Blogging Social Difference in L.A.: Week 10

For my last post, I replied to a fellow classmate, Shmuel Nosrati, whose post can be found at:  http://shmuelnosrati1.blogspot.com/2012/12/blogging-social-difference-in-la-week-10.html
His post presents an interesting take on Brenner and Theodore's arguments regarding neoliberalism as creative destruction.

Hi Shmuel,

After reading Theodore and Brenner’s article, I became interested in how neoliberal policies manifest and how they are implicated in Los Angele’s urban structure, past or present. (How much does it affect segregation and lead to the phenomenon you discuss in which communities are shaped and disturbed by self-interest and monetary power?) Thus, I appreciated your exploration of Van Nuys and its rallying citizens, who fought to keep a GM plant in place. By deeming neo-liberal economics “corrupted,” you point out the destructive nature of such individualistic, elitist interests and decisions for local development and businesses. This argument is echoed by Theodore and Brenner, who claim “urban restructuring” occurs on smaller scales, not solely large scales. Moreover, your discussion reminds me of a certain mechanism of neoliberal localization outlined in Theodore and Brenner’s table: “restructuring strategies of territorial development” (415). This includes “increasing exposure of local and regional economies to global competitive forces” and rechanneling “infrastructure investments into globally connected local/regional agglomerations” (415). You effectively argue against such capitalist globalization when you state that GM is only concerned with surplus value, much like Marx argues when he described the bourgeoisie relationship with the proletariat. In the case you include, the threat of GM’s removal led to some level of community cohesion; the workers banded together to protect the business. This solidarity, though likely temporary, demonstrates that unity exists in the urban fabric as well as difference; if the fabric is torn, in this case by neoliberalism’s exploitative tendency, societies often attempt to fix themselves. Karl Polanyi, author of The Great Transformation, would assert that this push against capitalism is an expected movement towards social welfare; the two movements counter each other.

            Your claim that firms and housing areas are located where they are “for the greater profit of the firm-owner or landlord” gets me thinking. Is it possible any businesses are located where they are for the “local community’s good?”  I agree that we need not remain in a neoliberal mindset despite its prevalence. I wonder, however, what the other alternatives are. I like Majora Carter’s way of thinking. She would agree that positive action to rebuild and refurbish communities left in the dust of capitalist development can beneficial to all those involved, while not completely deviating from the capitalist principles bolted to the mechanisms of our ‘societal factory,’ if you will. Like you mention, we can improve our socio-economic conditions, and this will not occur unless some sort of deviation from the norm occurs. We can work with the corrupted system we have by finding ways to bend the rules until the rules change. For example, Stuart Hall underlines the significance of affirmative action, such as offering equal opportunity employment. When legal action falls short of improving societal problems—not uncommon—it is important to take advantage of the commonalities that exist in cities. They may be hidden behind diversity, but they exist. The example you provide is that the GM workers were bonded by their desire not be laid-off, the need to support themselves or their families.

            Thank you for your unique perspective, I respect your support of a more selfless society. With the rise of the environmental justice movement, it seems as though at least some citizens are becoming concerned not only with the conditions of the environment, but also the condition of fellow human beings. Are we again pushing towards social welfare?

Blogging Social Difference in L.A.: Week 9

             I do not prefer to begin anything with pessimism. Avoiding the less-than-optimistic truth would defeat the purpose of being optimistic in this situation, however. As Marxist David Harvey clarifies in his work “Neoliberalism as Creative Destruction,” there is not a utopia in history to return to; there is no quintessential, perfectly functioning governmental theory or system agreed upon by the masses that we can refer to for guidance. While I am being pessimistic, I might as well add that society does not seem to be developing into a utopia anytime soon. According to Harvey, the social classes that historically have had power and fortunes unfortunately want to protect their position from political and economic annihilation through privatization, or individualization (Harvey 147).

            This attempt to re-establish conditions for capital accumulation with “seductive rhetoric” and an institutional framework focused on free markets and individual freedom is termed neoliberalism. Because there is no previous utopia (that we know of), Harvey is not arguing that oppositional movements should strive to break down neoliberal institutions in order to re-establish a faultless system that existed before the industrial revolution and the formation of the modern/post-modern metropolises. Instead, he emphasizes finding an “organic link” between different class movements and thus responding to the class struggle in class terms (Harvey 157). Despite the frequent use of “free” and “freedom” in the neoliberal ideology, there is a cost associated with increased privatization. The neoliberal Though it may not have as much influence as it did during the late 20th century after the economic recession, it has, in a sense, influenced almost all countries in some form. Media has played a large part in naturalizing the ideals in the US. It has become “hegemonic” (Harvey 147). Home to many economic elites who likely assume that their freedoms are guaranteed by freedom of the market, I have observed during my travels some ways in which the naturalization of the neoliberal mode of governance manifests in Los Angeles—and some ways it does not.

On the bus!

   
Although I got on the wrong bus, I was not perturbed; the goal of my journey was to experience being on a bus in Los Angeles. The destination was secondary. At three o’clock, the bus was not full, but soon became crowded as we continued down Westwood Blvd. People of various ages, from young teenagers to elderly workers, entered the bus, taking a seat silently. No Caucasians rode the bus while I was on it, but many passed by in cars as I looked out the window. The idea of mass transit is contrary to neoliberal ideas, which rely on consumer choices, not collective political decisions. Therefore, even though the bus riders kept to themselves, they displayed less individualism than traveling in an automobile. For some, the choice between which form of transportation to take may not exist. Moreover, the ability to decide confirms that there are class differences highlighted by transit. As we traveled down Westwood Blvd, I saw a Nordstroms attached to a large mall, recalling an aspect of the neoliberal movement discussed by Harvey: individualized consumerism and entrepreneurism. Deciding it was best not to get lost, I yanked the wire, requesting a stop at the mall.

      The essay written by R. Cronk, found at http://www.westland.net/venice/art/cronk/consumer.htm, discusses the result of neoliberalism in terms of cultural values and economic worth. His concerns often parallel those of Harvey, who claims that neoliberal institutions have globally affected divisions of labor, social relations, welfare provisions, ways of life, and ways of thought. Cronk laments that product availability has become “justification for political oppression” and economic worth has “displaced traditional cultural values defining self-worth.” Stepping inside the mall, nothing was more apparent than a consumer-oriented society in which self-worth is largely depending on buying power. Inside the mall, consumption is glorified; decorations hang from every ledge, beautifying the expansive walkways. I was surrounded by stores like a fish surrounded by fish hooks, dangling their bait in my path. Similarly, neoliberalism glorifies individual consumption. In principle, the neoliberal ideals seem beneficial for all, promoting maximization of social good. However, the ability to consume—similar to the ability to own and drive an individual car—is not universal. No one from the bus, myself excluded, stopped at the mall in order to enter the mall. Collective planning may be viewed as a denial of freedom, but in a city of extreme economic gaps, a certain amount of state control may be more effective at stimulating economic growth.

Blogging Social Difference in L.A.: Week 8

This week, I replied to a fellow classmate's blog, found here: http://adventuretimewithellen.blogspot.com/2012/11/blogging-social-difference-in-la-week-6.html

Ellen,

I found your Week 6 blog post about Leimert Park extremely well-written and intriguing. Although the all-black community touches communities with mixed races, the town seems to have its own distinct character and way of life that does not necessarily depend on interactions with surrounding areas. This difference is evident in the architecture and layout of the streets and buildings. As you mention, there are no skyscrapers like in the business sectors of Los Angeles; instead, the trees stand “majestically” and taller than any human creation. Moreover, the streets are very wide and open. Such openness on the road is foreign to me, always having lived in areas of constant traffic, honking, sirens, hustling and bustling. Based on your photograph of the empty intersection, these open boulevards seem to be a prime place for someone with road-claustrophobia. While the aesthetic elements of Leimert Park are a reason to stay put in the community all on their own, I think your observations about their culture, including “impromptu jazz sessions” and “street fairs every weekend,” convey an atmosphere as pleasant as the soft curves of the boulevards and valuable as the trees lining the streets.

By choosing pictures that reflect Leimert Park’s street life, you effectively illustrate the importance of traditions that serve as reinforcement for the strong ties holding the “tight knit community” together. Also, your inclusion of a long-time resident’s opinion about the neighborhood supports your arguments well; it is not necessarily best for the neighborhood to be diverse or “mixed” because the cultural homogeneity in this case, allows for increased “cohesion.” From my travels in Los Angeles, “cultural unity” as you describe has not been a common attribute of the communities I encounter. All of the places I have traveled to have been mixed culturally, and many of them have been “mired in poverty,” a description not relevant for Leimert Park. Thus, this community does not conform to the widespread notion that black communities are far from thriving; studies tend to focus on the prevalence of crime and low incomes in predominately black areas. From your observation, however, it is clear that Leimert Park is suffering from neither unemployment nor violence. These ideas about black communities are discussed in detail in “Race, Class, and Hurricane Katrina: Social Differences in Human Responses to Disaster,” an article written in 2006 by James Elliot and Jeremy Pais. Analyzing how race and class influence responses to disaster, the authors highlight the vulnerability of African-Americans to job loss, suggesting that they are socially disadvantaged. In fact, many of our readings have involved this idea, including the reading you discuss: “Fear of a Black President” by Ta-Nehisi Coates.

The questions you pose also got me thinking. In the past, it is possible that white flight occurred because there was resistance against black culture. Nowadays, I find it hard to believe that a black person would not be appropriately assimilated into a largely white neighborhood due to the floating signifiers. Still, it is not out of the question. I often wonder as well if our country has made any progress. Thank you for reminding me and whoever reads your blog that while there are neighborhoods that live in peace, our country as a whole is still in need of tolerance.

Blogging Social Difference in LA: Week 7

Healthy Bodies: one of the principles at Rolling Hills Preparatory School, seated atop a hill overlooking the Los Angeles Refinery in Wilmington (adjacent to Long Beach). Healthy bodies? Visible rising above the school buses in the distance, the clouds of smoke are hard to miss. And their harm is hardly invisible; their maker is invincible.

             At first I smiled at the juxtaposition of the Healthy Bodies pillar with the smoke from the plant behind it. Then, the gravity of the situation choked me like fumes. Who has the right to pollute the air? Everyone and no one, according to the ideals of the environmental justice movement. We must collaborate to fix this national issue.

Los Angeles Refinery

                 In Wilmington's history, there have been various cases in which people have filed to shut down toxic waste facilities. The article found at http://articles.latimes.com/1985-02-14/news/cb-2812_1_hazardous-waste was published in 1985 and details IT Corp.'s denied appeal of orders to shut down its second Wilmington hazardous-waste facility. The city of Los Angeles upheld the decision to close it down. Nevertheless, there exists today a massive 300-acre refinery on West Anaheim St, an unmistakable symbol of industry...and harmful toxins. It was after reading this article that I decided to drive down to the refinery in Wilmington to observe a community that must see and hear it--and breathe it--every day. The Wilmington/Carson region of Los Angeles has the highest concentration of refineries in the state according to examiner.com, exemplified by the map below found at http://earthjustice.org/blog/2011-april/tr-ash-talk-mapping-environmental-injustice. The map shows the large cluster of toxic release facilities near the harbor and the high percentage of peoples of color in the same areas, visually confirming David Harvey's concerns; poor communities are disproportionately exposed to toxic wastes, leading to a largely futile debate on environmental ethics due to varying viewpoints regarding "social relations, power imbalances, beliefs, and institutions that underlie the environmental problem" (Harvey 1).

                 The next map from simplymap.com highlights the Wilmington area, where the Los Angeles Refinery is located, illustrating the dramatic differences in income. According to the Census Bureau, the highest percent of households with an income less than $15,000 are within the Wilmington area. Further west, away from the majority of facilities, the incomes become increasingly higher. This data does not necessarily indicate an intentional discrimination against minorities through the placement of hazardous waste sites in minority areas. Instead, it underlines economic, political, or social issues that may be an indirect cause of racism, but that are not themselves issues of race. For example, minority neighborhoods tend to have a less resistant social fabric, not strengthened by education or substantial incomes, allowing industrial facilities to develop without major roadblocks because the community does not have resources to mobilize against it. Again, it is not necessary an individual act of malice, but a product of societal structure.

                  Moreover, it demonstrates the power of money emphasized in Harvey's article. The standard view of environmental management popular before the ongoing environmental justice movement kept concerns for environmental justice "subservient to concerns for economic efficiency, continuous growth, and capital accumulation" (Harvey 4). In contrast, the environmental justice movement promotes a moral economy; collective responsibility, and the fundamental right to political, economic, cultural and environmental self‐determination. According to Harvey, this “environmentalism of the poor” is lacking in practical action and organization. Still, there are examples of coherent organization, including the El Pueblo community group in Kettleman City who fought to prevent an incinerator from being constructed in their low-income city. As discussed above, Wilmington too has organized to close toxic waste facilities. An example of a permit can be found here: http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/HazardousWaste/Projects/upload/ConocoPhillipsW_dPCPermit.pdf.
            Environmental racism, while seemingly linked directly to differences in skin color, is better explained as structural racism in which a system of social structure produces cumulative, durable, often class or race-based inequalities. It includes a combination of individual practices, social institutions that work interactively to some people's advantage--and other's disadvantage--in patterned ways. These patterns can be observed on both maps.

View of the Refinery from Rolling Hills Preparatory

           I was reminded of Harvey's discussion of "Not-in-my-backyard" upon observing the proximity of the school to the refinery. The plant overwhelmed the landscape, defining the area with its un-lively yet productive jungle of pipes, smoke stacks, barrels, whooz-its, and whatz-its. It appeared as if the school was in the facility's backyard, not the other way around. Reflecting the struggle for empowerment, recognition, and respect, the shift in the US from "Not-in-my-back-yard" to "Not-in-Anyone's-Back-Yard" indicates a new perspective on differences within and amongst societies; Harvey claims that traditional approaches to environmental management are giving way to new rhetoric that must be supported by mobilization. While minorities neither deserve health hazards nor an unpleasant landscape, other portions of the Los Angeles population are neither deserving nor willing to move the the facilities into their own backyards. Los Angeles is one large refinery, producing segregation by the barrel  Still, as Harvey notes, diversity and geographical difference are not without the "necessary homogenities of global market integrations." It is unlikely that a certain quality of life will ever be universal, but is it possible to significantly lessen the gap?
            Before driving to the residential area on the other side of the refinery, I stopped at gas station. As I sat in the car, I observed the people entering the Subway and the place for Loans pictured below. During lunchtime, more customers entered to potentially receive a loan than entered Subway, and not one person was Caucasian. In fact, I did not see a white person for the entire duration of my trip to Wilmington. Many people seemed to be seeking a "steady income" as advertised on the poster, which is concurrent with the data gained from the map.

 A man on the corner of the street also held a sign that read "Cash Advance" and pointed this way, suggesting that the need for stability and sufficient income in this working-class community is not secret, but prevalent. The problem of hazardous material being placed in working-class communities is not local, but national. 

          For Harvey and other Marxian thinkers, Wilmington is a key place of difference because it is along income lines and the difference between it and its neighboring communities is reducible to class difference. In Wilmington, I drove past a large number of trucks with workers inside. I began to wonder: why do people continue to work and live here? The obvious answer would be that their job is here. Still, I wonder if Harvey's concerns--how do you keep the workers you are exploiting alive and reproducing?--can at least be partially demonstrated by Wilmington's geography. There is an expansive park just north of the refinery, a school to the west, and residential areas surrounding it. For a Marxian, the school exists to create factory workers, and the park is to increase labor by increasing people's happiness, which translates to increased satisfaction with wages. While I do not agree fully with the Marxian point of view, I do agree that there must be something to encourage productivity in a less-than-ideal environment. Political power seems to play a very potent role in the geography of cities. The difference between Wilmington and surrounding communities again confirms the idea that cities consist of smaller isolated worlds.

              

 Like the elementary school, the residential area was in the refinery's backyard. The modest houses seemed out of place, but shouldn't a jungle of metal seem out of place? Stepping outside the car, I listened to the factory roar, gurgle, sizzle, and hum. I breathed in as it breathed out. It did not stop to breathe in. There was no moment of quiet or rest. How could something so vital to production and future consumption be so unnatural? A crow flew in front of me, cawing.  Its voice was barely heard over the grumble of the plant. I hope that the voices of these people are heard clearly, if they have something to say.

           Traveling to this region demonstrated to me the role economics, political power, and race play not only in the location of toxic facilities, but in urban segregation as well. 

Blogging Social Difference in LA: Week 6

Percent Black Population in Brentwood, Los Angeles

         

           Ta-Nahisi Coates in 2012 article “Fear of a Black President” published in The Atlantic discusses the Trayvon Martin tragedy, arguing that Obama had not openly discussed "the ways in which race complicates the American present"--nor his own presidency--until the death of an innocent boy who he claims would look like his son (Coates 1). According to Coates, Obama's reaction to the incidence demonstrates his "conservative character" and revolutionary attitude. The irony of President Barack Obama can be compared to the irony of racial segregation in Los Angeles communities. Many residents may embrace equality in principle, but not in practice, which leads back to Sibley’s discussion of the object relations theory in “Mapping the Pure and Defiled”: feelings can be analyzed spatially as “us” versus “them” mindsets create map-able boundaries between groups or individuals. Although there is no universal consensus regarding the exact cause of segregation and nor is there a solution, maps like the one below suggest a systematic shutting out of certain races from certain regions. With Brentwood outlined in yellow, the map illustrates the percent of black populations in Los Angeles regions. Brentwood has an unusually high percent of white residents and low percent of black residents; according to an L.A Times article “Mapping L.A.,” 84.2% are white and 1.2% are black. This demographic has not always been the same. The article can be found at: http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/neighborhood/brentwood/

            Darnell Hunt, a sociology professor at UCLA, wrote a book titled Black Los Angeles: American Dream and Racial Realities in which he explains the history of certain communities in Los Angeles where whites have moved into predominantly black neighborhoods, resulting in the movement of blacks out of the neighborhood A summary of his book can be found at: http://www.today.ucla.edu/portal/ut/headline-156837.aspx. His current home now, Baldwin Hills, was created in the 1940s for whites-only. The original deed to the Hunts' home put into writing the prohibition that it never be “sold, conveyed, leased or rented to any person not of the white or Caucasian race.” African Americans were often denied housing before the Fair Housing Act of 1968 and as Massey and Denton point out, “money did not buy entry into white neighborhoods of American cities” (178). Since then, the percentage of black residents in the area has increased dramatically. Still, according to Massey and Denton in "The Continuing Causes of Segregation," residential segregation and racism have not come to an end due to legislation. While racism may seem less overt according to historical definitions, its prevalence remains palpable--and imbued with historical sentiments. It has taken on a modern form in modern cities.

               If race is in fact the reason for current residential segregation, its power should not be underestimated. A liberal approach, according to William Wilson in “The Truly Disadvantaged,” will likely hinder progress for the black community because the avoidance of controversial terms takes focus away from addressing internal differences and economic changes that necessitate social or economic reform. With Obama as president, Coates would agree that this form of “[soothing] race consciousness” characterizes an immature country only able to accept black “when they meet an Al Roker standard,” or in other words, achieve a position worthy of national recognition, a position far above average for someone of any race. This expectation may cause disappointment if the president is held to the same standard. As I read this article on the day of elections, I found it profound to look back at 2008 and the four years in between. Obama’s promise of new peace, signified by receiving votes from predominantly white states, was a tantalizing promise, and still is. However, although his second victory supported by a large portion of Los Angeles residents, I still wonder if integration is possible, likely, or necessary. Would it benefit Los Angeles as a city of disparity to have less divided communities? I agree with Coates’ implication that Obama symbolizes hope for many. Nevertheless, there are some views that need not be racialized, including many of the Props America just voted on; there is a fine line between acknowledging racism to diminish consequences and attributing racist attitudes to phenomena unrelated to race. Thus, I was cautious to agree fully with Denton and Massey’s argument that race is the “dominant organizing principle of U.S. urban housing markets” (181), a more influential factor than economic disadvantages. George Galster combines both schools of thought in his 1977 study, concluding that discrimination leads to segregation, which leads to economic hardship, increasing disparities and refueling the cycle. As the cycle churns and socioeconomic status fluctuates, black segregation remains universally high. Especially evident in Los Angeles where “the poorest Hispanics are less segregated than the most affluent blacks,” this trend differs from Hispanic and Asian segregation, which falls progressively as status rises (180). 

              While reading these statistics after my journey to Brentwood in search of a polling booth, I could not help but consider the attitudes of this largely white, extremely affluent neighborhood. Searching SimplyMap.com to find the most conservative regions of Los Angeles, Brentwood was ranked near the top. I intended not only to evaluate and photograph the area as usual, but to interview residents who had just voted, despite the obvious touchiness of the subject. I assumed many residents would be voting for Romney according to the demographics in the “Mapping L.A.” article mentioned above; according to the Census Bureau statistics, the median age in Brentwood is 39, high for the county, and the median household income is $112,927, also high for the city of L.A. Why do blacks have such a small presence in this community? I flirt with the two options proposed in Denton and Massey’s article: social class or race.

            Arriving at the small elementary school in Brentwood, I felt like an intruder, entering into the cozy polling booth within the toddler-sized library—I felt too old for the location, but not old enough to see eye-to-eye with the voters in the room. All voters were white. One younger man I interviewed was not hesitant to share his opinions and motivation for choosing Obama as president: “Romney is a crazy white guy who only wants to take care of the wealth.” I must have had a quizzical look on my face because he quickly added: “I know, you would think since this is an affluent area I would support him, but it’s more of a personal thing, my beliefs.” I thanked him for his openness and asked if he believes racism will decrease, increase, or remain the same if Obama is elected again. He stated confidently that racism would increase; “either way, there is going to be resentment on the other person’s side, it is a racially divided election.” A woman in her forties disagreed, confident that the election of either president would produce the same result. The rest of the people I attempted to interview did not hesitate to avoid my questions, shuffling past with minimal eye-contact, which is understandable.

                While it is not a large enough sample size to generalize and attribute it to the entire community of Brentwood, the young man’s comments were enough to contradict my preconceptions about this region; it is not entirely conservative. In fact, many of the signs outside of the gigantic homes partially hidden by flora were in support of Obama and Biden. His choice of words (“racially divided election”) suggest that he views race a central part of the election, a grounds for political separation. If race can divide a country politically, it is not unfathomable that it would separate people geographically and stratify people socially. Current residential patterns, illustrated by the map above, reflect either a conscious decision by blacks to live elsewhere (in this case, somewhere other than Brentwood) due to neighborhood preferences or economic inability. Now that there are no deeds prohibiting other races from purchasing homes in L.A., there must be an unwritten, yet significant factor, or mixture of factors, implicated in this decision. As Massey and Denton stress, there is no definitive solution to segregation, but there are many ideas attempting to explain its role in modern society. Whether the lack of blacks in Brentwood is a result of economics or a manifestation of prejudice, or both, only blacks experience a high segregation “impervious to socioeconomic influences” (Massey 180), the “most spatially isolated population in US history” (Massey 183). If it is due to economics, segregation should not be ignored but rather utilized to reduce the disadvantages certain races face.
             Personally, race did not influence my presidential vote, but I now am curious as to how Obama will continue to react to stories similar to Trayvon Martin’s and what it will signify for the American public. And while I am unsure as to the exact struggles each race faces, I can say with confidence after spending two hours returning to UCLA from Brentwood (fifteen minutes away) that traffic is the one hardship all races share.

Blogging Social Difference in LA: Week 5

Sibley's object relations theory has led to much pondering on my part...so I enjoyed reading Teresa's perspective on how feelings create boundaries, divisions, and geographic groups of all sorts. This is my reply: (her blog can be found at http://findlostangeles.blogspot.com/2012/10/blogging-social-difference-in-la-week-3.html?showComment=1351899841303#c2541051214074584351)        

            Although answers may seem more satisfying than questions, I appreciate that your blog provided me with more questions to ask…even if there is no immediate answer to find. I have never been to Palos Verdes Estates, but from your pictures, I can sense the extravagance; the views are unending and the proximity to the ocean borders on unfair. The residents must be without a care. As we discussed during lecture, the households in Los Angeles with higher incomes tend to be located in higher elevations or near the coast. By comparing the unspoiled view of the privileged Palos Verdes community to the not-so-breathtaking view of urban sprawl in the distance, you emphasize an interesting point; the poor or “underclass” do not have the same access to beauty and purity signified by the water; for many, the ocean is a place to be peaceful and to cleanse the mind or soul. Nature connotes purity, whereas the city is often perceived as a place of vice, crime, and defilement, expressed by Sibley in “Mapping the Pure and Defiled.” Therefore, you nicely illustrate a distinction similar also to that described by Engels in “The Great Towns” as he contrasts the filthy, dark slums with the “brilliant” shops up above—dark versus light, and dirty versus clean. The grime is not in the elite’s line of sight. Is this because of selfish greed as Engels would argue, or a natural result of humans’ tendency to see themselves as civilized, and others as “unclean” or uncivilized?

             Does achieving status in society reinforce an individual’s positive identity and cause boundaries between “us” and “them” to become more strictly enforced? You effectively relate Sibley’s object relations theory to the potentially exclusionary practices of the elite residents of Palos Verdes: “It’s not clear, however, if the residents of Palos Verdes Estates are purposefully trying to exclude lower classes of less ‘perfect’ people, but I don’t think that this matters.” I would agree that the intention may not be entirely a conscious one, but nevertheless signs of social inclusion and exclusion are arguably more visible in cities where people (at first) are concentrated and social boundaries for each individual must be slightly redrawn as one adjusts to the environment. Like you note, the separation of Palos Verdes’ inhabitants from other, less well-off communities may be an “implied consequence of living on a limited expensive real estate,” but even so, it a map-able representation of physical and social boundaries that reinforce the geographical division of different socio-economic groups.

            It is impossible to know whether or not the residents of Palos Verdes feel threatened by poorer or “less-civilized individuals” without probing their conscious and subconscious mind. Still, your observations about the luxurious cars parked outside the enormous houses point out that “they are effectively apart from any culture of crime or vandalism, most usually seen in areas of poverty.” This again reminds me of the quote I included in my last post about Wilson’s underclass definition. Wilson characterizes the stereotypical beliefs of what underclass denotes in modern society, including that they are often people who are “engaged in street crime and forms of aberrant behavior.” The image I get after reading your blog reminds me of how I picture the Ziggurat of Ur, positioned above the entire city (with the best view of the entire city), signifying its prominence. Palos Verdes does not seem to be a main “center” by any means, as you mention, but it is a “valuable” region, hinting at the power of the higher social classes.

            Thank you for your post, I found it quite insightful, weaving in the readings well with the information you gathered! I hope you find Lost Angeles…

Los Angeles' Growth--Mapped

While in downtown Los Angeles, I stumbled upon a showcase of Los Angeles maps in the Public Library, dating back to the early 1800s before its rapid development. Little did I know, L.A. was not always predominantly cement and automobiles. Where did the orchards go?