Can a highway be racist?

[D-Dey65]

But they do build roads on the basis of money, a tendency that disproportionately affects nonwhite communities.

They also build on the basis of connecting certain destinations, regardless of who or what else is along the way or in the way.

You know, by this so-called "logic" if our highways can be racist, so can our railroads.  We displaced a lot of Native Americans to build our railroads across the country. We also displaced white and even non-white settlers.  And many of our stations had segregated waiting rooms, even on Long Island!!

The former Wainscott LIRR station had segregated waiting rooms for whites and non-whites.

So, do you want to tear those railroads and the stations down too? I don't.

[SEWIGuy]

But they do build roads on the basis of money, a tendency that disproportionately affects nonwhite communities.

They also build on the basis of connecting certain destinations, regardless of who or what else is along the way or in the way.

You know, by this so-called "logic" if our highways can be racist, so can our railroads.  We displaced a lot of Native Americans to build our railroads across the country. We also displaced white and even non-white settlers.  And many of our stations had segregated waiting rooms, even on Long Island!!

The former Wainscott LIRR station had segregated waiting rooms for whites and non-whites.

So, do you want to tear those railroads and the stations down too? I don't.

Not many (any?) people here are advocating tearing down freeways due to the facts on how they were routed.  Simply acknowledging that racism played a role in such routings.

[thspfc]

But they do build roads on the basis of money, a tendency that disproportionately affects nonwhite communities.

They also build on the basis of connecting certain destinations, regardless of who or what else is along the way or in the way.

You know, by this so-called "logic" if our highways can be racist, so can our railroads.  We displaced a lot of Native Americans to build our railroads across the country. We also displaced white and even non-white settlers.  And many of our stations had segregated waiting rooms, even on Long Island!!

The former Wainscott LIRR station had segregated waiting rooms for whites and non-whites.

So, do you want to tear those railroads and the stations down too? I don't.

I'm not in any way advocating for freeway removal on the basis of past racist tendencies, and I'm not sure how you gathered that I was from my post, but alright.

However there are certain urban freeways that I believe should be removed, with the poster child being the western and northern segments of Kansas City's loop around downtown. There's just no reason why those stretches have to be there, and they unnecessarily disconnect the city. I-35 and I-70 could be rerouted along what is now I-670.

[jamess]

You know, by this so-called "logic" if our highways can be racist, so can our railroads.

Who exactly are you arguing against? Or are you just trying to build a strawman?

Of course this is true. It's common that "quiet zones" exist in wealthy, majority white areas while the train is required to blast away in the non-white parts of town.

[bandit957]

Northern Kentucky had at least one highway project that I'm pretty sure was racist, and it's had tons that were classist.

I think the 12th Street project in Covington in the 2000s probably had some racism at its core. From what I've seen from public officials, that would be very likely.

And I-471 is a living celebration of classism. Think of all the blocks and blocks of poor and working-class housing that was torn down for it, while the road bulges to the west to avoid tearing down the country club. The new KY 9 through Newport was built for the very purpose of tearing down public housing, and public officials weren't even shy about admitting it.

I just wonder what public officials said behind closed doors.

[UCFKnights]

It was once thought that slum clearance would nullify the reasons it existed rather than push it elsewhere.  It is fascinating to read 1950s and 1960s eras studies on the topic in the California Highways & Public Works volume.  They really didn't have a solid idea what effects would be caused by Freeway and Expressway development, just guesses.

And, even on this forum, people have purported that those whose homes were demolished could have simply moved–presumably into non-slum/non-ghetto housing.  It does seem commonsense to wonder why, if that had been true, they hadn't already moved into better conditions...

The traditional economics reason for this is likely that by removing supply, and paying out the appraised value to those individuals, its making it easier for them to move - I imagine its not the easiest to sell your home and move in the slum/ghetto. The modifications to the supply/demand curve should have helped. Of course, the issue is highways brought a bunch of new problems with it to those areas.

Its not like we exactly have abandoned the idea of using eminent domain to try to improve blighted areas following the same economic principles... just now we seem to have realized that just slapping some facility in the middle of a community without much thought isn't a great way to do that, but by more strategically picking the locations to try to avoid dividing communities. The common theory now seems to be to try to place the improvements on the edge of these areas to avoid dividing the communities. When my city placed a new basketball arena, soccer stadium, and university/high school complex, they weren't exactly tearing down any nice homes/buildings, but thought was put into trying to make sure that they weren't dividing communities, attempts were made to situate parking to discourage people from avoiding surrounding businesses and escaping the area quickly, etc...

[Max Rockatansky]

It was once thought that slum clearance would nullify the reasons it existed rather than push it elsewhere.  It is fascinating to read 1950s and 1960s eras studies on the topic in the California Highways & Public Works volume.  They really didn't have a solid idea what effects would be caused by Freeway and Expressway development, just guesses.

And, even on this forum, people have purported that those whose homes were demolished could have simply moved–presumably into non-slum/non-ghetto housing.  It does seem commonsense to wonder why, if that had been true, they hadn't already moved into better conditions...

The traditional economics reason for this is likely that by removing supply, and paying out the appraised value to those individuals, its making it easier for them to move - I imagine its not the easiest to sell your home and move in the slum/ghetto. The modifications to the supply/demand curve should have helped. Of course, the issue is highways brought a bunch of new problems with it to those areas.

Its not like we exactly have abandoned the idea of using eminent domain to try to improve blighted areas following the same economic principles... just now we seem to have realized that just slapping some facility in the middle of a community without much thought isn't a great way to do that, but by more strategically picking the locations to try to avoid dividing communities. The common theory now seems to be to try to place the improvements on the edge of these areas to avoid dividing the communities. When my city placed a new basketball arena, soccer stadium, and university/high school complex, they weren't exactly tearing down any nice homes/buildings, but thought was put into trying to make sure that they weren't dividing communities, attempts were made to situate parking to discourage people from avoiding surrounding businesses and escaping the area quickly, etc...

This is part of the reason I find the HSR so fascinating in Fresno.  The location was run straight through the middle of the most poverty-stricken neighborhoods in the city and basically obliterated the old Chinese district to make way for new station.  The people who are pro-HSR are all in with the demolition whereas people who aren't for the HSR aren't exactly crying foul on what area is being demolished.  Hard to assess how the project location might be viewed four-five decades after the fact like we are doing with a lot of the freeway corridors. 

[jamess]

It was once thought that slum clearance would nullify the reasons it existed rather than push it elsewhere.  It is fascinating to read 1950s and 1960s eras studies on the topic in the California Highways & Public Works volume.  They really didn't have a solid idea what effects would be caused by Freeway and Expressway development, just guesses.

And, even on this forum, people have purported that those whose homes were demolished could have simply moved–presumably into non-slum/non-ghetto housing.  It does seem commonsense to wonder why, if that had been true, they hadn't already moved into better conditions...

The traditional economics reason for this is likely that by removing supply, and paying out the appraised value to those individuals, its making it easier for them to move - I imagine its not the easiest to sell your home and move in the slum/ghetto. The modifications to the supply/demand curve should have helped. Of course, the issue is highways brought a bunch of new problems with it to those areas.

Its not like we exactly have abandoned the idea of using eminent domain to try to improve blighted areas following the same economic principles... just now we seem to have realized that just slapping some facility in the middle of a community without much thought isn't a great way to do that, but by more strategically picking the locations to try to avoid dividing communities. The common theory now seems to be to try to place the improvements on the edge of these areas to avoid dividing the communities. When my city placed a new basketball arena, soccer stadium, and university/high school complex, they weren't exactly tearing down any nice homes/buildings, but thought was put into trying to make sure that they weren't dividing communities, attempts were made to situate parking to discourage people from avoiding surrounding businesses and escaping the area quickly, etc...

This is part of the reason I find the HSR so fascinating in Fresno.  The location was run straight through the middle of the most poverty-stricken neighborhoods in the city and basically obliterated the old Chinese district to make way for new station.  The people who are pro-HSR are all in with the demolition whereas people who aren't for the HSR aren't exactly crying foul on what area is being demolished.  Hard to assess how the project location might be viewed four-five decades after the fact like we are doing with a lot of the freeway corridors.

Eh, not exactly. The HSR line runs along the UP right of way. 99% of the demolitions have actually been road related.

And Chintown - the whole 2 blocks - has been dead for 40+ years. One of the largest buildings recently burnt down because it had been abandoned for so long and the homeless break in.

Had they used the BNSF corridor, there would have been a lot more demolitions. Had they gone further west, they would have not been able to serve downtown, which defeats the purpose.

If you want a Fresno example, just look at how 180 destroyed the Belmont corridor in the last 2 decades.

[Max Rockatansky]

It was once thought that slum clearance would nullify the reasons it existed rather than push it elsewhere.  It is fascinating to read 1950s and 1960s eras studies on the topic in the California Highways & Public Works volume.  They really didn't have a solid idea what effects would be caused by Freeway and Expressway development, just guesses.

And, even on this forum, people have purported that those whose homes were demolished could have simply moved–presumably into non-slum/non-ghetto housing.  It does seem commonsense to wonder why, if that had been true, they hadn't already moved into better conditions...

The traditional economics reason for this is likely that by removing supply, and paying out the appraised value to those individuals, its making it easier for them to move - I imagine its not the easiest to sell your home and move in the slum/ghetto. The modifications to the supply/demand curve should have helped. Of course, the issue is highways brought a bunch of new problems with it to those areas.

Its not like we exactly have abandoned the idea of using eminent domain to try to improve blighted areas following the same economic principles... just now we seem to have realized that just slapping some facility in the middle of a community without much thought isn't a great way to do that, but by more strategically picking the locations to try to avoid dividing communities. The common theory now seems to be to try to place the improvements on the edge of these areas to avoid dividing the communities. When my city placed a new basketball arena, soccer stadium, and university/high school complex, they weren't exactly tearing down any nice homes/buildings, but thought was put into trying to make sure that they weren't dividing communities, attempts were made to situate parking to discourage people from avoiding surrounding businesses and escaping the area quickly, etc...

This is part of the reason I find the HSR so fascinating in Fresno.  The location was run straight through the middle of the most poverty-stricken neighborhoods in the city and basically obliterated the old Chinese district to make way for new station.  The people who are pro-HSR are all in with the demolition whereas people who aren't for the HSR aren't exactly crying foul on what area is being demolished.  Hard to assess how the project location might be viewed four-five decades after the fact like we are doing with a lot of the freeway corridors.

Eh, not exactly. The HSR line runs along the UP right of way. 99% of the demolitions have actually been road related.

And Chintown - the whole 2 blocks - has been dead for 40+ years. One of the largest buildings recently burnt down because it had been abandoned for so long and the homeless break in.

Had they used the BNSF corridor, there would have been a lot more demolitions. Had they gone further west, they would have not been able to serve downtown, which defeats the purpose.

If you want a Fresno example, just look at how 180 destroyed the Belmont corridor in the last 2 decades.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I am wondering how 4-5 decades on how people will feel about  those demolitions in Fresno?  Who's to say in that timeframe someone won't come around to critique the Fresno HSR project in a light that might not be so favorable as it is viewed in present tense?  I can totally see someone in the future twisting cheap right of way and slum clearance into a substantially different narrative than it actually was. 

This thread is a great example, what we are doing is viewing things 4-5 decades after the fact and drawing conclusions.  Some people are probably making correct assumptions and conclusions, but few us of were around for many of the projects being cited in this thread.  How much accurate and intimate knowledge do we have a half century removed?

Amusingly I use a lot of the parts shops on Belmont still, way cheaper priced than the rest of the city.  The corridor might be dead but it is a haven for cheap automotive parts and service if you know where to look. 

[jamess]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I am wondering how 4-5 decades on how people will feel about  those demolitions in Fresno?  Who's to say in that timeframe someone won't come around to critique the Fresno HSR project in a light that might not be so favorable as it is viewed in present tense?  I can totally see someone in the future twisting cheap right of way and slum clearance into a substantially different narrative than it actually was. 

Because we know connectivity is a goal of the project. Right now theres a barren wasteland between downtown and Chinatown due to the massive UP right of way. When trains come by, and they do so very, very slowly, they block the crossings for a long time.

The HSR project is building underpasses to fix this issue, and the station will have a grand entrance on both sides.

Yeah in the future someone might give a bad faith argument, but the plan is explicitly designed to fix mistakes of the past.

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I am wondering how 4-5 decades on how people will feel about  those demolitions in Fresno?  Who's to say in that timeframe someone won't come around to critique the Fresno HSR project in a light that might not be so favorable as it is viewed in present tense?  I can totally see someone in the future twisting cheap right of way and slum clearance into a substantially different narrative than it actually was. 

Because we know connectivity is a goal of the project. Right now theres a barren wasteland between downtown and Chinatown due to the massive UP right of way. When trains come by, and they do so very, very slowly, they block the crossings for a long time.

The HSR project is building underpasses to fix this issue, and the station will have a grand entrance on both sides.

Yeah in the future someone might give a bad faith argument, but the plan is explicitly designed to fix mistakes of the past.

Right, but with many past freeway examples you see cited in popular conscious these days how are they any different then versus what the is doing HSR now?  It makes all the sense in the world for a city like Fresno to go all in with the HSR from a present viewpoint because it the potential revitalization the project offers would otherwise take decades to achieve.  Will people make similar complaints and comparisons about the HSR as they do now with freeways in the future?...maybe?...probably?...who knows?  Either way, maybe the HSR can serve as an example of why a modernist view point being universally applied retroactively to past corridors and events might possibly not the best way to frame things?

Can a highway or any public works project be racist?  Absolutely, but there is needs to be some sort of burden of proof for me to be comfortable with that conclusion.  Some projects overtly were influenced by racism and classism, but that is certainly not a blanket label I'm willing to apply to all past infrastructure projects. 

[bwana39]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/biden-administration-launches-1-billion-effort-to-correct-racist-highway-designs-of-the-past/ar-AAZ1o3W?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e5c8161bdfa348c191bc0be8698f0153

Let's comment on this with Grace...

[kphoger]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/biden-administration-launches-1-billion-effort-to-correct-racist-highway-designs-of-the-past/ar-AAZ1o3W?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e5c8161bdfa348c191bc0be8698f0153

Let's comment on this with Grace...

I'm guessing the "new infrastructure, like greenways to promote cycling and walking or transit programs, like rapid bus lines" part will end up being the bulk of the projects–and that the "[tearing] down highways" part, not so much.

[hbelkins]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/biden-administration-launches-1-billion-effort-to-correct-racist-highway-designs-of-the-past/ar-AAZ1o3W?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e5c8161bdfa348c191bc0be8698f0153

Let's comment on this with Grace...

Grace? She passed away 30 years ago...

[kphoger]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/biden-administration-launches-1-billion-effort-to-correct-racist-highway-designs-of-the-past/ar-AAZ1o3W?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e5c8161bdfa348c191bc0be8698f0153

Let's comment on this with Grace...

Grace? She passed away 30 years ago...

You knew my grandma?

[Henry]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/biden-administration-launches-1-billion-effort-to-correct-racist-highway-designs-of-the-past/ar-AAZ1o3W?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e5c8161bdfa348c191bc0be8698f0153

Let's comment on this with Grace...

Grace? She passed away 30 years ago...

You knew my grandma?

Actually, that was a reference to National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation, when Aunt Bethany said it after Clark asked her to give the blessing of the family Christmas Eve dinner. And when she finally did, she hilariously recited the Pledge of Allegiance, with the rest playing along and gradually joining in.

[kphoger]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/biden-administration-launches-1-billion-effort-to-correct-racist-highway-designs-of-the-past/ar-AAZ1o3W?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e5c8161bdfa348c191bc0be8698f0153

Let's comment on this with Grace...

Grace? She passed away 30 years ago...

You knew my grandma?

Actually, that was a reference to National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation, when Aunt Bethany said it after Clark asked her to give the blessing of the family Christmas Eve dinner. And when she finally did, she hilariously recited the Pledge of Allegiance, with the rest playing along and gradually joining in.

Aw man, I can't believe that went over my head!

No, but what's really weird is that my paternal grandmother, whose name was Grace, died approximately 30 years ago.  I can't remember the exact year, and I can't seem to find the obituary online, but it was right around 30 years ago.

[zzcarp]

I was thinking more quiet dignity and grace:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=We9zqMx-kRQ

[Rothman]

Or: https://youtu.be/ogO6_fANT5E

[hbelkins]

[english si]

Can a highway or any public works project be racist?  Absolutely, but there is needs to be some sort of burden of proof for me to be comfortable with that conclusion.  Some projects overtly were influenced by racism and classism, but that is certainly not a blanket label I'm willing to apply to all past infrastructure projects.

This is my view - except for racism isn't the same as classism, though there is an overlap between race and class. Arguably the issue with highways is classism, rather than racism - the areas where freeways were successfully driven through were lower class 'slums', and the higher class areas were able to block them - rather than specifically targeting black areas.

There's an issue where focussing on race (especially in the UK, where the race issue is more disconnected from the class issue, and there's a big issue with classism) is that the white lower classes are overlooked, exacerbating the classism that the left is meant to care about as being bad. And worse higher class non-whites can be seen as oppressed and in need of help, with the white lower classes as oppressors in need of punishment, exponentially making the classism problem far worse.

You know, by this so-called "logic" if our highways can be racist, so can our railroads.

I remember reading, as a kid, a children-focused history book on the Victorians. When they built the approach to Kings Cross station in the early 1850s, they demolished a cemetery and a load of slum housing. With the cemetery (which wasn't entirely higher class people) they sought permission from the families to move the bodies and found a place to rebury them. With the people in the slums, they just evicted them and razed it to the ground.

Obviously London in the early 1850s was 99% white, and it was possibly the pinnacle of Britain not being racist (Darwin hadn't published so the racism that came off the back of that didn't exist, and the horrors of the slave trade had been thrown off - instead Britain was waging war against those trading slaves), but the same approach in the 60s in the US would have certainly raise 'it was racist' heckles nowadays.

[Scott5114]

Can a highway or any public works project be racist?  Absolutely, but there is needs to be some sort of burden of proof for me to be comfortable with that conclusion.  Some projects overtly were influenced by racism and classism, but that is certainly not a blanket label I'm willing to apply to all past infrastructure projects.

This is my view - except for racism isn't the same as classism, though there is an overlap between race and class. Arguably the issue with highways is classism, rather than racism - the areas where freeways were successfully driven through were lower class 'slums', and the higher class areas were able to block them - rather than specifically targeting black areas.

There's an issue where focussing on race (especially in the UK, where the race issue is more disconnected from the class issue, and there's a big issue with classism) is that the white lower classes are overlooked, exacerbating the classism that the left is meant to care about as being bad. And worse higher class non-whites can be seen as oppressed and in need of help, with the white lower classes as oppressors in need of punishment, exponentially making the classism problem far worse.

This leads to an observation of one of the odd cultural differences between the US and the UK–in the US there is not much recognition at all of classism as a concept. Many lower-class people have the belief that they can and should be upper-class–and would be but for some stroke of luck that hasn't happened yet. There's a belief that one can change their social class simply by working hard. That means that a segment of the population is loathe to do anything to address classism directly; they don't want to do anything that they perceive as penalizing the upper classes that they assume they will be part of someday. (This is why it is so easy to get poor people to oppose tax increases on the rich, for instance.)

Racism, of course, cannot be written off in such a fashion–a Black man cannot aspire to someday be considered White–so that's what society focuses on. Of course, many of the same forces that act to keep a poor Black man down also keep a poor White man down, but the poor White man thinks someday he'll be a rich White man, so he self-disincentivizes doing anything to act against those forces.

[english si]

In the UK it's higher class to pretend to be working class. Sure Jamie Olive Oil is very much a class snob (to the point of making deliberately crap food, but with the higher class signalling ingredients, eg always using Olive Oil), but the mockney accent (which is put on) is an attempt to signal lower class, which is an attempt to signal higher class (though not the truely upper class as they typically don't have any need to show they are posh).

I remember John Prescott doing a documentary looked for the working class, and found a load of middle class people (which means something  different here - professionals are middle class) claiming to be working class. He said to someone who was positively poor "your the first working class person I've actually met", to which the reply was "how can I be working class if I don't work?" And that was more ignorance than the middle class (who may have spent early childhood with working class parents) people who claimed to be working class and oppressed despite being management or professional when it comes to their employment.

So we probably overstate classism in the UK as we're obsessed with it as identifiers, just as the US is about race.

[Rothman]

In the UK it's higher class to pretend to be working class. Sure Jamie Olive Oil is very much a class snob (to the point of making deliberately crap food, but with the higher class signalling ingredients, eg always using Olive Oil), but the mockney accent (which is put on) is an attempt to signal lower class, which is an attempt to signal higher class (though not the truely upper class as they typically don't have any need to show they are posh).

I remember John Prescott doing a documentary looked for the working class, and found a load of middle class people (which means something  different here - professionals are middle class) claiming to be working class. He said to someone who was positively poor "your the first working class person I've actually met", to which the reply was "how can I be working class if I don't work?" And that was more ignorance than the middle class (who may have spent early childhood with working class parents) people who claimed to be working class and oppressed despite being management or professional when it comes to their employment.

So we probably overstate classism in the UK as we're obsessed with it as identifiers, just as the US is about race.

Psst.  We declared independence because of the UK's strict classism... ;D

[Scott5114]

Psst.  We declared independence because of the UK's strict classism... ;D

Heh, yeah, there are some aspects of the UK class system that make absolutely no sense to me, even as an American who has actively tried to understand them. The peerage is one of them–I cannot comprehend why the government takes the time to hand out titles like "Archbaron of Drawerchester" or whatever, much less why they or anyone else would care if they had that title, since it seems to not really carry any duties or responsibilities of office.