Where?

By Sarah Gyurina ’22
November 16th, 2021

In November of 2020, Governor of Minnesota Tim Walz approved the construction and expansion of the Enbridge Line 3 pipeline. The project received final approvals under Trump Administration, and the Biden administration also expressed support for the project in June of 2021.

Once fully constructed, Line 3 will carry tar-sands oil from Alberta, Canada, to Superior, Wisconsin. Tar sands are the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel on the planet. Once constructed, the pipeline will emit more CO2 annually than the entire state of Minnesota combined, equivalent to 50 coal plants.

The Pipeline will cross through the headwaters of the Mississippi, under the Mississippi twice, and through the watersheds of two of the Great Lakes (containing 84% of the nation’s freshwater). If it leaks (which Enbridge pipelines have a history of doing), Line 3 threatens the water supply for both Indigenous and non-indigenous Americans. Tar-sands oil is especially difficult to clean up because it is denser and will quickly settle at the bottom of bodies of water.

The pipeline crosses indigenous treaty territories of 1837, 1855, and 1857. These lands are a key habitat for wild rice, a traditional crop of the Ojibwe people. According to to Indigenous-led organization Honor the Earth, The US Supreme Court has upheld the rights of native peoples to hunt, fish and subsist off the land. Line 3 threatens the culture, way of life and physical survival of the Ojibwe people.”

Protests at Enbridge construction sites are led by Indigenous leaders and water-protectors who camp out for weeks at a time. They hold prayer and drum circles together and plan disruptive action such as chaining themselves to construction equipment, climbing into hazardous construction sites, and generally risking arrest in an attempt to slow or halt construction.

This conflict has received little national attention, and the silent support by a Democratic administration has culled hopes for meaningful climate action and support of Indigenous rights. It reminds us of the disregard that the United States government has for Indigenous treaty rights when there is an opportunity for capital gain.

It also calls into question to what extent treaty rights are treated similarly or dissimilarly to property rights or national boundaries. The threats to the health and habitability of the Ojibwe (and all others subsisting) on this land are threatened by these actions. Harm will inevitably be done, as spills and leaks have already occurred throughout the expansion project. But treaty territories are treated without the same respect that national boundaries or property boundaries are by national law, reflecting a capitalist and white supremacist conception of place-based rights.

Sources
Line 3 Fact Sheet, Honor the Earth. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58a3c10abebafb5c4b3293ac/t/60c37b9610580a6c3be71991/1623423899255/Line3FAQSmall.pdf

Tabuchi, Hiroko. “Police Make Massive Arrests at Protests Against Oil Pipeline.” The New York Times. June 9th, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/07/climate/line-3-pipeline-protest-native-americans.html

Eldrich, Louise. “Not Just Another Pipeline” The New York Times, Dec. 28th, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/28/opinion/minnesota-line-3-enbridge-pipeline.html

Tabuchi, Hiroka. “Biden Administration Backs Oil Sands Pipeline Project.” The New York Times. June 24th, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/24/climate/line-3-pipeline-biden.html

Path of Enbridge Pipeline:https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/embed?mid=1MN2qI7aJHsH5kYFQwUG43NmR0FPzM337&ll=49.85617517112027%2C-91.84672981881081&z=5

By Jack Ruppert

On May 25, 2020, George Floyd was murdered by Minneapolis police in a violent altercation in which officer Derek Chauvin knelt on his neck for over nine minutes. Almost immediately following this, protests erupted in Minneapolis, and began to spring up across the U.S. and, eventually, the world. At the center of the protests was the intersection where Floyd had been killed, 38^th and Chicago, which was quickly renamed George Floyd Square in his honor. The square served as a gathering point for both activists and mourners, and its significance as a symbol of the protest movement cannot be understated. However, as these protests have continued, debates around reopening the square have raised questions around who has the rights to decide how it is used.

As someone who lives one block away from the city of Minneapolis, these demonstrations sat very close to home for me, both literally and figuratively. The situation at George Floyd Square continues to be an interesting one when one asks the question of who has the right to continue to hold that land. When the protesters originally occupied the square, it was used as both a gathering point for the protests, and a place of mourning for both George Floyd, and the many other people of color who had been targeted unjustly by police violence. People came to leave flowers, make art, and call for change. Demonstrators originally created makeshift barriers at the ends of each of the streets connected to George Floyd square, creating a space one block square. These actions could be seen as a way of founding the place of George Floyd Square. The city of Minneapolis soon erected their own barriers in order to keep people safe from vehicles (The Learning Network, 2021). For the rest of the year, and into January 2021, the city seemed content to allow the occupation of the square to continue. However, in early February 2021, the city of Minneapolis announced that it would seek to reopen the square following the trial of Derek Chauvin, scheduled to begin later that March (Reeves, 2021). Many sides began to weigh in on both the process of reopening the square, and whether the square should even be reopened in the first place.

The protesters still maintaining the square – by holding events, and installing planters, statues and other art – are obviously in favor of continuing the occupation. In August of 2020, the demonstrators at the square released a list of 24 demands that they wanted the city of Minneapolis to meet before they would agree to open up the square (Allen, 2021). Some of these demands include the convictions of Derek Chauvin and his fellow police officers, defunding of the police, and removal of some prominent Minneapolis government workers who protesters say have supported the abuse of police power (Reeves, 2021).

The city is on the opposite end of the spectrum; Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo stated on March 18^th that “The best public safety remedy right now is to open up and get that intersection flowing again.” (KSTP, 2021) Due to the target of the protests, police have not been welcomed in George Floyd Square during demonstrations. Arradondo and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey cited an increase in crime in the surrounding neighborhood as justification for reopening the square, including “a 240% increase in robberies and 378% increase in assaults.” (KSTP, 2021) However, protesters argue that this simply reflects a nationwide increase in crime throughout 2020 and 2021. (Holder & Akinnibi, 2021) According to them, these statistics just represent an excuse for the city to close the square without meeting their demands.

Another constituency with a stake in this discussion are the residents and business owners within George Floyd Square and its surrounding areas. Powderhorn Park, the neighborhood of Minneapolis where the square is located, is a mainly minority community. Some residents argue that the occupation of the square, although it was intended to raise costs to force the city to meet protesters demands, has only harmed members of the community. “Not only did George Floyd end up losing his life, but the community wound up paying for it as well.” said Adrian Anderson, a resident of the Powderhorn Park neighborhood. (The Learning Network, 2021) During 2020, business owners in and around George Floyd Square lost 70% of their revenue, although some of this loss may have been related to the pandemic rather than the protests. (KSTP, 2021)

In early June, the city tried twice, along with community organization Agape, to remove the barriers surrounding George Floyd Square. During both of these, removal of the barriers began very early in the morning, and without informing either the protesters, or the residents of the square and surrounding area. After both of these attempts, protesters simply replaced the city’s barriers with makeshift barriers of their own. The square still remains closed to traffic today.

All of this raises the question of who should have the right to decide what happens to George Floyd Square. Should the city of Minneapolis, who technically has the rights to the streets, be able to have complete control over what happens in the square? Or have they forfeited this right to the protesters, through their violent actions against George Floyd and other people of color? Alternatively, the long-time residents of the square and the neighborhood could be considered to have the best claim over George Floyd Square. The final answer will probably contain some input from all three of these groups. Regardless, the case of George Floyd Square offers many interesting insights into the question of rights to a place, and the difficulty of mediating between these various claims.

Sources:

Reeves, Mel. 2021. “George Floyd Square to Reopen after March Trial.” Spokesman-Recorder, February 17, 2021. https://spokesman-recorder.com/2021/02/17/george-floyd-square-to-reopen-after-march-trial/

KSTP. 2021. “Minneapolis City Leaders Continue Discussion of Reopening George Floyd Square.” KSTP-TV, March 18, 2021. https://kstp.com/news/minneapolis-city-leaders-continue-discussion-of-reopening-george-floyd-square-march-18-2021/6046857/

The Learning Network. 2021. “Film Club: ‘Inside the Battle Over George Floyd Square.’” The New York Times, April 1, 2021, updated June 3, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/learning/film-club-inside-the-battle-over-george-floyd-square.html

Allen, Jonathan. 2021. “After Landmark Policing Trial, a Debate over Reopening George Floyd Square.” Reuters, April 23, 2021. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/after-landmark-policing-trial-debate-over-reopening-george-floyd-square-2021-04-23/

Holder, Sarah and Fola Akinnibi. 2021. “Minneapolis Dismantled Barriers at George Floyd Square. Activists Put up New Ones.” Bloomberg, June 3, 2021. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-03/activists-take-back-george-floyd-square-again

By: Andrea Shipton

In Shreveport, Louisiana, the implementation of a volunteer patrol group has quickly transformed the environment of a once-violent public school. In September of this year, an uptick in school fights triggered the arrest of twenty-three Southwood High School students over the course of three days. Concerned by this violence, a group of fathers decided to do something about it, establishing a program called “Dads on Duty.” This volunteer group allows about forty fathers to take shifts patrolling the school, greeting students and helping maintain a positive learning environment. Students report feeling much safer and happier now, with zero violent incidents reported in the month since the program’s implementation. This program’s success in the short-term speaks to the power of individuals to rapidly transform the character of a place through community-based solutions.

            Dads on Duty has re-founded Southwood High School by establishing a new sense of place on campus— one that feels a lot more like Iris Marion Young’s conception of home. The fathers add powerful senses of kinship through their “preservation” of the school as a home-like environment for its students. Just as homemaking is typically gendered, men are the ones leading this preservation, presumably since young boys are more often involved in school fights than girls. Fathers may be able to better connect with these boys to enhance feelings of safety, security, and belonging while deterring violent tendencies. While no one has altered the school physically, the addition of fathers has re-founded the place through a transformation of a violent environment to a more peaceful and welcoming one.

            Dads on Duty also speaks to the importance of community-based solutions to solve local issues, especially in public spaces. Rather than increasing police presence in schools, which would likely increase fear and apprehension among students, the program conversely soothes these anxieties. Though these fathers have no formal training as school counsellors or patrol officers, they do have experience being dads, which allows for loving yet stern bonds between fathers and students. Since volunteers run the program, it is also completely free for the school and the community. Considering that property taxes fund this school and that 53% of students are economically disadvantaged, Dads on Duty does not put further stress on a school budget that is likely already strained.

Members’ identity as not just fathers but Black fathers also enhances their ability to connect to students. Black students comprise about 74% of the student body, which is likely due to some combination of zoning laws, redlining, racial covenants, and other forms of discrimination that have formed a racialized geography— and thus racialized school districts— throughout the United States (Ford 234). The presence of positive role models that the majority of students feel they can identify with certainly aids the program’s effectiveness. In addition, these men also push back against negative stereotypes of Black men that the American public is constantly overwhelmed with. In that sense, Dads on Duty acts as a counter-hegemonic force that seeks to inspire and empower young Black students.

Every young American has the right to an education in a safe learning environment— one free of environmental harms and other threats to their physical and mental wellbeing. This community-based solution to in-school violence suggests that simple, costless programs that draw on the existing skills and expertise of citizens can not only obtain overwhelming support but effectively solve community issues. Furthermore, Dads on Duty emphasizes the significant, positive impact that a group of people— specifically Black fathers— can have on a place. Without physically altering Southwood High School, or increasing police presence, Dads on Duty has re-founded the place through the transformation of a violent environment to a welcoming, safe, secure, and pro-learning one. The dads are hopeful their success will continue in the long-term— not only in Southwood High, but in public high schools across the nation,

References:

Richard Thompson Ford, “The Color of Territory: How Law and Borders Keep America Segregated,” in Clarissa Rile Hayward and Todd Swanstrom, eds., Justice and the American Metropolis, pp.223-236

Iris Marion Young, “House and Home: Feminist Variations on a Theme,” in Young, Intersecting Voices: Dilemmas of Gender, Political Philosophy, and Policy, pp. 134-164

https://www.insider.com/louisiana-dads-started-patrol-group-high-school-prevent-fights-2021-10

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dads-louisiana-high-school-student-violence/

https://www.publicschoolreview.com/southwood-high-school-profile

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/louisiana/districts/caddo-parish/southwood-high-school-8543

Post by Luke Zaelke

To some, mining seems like a distant concept reserved for people and places that exhibit a historical geologic presence. One might think of old mining towns in the western United States, or coal mines in England during the industrial revolution. But some inhabited areas exhibit no mining value until new technologies reveal the hidden treasure, thus creating tension between the place’s current use and the possible founding of a mine. This tension reveals issues of preservation, founding, and environmental justice. The 2017 La Colosa Mine controversy in Colombia manifests these issues and demonstrates the increasingly dangerous mining technologies that are used to explore mineral deposits without regard for who is harmed.

Subsurface resource exploration is an increasingly viable mode of retrieving mass amounts of minerals for the large-scale production of precious metals. In the past, subsurface exploration was hindered by observational geologic maps that could only predict mineralogical patterns in the subsurface by observing an outcrop and then applying the laws of superposition and lateral continuity.

The Law of Superposition: In sedimentary rocks, the oldest rock layer is at the bottom of a rock unit and the younger layers ascend upwards.

The Law of Lateral Continuity: All rocks continue horizontally (laterally) unless disrupted by a geologic process such as faulting or erosion.

This meant that a geologist’s prediction of where to mine was solely dependent on the number of outcrops in the area and the accuracy of the geologic map. Technological advances such as seismic data, chemical analysis, and coring have expanded subsurface exploration to the point where only those with the newest technologies can find profitable mineral deposits in remote areas.

Example of subsurface drilling and mineral visualization

https://www.goldensoftware.com/solutions/use-case/map-subsurface-mineralization

The South African AngloGold Ashanti mining company discovered a gold deposit in the Colombian subsurface in 2006 using drilling technology that led to “extensive exploration drilling in 2007” (NSEnergy). The thorough exploration outlined the oval shape of the deposit and discovered the complex to be largely a diorite porphyry with gold occurring in common sulfide veins and silicates. The exact measurements led AngloGold to predict that the porphyry body contains 28.33 million ounces of gold, the largest deposit in Colombia.

However, the residents of Cajamarca, a nearby agricultural municipality, raised environmental justice objections to the sale of land for mining. Mine tailings, acidic water, and loss of their forest reserve were just a few of the reasons locals protested the mining operation. These issues were especially problematic because of the remote agricultural economy that could be destroyed by waste mining products. Even still, the Colombian government was eager to make a deal with AngloGold.

In response, the residents of Cajamarca used a recent Colombian law that allows local municipalities to hold a binding referendum where citizens can vote whether to continue resource extraction or to halt a project all together. Against government persuasion, 98% of Cajamarca’s residents voted to halt AngloGold’s mining, hence ending all gold mining operations in the municipality for the time being. The focus of the Colombian Federal government on protecting foreign interests compelled the head of the Environmental Committee in Defense of Life from Cajamarca, Renzo Alexandria Garcia, to state:

“It is unacceptable to expect to mutilate Colombian democracy under the pretext of protecting the foreign interests of mining companies.”

https://earthworks.org/blog/98-vote-colombias-la-colosa-mine/

Cajamarca residents protesting the AngloGold mine

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/98-of-Cajamarca-Residents-Vote-Against-Gold-Mining-in-Colombia-20170327-0027.html

Luckily, the Colombian voting laws led to a happy ending and mine closure for Cajamarca in 2017. But, the story illustrates how technological advances in all resource extraction puts poor remote communities at risk of exploitation all over the world.  Since these technologies indiscriminately search for geologic deposits in remote areas, small communities and less populated areas are targeted by major corporations. Mining technologies search specifically for the most valuable area to extract without considering fewer valuable areas with minimal impacts.

These concepts not only apply to mining but can be seen in other extraction such as oil drilling, where the most profitable drill site might be in fundamentally risky areas such as the ocean or protected wildlife localities. No matter the area or technique, extraction equipment is erected to maximize resource collection, not to minimize harm.

Contrary to neoliberal values, places are more than just a resource. The people of Cajamarca and of other remote areas have deep emotional and cultural ties to their community and to the places they are trying to preserve. By viewing areas simply as resources, companies ignore these invaluable attributes and hence devalue the land to only what they can physically extract from it. New mining and extraction technologies completely ignore the intangible characteristics of a place, worsening the issue of devaluation which allows mining companies to unjustly take the land.

In conclusion, the mining and resource extraction industries should examine the dangers of exploring and exploiting the most valuable resource areas when they conflict with local communities. International law must regulate these corporations and force them to take a more holistic approach to mining, especially in remote areas.

Sources:

https://www.icmm.com/en-gb/mining-metals/about-mining/operating-mines

La Colosa Gold-Mining Struggle, A Case Study of How a Community Brings the Colombian Constitution to Life for Environmental Justice

98% vote against Colombia’s La Colosa mine

https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/projects/la-colosa-gold-project/

(post by Ryan DiLello)

Two supreme court cases dealing with criminal prosecutions in Oklahoma have created a crisis regarding the state’s recognition and treatment of Native American land. 

Background: The Trail of Tears

    Like other Native American tribes, the Muscogee Creek people have endured a history of relocation and marginalization. Following the Indian Removal Act of 1830 and the Removal Treaty in 1832, the U.S. army marched more than 20,000 Muscogees into Indian Territories primarily in Oklahoma. In Oklahoma, the Muscogee re-established themselves, maintaining a chief as well as a constitution. Shortly after the civil war, the tribe was forced to forfeit 3.2 million acres of its land for redistribution. But despite more widespread efforts from congress to strip native american tribes of their sovereignty, the Muscogee have resisted. Today, the tribe retains their land but their sovereignty is in question, often capitulating to joint agreements with the state of Oklahoma. But after two court cases recently resurfaced, the entirety of the reservation’s sovereignty is up for debate. 

Sharp v. Murphy

In 1999, Patrick Murphy of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation in Oklahoma murdered another Muscogee man, George Jacobs. Murphy was found guilty in state court and sentenced to death. Earlier this year, however, Murphy appealed his case to the Supreme Court claiming that because he is a Native American and the murder occured on the reservation, it was outside the state’s jurisdiction to prosecute him. Murphy argued that the case ought to have been carried out at the federal level instead. Murphy’s argument sharply diverges from almost 100 years of juridical practice in Oklahoma. Though Congress failed to ever formally eliminate Muscogee land, judicial proceedings paired since the founding of Oklahoma effectively eliminated Muscogee land. The possible retrial at the federal level, however, would reify Muscogee land in Oklahoma and reclassify much of Eastern Oklahoma as an Indian reservation.

In the eyes of the state, the appeal posed worrisome consequences. In the words of state lawyer Lisa Blatt, affirming the existence of the reservation would have “earth-shattering consequences.” She pointed to the 2,000 prisoners, 155 of whom are convicted murderers, who would have their cases reopened. Legitimizing Muscogee land would also mean its natives would be exempt from sales and income taxes. The case remains pending in a 4-4 gridlock, with Justice Neil Gorsuch having recused himself. 

Oklahoma v. McGirt

Last friday, a similar case arose regarding sexual violence against a child. Jimcy McGirt, a Muscogee man, claimed his 1997 rape conviction should be overturned because of the same jurisdictional dispute. Borrowing Murphy’s argument, McGirt asserted that only the federal government could prosecute him. Speaking with NPR, Justice Breyer said, “here are 1.8 million people living in this area. They’ve built their lives not necessarily on criminal law but on municipal regulations, property law, dog-related law. And now if we say this land belongs to the tribe, what happens to all those people, all those laws?” The case poses immense logistical, economic, and political problems for those living on and off the reservation. The Supreme Court expects to have a decision by January 1st, 2020. 

A map of Muscogee territory. The tribe has over 81,000 members.

What’s ultimately at stake? // Reflection

    The decision of the Supreme Court in the Oklahoma v. McGirt case will decide whether nearly half of Eastern Oklahoma is in fact an Indian reservation. Affirming the reservation, however, would jeopardize the homes of millions, cut essential tax revenue, and resurface hundreds of court cases. And though the media has emphasized the downsides, the freedoms and sovereignty of the Muscogee people are also on the line. 

    I was intrigued with these cases because they illustrate the complex connection between juridical practices and the formation of boundaries. These cases in particular showed how  juridical changes in one region can have significant implications on outsiders. Oklahomans living off the reservation would still feel the effects of tax adjustments in various forms of socio-economic changes. Additionally, if non-Muscogan citizens living on the reservation had to leave, the effects of displacement would be widely felt. There are also concerns at the federal level; courts might exhaust their resources when faced with an overload of retried cases. In all, the far-reaching effects of this one case serves to demonstrate the ways in which juridical practices at a local level can pose significant impacts on a national level and the interdependence of juridical practice and boundaries. 

Sources:

https://www.mcn-nsn.gov/

https://kfor.com/2019/06/27/us-supreme-court-delays-ruling-on-oklahoma-creek-nation-case/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/13/supreme-court-oklahoma-indian-land-dispute/2642692001/

(post written by Alma Bradley)

In this class we have discussed the lack of access to affordable housing, but we did not discuss one crucial consequence and cause: eviction. Eviction occurs for a variety of reasons, but mainly because tenants cannot afford their rent. Sociologist and author Matthew Desmond estimates that 2.3 million evictions were filed in the U.S. in 2016, which equates to a rate of four every minute. Desmond chronicled this widespread issue in his seminal book Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City. 

Desmond focuses on those living in the private rental market, who qualify but do not receive government housing assistance. Only approximately 1 in 4 families who qualify receive housing assistance. Desmond follows the lives of eight families living below the poverty line, some black and some white, who spend more than half (and sometimes even 60, 70, 80%) of their income on rent, and are constantly struggling with eviction in Milwaukee. 

Lamar, a single-father and double-amputee, rents a two bedroom apartment for $550, despite his income being only $628- leaving $2.19 a day for the family’s other needs. For many poor families like Lamar’s, it is sometimes impossible to pay for rent each month. Desmond also profiles Crystal, a manic depressive young black woman, who in despiration turns to prostitution after her eviction. 

Observing Milwaukee’s eviction court, where the majority of the tenants are black women, Desmond notes: “If incarceration had come to define the lives of men from impoverished black neighborhoods, eviction was shaping the lives of women. Poor black men were locked up. Poor black women were locked out.” 

 Like incarceration, prior evictions serve as a stigma; they make tennents undesirable and condemn them to even more filthy, dilapidated housing. Moreover, eviction can prevent one from ever living in public housing. Desmond ends his description of Arlene, a mother of two, with her making her 89th call to find a new home.I’ve included a long, but poignant, except from the New York Review of Books : 

“The mother, Arleen, finds a house she likes, and it consumes only 84 percent of her cash income. But the city condemns it. So she moves the teen, Jori, and his brother, Jafiris, to a place she calls “Crackhead City” and then to a duplex where the rent, $550 a month, requires 88 percent of her income. She falls behind and gets evicted two days before Christmas, but the new tenant lets her stay until she finds a place. Living with a stranger causes friction, and Arleen calls ninety landlords before finding a place, from which she is again evicted. The situation worsens. She and the boys double up with a neighbor who is turning tricks. They rent a place where they are robbed at gunpoint. When Arleen’s next apartment takes 96 percent of her welfare check, she can’t keep the lights on. Her worst fear comes to pass: child welfare takes the kids” 

Black women suffer the most. They make less money and are unable to work off part of their rent through manual labour, like some men do. Moreover, they have children, a greater expense, and many landlords dislike renting to families with young children. Black women experience the worst housing discrimination and end up with the worst housing. 

Yet, Desmond notes that while tenants face eviction, landlords make over 400,000 dollars a year. Desmond emphasizes that this mistreatment continues because poverty is profitable. These incomes are made possible by a. keeping these properties in dire conditions, most have no appliances and are infested with cockroaches and maggots, and b. the extreme poverty of the tenants, who lack the power to complain. Desmond deems this exploitation. Since its a landlord’s market, landlords keep rents at a higher level than tenants can afford; if they have to evict them, they can keep the security deposit and find someone else desperate for housing. One should also note that government law allows landlords to rent units that violate property code if they inform tenants, and in most states they can deny tenants basic appliances. The solution cannot be to find a better suited apartment – no one better will rent to tenants with so many evictions. 

 Sadly, without stable housing, it is hard to maintain jobs and attend school, furthering the cycle of poverty, and eventually eviction. Just as we studied in class, social relations shape space, and space establishes social relations: evictions are not only a consequence of poverty, they are a cause. 

Sources: 

Kicked Out in America!

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/12/601783346/first-ever-evictions-database-shows-were-in-the-middle-of-a-housing-crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/07/evicted-poverty-and-profit-in-the-american-city-matthew-desmond-review

Poor, minority neighborhoods are changing rapidly, and their food environments both exemplify and foster this change. Fort Greene, the neighborhood of my high school, was once a predominantly black area. Now it is almost 50% white, as rising rents, mortgages, and food prices have forced original residents out. In my four years of high school, more than 20 new food establishments opened in the area, completely changing the neighborhood. It now has a Whole Foods, two high-end, public food halls, and many chic new restaurants. These have replaced minority-owned, neighborhood and cultural staples such as Madiba, an extremely popular and delicious South African restaurant that in 2018, after 19 years, was forced to close due to financial troubles.  Both policy and cultural consumerism have driven gentrification in cities like NYC, and have created food environments that, while giving residents healthier options, decrease the affordability of neighborhoods and dislocate native residents. 

Policies have furthered food gentrification. Establishments such as Whole Foods used avoid minority, low income neighborhoods, but as these neighborhoods are growing richer and whiter, policies have changed to incentivize their development. Mayor DeBlasio’s housing plan included rezoning various low-income areas to boost high-density housing and commercial development. Additionally, the city has provided economic incentives, such as tax breaks, to lure companies like Whole Foods into these areas. This has resulted in more affluent, white people moving in, as well as more high-end eateries and supermarkets to cater to new residents. The neighborhoods affected by this process have experienced vast changes in their food environments. Harlem exemplifies these changes. Once a food desert, the neighborhood now has a variety of healthy food establishments, including a Whole Foods. While an increase in healthy options benefits the community, the costs that come with this growth are damning. Higher-quality food comes at a higher price, and many Harlem residents cannot afford to shop at these places. Additionally, the presence of gourmet supermarkets has proven to significantly increase the housing prices in surrounding areas. This outcome has become known as the Whole Foods effect. The combination of increased food prices and increased rents leads to residents having less to spend on food while food prices rise. This has forced residents in Harlem, and in other communities, to move out. 

Food gentrification goes beyond economically burdening poor residents; it also strips neighborhoods of their character, and appropriates their cultures. Numerous black-owned eateries that were considered important symbols of Harlem have closed in recent years, many now replaced by brand-name, commercial franchises that use the cultural roots of the neighborhoods as a selling point. Additionally, food itself has become gentrified. High-end establishments have recreated culinary staples of poor, minority communities, and marketed them to a broader, whiter audience at a higher price. For example, Whole Foods now sells the chopped-cheese sandwich, what used to be a specialty in the bodegas of minority NYC neighborhoods. Whole Foods also labeled collard greens the new kale, a statement that proves their complicity in culinary cultural appropriation. 

While trendy and desirable to some, high-end supermarkets, food halls and restaurants are forces of gentrification. They cater to an affluent, white demographic, while driving out the poor, minority communities that created many of their dishes. If this trend continues, we could see neighborhoods like Harlem complete their transformation into places whose cultural roots have all but died, the only remnants of them lining the shelves of gourmet supermarkets and the menus of high-end eateries.

Links:

–https://www.theroot.com/on-whole-foods-gentrification-and-the-erasure-of-black-1797444513

-https://www.cunyurbanfoodpolicy.org/news/2018/3/27/feeding-or-starving-gentrification-the-role-of-food-policy

-https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/magazine/when-gentrification-isnt-about-housing.html

-http://eatingineastharlem.org/eating-in-east-harlem-an-assessment-of-changing-foodscapes-in-community-district-11-2000-2015/

              When discussing place and space, we often refer to physical locations on Earth. However, in this blog post I would like to focus on space – outer space.

In the United States, both NASA and private companies and entrepreneurs have ventured into the realm of commercial spacecraft. Boeing is creating a Starliner Aircraft in conjunction with NASA’s Commercial Crew Program. This spacecraft is designed to take passengers and crew into low-orbit around Earth. At first, the Starliner will just take NASA crew members and scientists into space, specifically to the International Space Station (ISS). Eventually, wealthy people who are not engaged in scientific projects will be able to join on these trips as well, in what is called “space tourism.” There are already designs in place for “space hotels” orbiting Earth. Startup company Orion Span plans to launch the first-ever luxury space hotel in 2021 and start hosting guests in 2022. This is not only an American phenomenon: Russia’s space agency Roscosmos has already started bringing people to space who are not astronauts.

In the middle of the New Mexico desert sits Spaceport America, spaceflight headquarters and launch site for the company Virgin Galactica. A massive structure called the Gateway to Space building is the heart of this facility. It holds training facilities for astronauts and it is where spacecraft launch and land. Spaceport America occupies 27 square miles of land, and is funded by the state of New Mexico, Sierra and Dona Anna counties. The operation was founded by British billionaire Sir Richard Branson, and he describes his vision for the program in the following quotes:

“Virgin Galactic recognizes that answers to many of the challenges we face in sustaining life on our beautiful but fragile planet, lie in making better use of space.”

“From space it is clear that there is much more that unites than divides us.”

“We are at the vanguard of a new industry determined to pioneer twenty-first century spacecraft, which will open space to everybody – and change the world for good.”

These quotes need to be read with these facts and figures in mind: 700 people have signed up for a trip with a Virgin Galactic spaceship which will travel 62 miles up into space, spend several minutes in zero-gravity, and then return to New Mexico. This costs up to $250,000 per ticket, and all of the available tickets have been sold. On a Russian Soyuz aircraft, people paid between $20 million and $40 million for a spare seat as the aircraft orbited Earth for one to two weeks. A ten-day stay at a luxury space hotel will cost $9.5 million – at a minimum.

This prohibitive cost might not directly “open space to everybody.” The space travel is available only those who can afford it. These operations do not necessarily make it clear that “there is much more that unites than divides us.” Instead, the cost barrier highlights some stark differences between those who are privileged and those who are not. Perhaps from space country borders are invisible, but this temporary perspective does not automatically erase political struggles, civil wars, genocides, poverty, and oppression.

NASA hopes to use this revenue to offset the cost of running the ISS, which costs $3-$4 billion dollars a year. But what will it do with the rest of the money? If NASA and these other companies have a mission to “change the world for good,” they might consider using the money to fight poverty, homelessness, disease, climate change…any one of the problems plaguing our world. Are they diverting their focus away from Earth and looking to space for entertainment and revenue? Or are these scientifically-minded missions, beneficial to the global population? Perhaps this space travel will develop the science and technology that will help find solutions to “sustaining life on our beautiful but fragile planet.” These are complex programs – on the face of them, they seem to exclude a large portion of the population and divert focus away from issues on Earth. But the results of the programs are unknown: they could hold the key to discovering technological solutions to some of our most pressing problems. I am excited to witness the future of this space travel.

Sources

https://www.boeing.com/space/starliner/

https://www.cntraveler.com/story/you-can-soon-vacation-in-space-for-dollar35000-per-night

https://www.virgingalactic.com/spaceport/

https://www.cntraveler.com/story/space-tourism-could-be-a-reality-in-2018

https://www.space.com/40207-space-hotel-launch-2021-aurora-station.html

https://www.space.com/russia-launching-space-tourists-2021.html