5/1 Reading Thoughts
For me, it seems pretty clear cut that there are large similarities in motives between gentrification and colonialism. For starters, both are driven by a desire either to exploit local resources, 'improve' the lives of the current population, or both.
The drive to exploit resources seems to me to be the most obvious driver of both colonialism for 'improvement' and gentrification. In situations of colonialism, the historical driver has almost always been the exploitation of natural resources. In them more specific case of colonialism through development, the resource being exploited would seem to be the people themselves. By interfering in local issues without an understanding of the dynamics of those issues, mission trips are made into vacations paid for by charity. Having worked in a photo developing department for years, I saw a lot of this kind of thing. People loved to show off photos of them working with locals and talked about how much of a difference it made in their own live to be there. It always rang a little hollow, but Illich certainly put that feeling into words more accurately than I ever could have. It really feels as thought some people don't even bother with the pretext of helping others, and skip straight to being on vacation.
Gentrification also follows suit here, with the recourse being properties that are suddenly realized to be undervalued. These properties are subsequently purchased by 'outsiders' who do not care about the culture of the neighborhood or city, or only care about it as an 'fun experience' they have bought into.
The desire to 'improve' the local area is seen in gentrification as well. A common argument is that gentrification is only the byproduct of economic growth, and that in the long run the city will be improved. The question should then become ''who is it being improved for?"
In short, the desire to improve a region's conditions through gentrification or what basically boils down to colonialism are often times only pretexts for exploitation at the expense of the local population.
Questions for this week are:
1. Is it even possible to travel abroad for the purposes of volunteering without falling into this trap of exploitation? What we are doing is essentially what Illich describes. Can this be done in a way that is respectful?
2. If it is possible to do it respectfully, how can it be done in a way that actually makes a positive and lasting difference? What kinds of projects tend towards this, rather than exploitation?
The drive to exploit resources seems to me to be the most obvious driver of both colonialism for 'improvement' and gentrification. In situations of colonialism, the historical driver has almost always been the exploitation of natural resources. In them more specific case of colonialism through development, the resource being exploited would seem to be the people themselves. By interfering in local issues without an understanding of the dynamics of those issues, mission trips are made into vacations paid for by charity. Having worked in a photo developing department for years, I saw a lot of this kind of thing. People loved to show off photos of them working with locals and talked about how much of a difference it made in their own live to be there. It always rang a little hollow, but Illich certainly put that feeling into words more accurately than I ever could have. It really feels as thought some people don't even bother with the pretext of helping others, and skip straight to being on vacation.
Gentrification also follows suit here, with the recourse being properties that are suddenly realized to be undervalued. These properties are subsequently purchased by 'outsiders' who do not care about the culture of the neighborhood or city, or only care about it as an 'fun experience' they have bought into.
The desire to 'improve' the local area is seen in gentrification as well. A common argument is that gentrification is only the byproduct of economic growth, and that in the long run the city will be improved. The question should then become ''who is it being improved for?"
In short, the desire to improve a region's conditions through gentrification or what basically boils down to colonialism are often times only pretexts for exploitation at the expense of the local population.
Questions for this week are:
1. Is it even possible to travel abroad for the purposes of volunteering without falling into this trap of exploitation? What we are doing is essentially what Illich describes. Can this be done in a way that is respectful?
2. If it is possible to do it respectfully, how can it be done in a way that actually makes a positive and lasting difference? What kinds of projects tend towards this, rather than exploitation?
Comments
Post a Comment