and vibrant daily lives. And while there will always be people left out of success, or forced by circumstances to adapt and decide where they can find a better life, for better or worse, I have to ask, who are we to say what is the right way or wrong? Who is to say who belongs and who doesn’t belong?

Maybe gentrification is just another term for the ugly side of change. Good people are being forced out of their lives by money, greed, and social standing. It’s hard to be for something like that. My hope is that smart people will seek out legislation to regulate this change or at least make it tenable to those who have less power. Maybe they can build more housing to satiate the demand and hopefully drive down prices. But when the tactics of the anti-gentrification movement are mob mentalities, assaults, and a bullish sense of self righteousness, I have to wonder if they really care about preserving culture or just care about themselves. As if they would be any different were the situations reversed.

Their tactics may work and that’s the worst part. The rich techies don’t have to live in San Francisco and if every time they walk in the streets they run the risk of being attacked and harassed by an angry mob they may decide it just isn’t worth it anymore. I know I would consider moving. But whether or not these groups realize it, they may doing more harm than good to the city they claim to love. If they hate working in coffee shops now, imagine what it will be like when there are no customers.

I used to work in a coffee shop too. People with even a little bit of money can be jerks. That’s what the paycheck is for.