Read on Twitter
The well-researched, nuanced, and insightful critiques of the blunt-force Bogotá-style “ban cars” pieces are making a lot of urbanists feel defensive, and I think there’s a few reasons why:
1) the critique calls for slowing down process so it can be led by community. Lots of urbanists like the top-down, expert driven process. The ‘public’ is a thing to be managed. Daddy knows best. What happened in Bogotá is a great example, and they loooooove it
This comes from rational-comprehensive theories of planning, which are based in racism, eugenics & more.
This isn’t the only way to do planning, so it’s threatening, because power and expertise is shared in alternate frameworks.
This isn’t the only way to do planning, so it’s threatening, because power and expertise is shared in alternate frameworks.
2) Who is the planner? To do community-driven planning in Black and Brown and poor neighbourhoods takes a specific skillset and experience. Lots of mainstream urbanists lack both. So this is threatening.
3) Fake saviourism: I’ve seen a couple of tweets today along the lines of banning cars forces people to take transit, and that forces a better transit system, and poor people will benefit. That is a lot of “if’s” my dude. We might just get a more crowded and shitty transit system
And this kind of thinking puts the burden on people who already rely on transit to get to those essential jobs to bear the burden of all these extra people. This is classic concern trolling, folks.
I watched you do this to @mssinenomine RE Stanley Park. Same thing.
I watched you do this to @mssinenomine RE Stanley Park. Same thing.
. @DrDesThePlanner Pointed out that are all these folks who are advocating for bike lanes on behalf of poor or disabled people also advocating for the basics, like adequate drainage and non-toxic environments? No, because again this is concern trolling
https://mobile.twitter.com/i/timeline
https://mobile.twitter.com/i/timeline
4) Another thing @bambinoir @dubonthestreets @DrDesThePlanner @mssinenomine +++ have been saying is to meet multiple policy goals at once. Many mainstream urbanists are saying the same (mostly limited to climate change), but they are forgetting existing substandard infrastructure
5) I honestly don’t think a lot of mainstream urbanists have a problem with gentrification, and don’t care that/how stuff like bike lanes and sustainability upgrades can destabilize neighbourhoods. So folks who don’t buy into Richard Florida BS will be threatening.
6) finally it takes brilliance, creativity, insight, and being in community to imagine better futures. For so long planning has centred white male thinking and pushed out everyone else‘s ideas out. To no longer have your ideas centred and praised is threatening.
. @kate_manne just posted “ When you're accustomed to undue deference, criticism feels like cancellation.”
It’s time for a lot of stuffy urbanists to sit down and let other people show you how it’s done. Just get out of the way.
It’s time for a lot of stuffy urbanists to sit down and let other people show you how it’s done. Just get out of the way.
