< PREVIOUS ] [ 1999 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
If some think tank is looking for a topic, one appeared last week in a story about self-proclaimed anarchists in the Whitaker neighborhood of Eugene, Ore.
I cannot claim any familiarity with that college town, other than what friends have told me, but apparently that neighborhood had been affordable, although somewhat rundown and seedy.
Some residents, old and new, began cleaning and painting, just because they liked it better that way, as indeed most of us do.
But that made the neighborhood more attractive, so more people considered moving there, which increased demand, which in turn elevated real-estate prices, which caused increases in taxes and rents, thereby squeezing some existing residents.
Certain of those existing residents call themselves
anarchists, and have responded to the neighborhood
improvements by fighting them. They distributed a flier
that said Resist the urge not to litter. The health and
diversity of our neighborhood depends on it.
And if trashy streets aren't enough to discourage
immigration and investment, the Whitaker anarchists also
call for resistance to the pioneering gentry
and
practice hate speech against yuppie gentrifying scum
and their BMW's. Smashing windows at new upscale and
trendy restaurants is another response.
While it is easy to criticize their behavior, it is also obvious that the Whitaker Anarchists have hit upon a real and widespread problem -- how do you deal with invaders who will destroy your quality of life unless they are stopped?
What makes this problem more challenging is that the process isn't entirely bad. In fact, it's beneficial before it crosses a line that has yet to be defined.
If we consider Salida about a dozen years ago, it was a run-down ramshackle town where houses hadn't seen fresh paint in years and yards were overgrown and untended.
Why bother? No matter how much you fixed up your property, you wouldn't be able to sell it, which meant you were never going to be able to move to where there were jobs at all, let alone jobs that paid more than minimum wage.
So you might as well spend that yard-and-house time on something productive, like strolling in the woods or abusing uncontrollable substances.
But a decade ago, it began to dawn on some of us that we were stuck here, and we might as well make the best of us. So we spruced up our houses and yards because we liked them better that way. Some of us worked to bring in public radio. Others worked to improve the city parks, to develop pleasant walking trails, to get historic designation to protect the charming old brick downtown.
None of this, to my knowledge, was done to attract new residents. It was just something we did for ourselves.
But America seems to work like a bizarre variation of
the movie Pacific Heights.
You fix something up for
yourself, and then somebody moves in and takes over, and
you will not be able to live there anymore because the
place is no longer tolerable.
Visiting people see an attractive area, rather than clutter and litter and decay, and decide to move in. Prices start going up.
This warps your attitude as a property owner. What was
just a place to live
evolves into a valuable
investment,
and the temptation is strong to put every
possible pressure on the local government to protect
property values
rather than serve the
public.
Such changes in the municipal polices accelerate the
rest of the process of making the world a better place for
invaders and a worse place for inhabitants. The chain-link
fence that once marked you as a good citizen because it
kept your dog from running free is a blight-causing
influence,
and the old car isn't an emblem of wholesome
traditional American thrift, but a threat to public health
and safety.
So there's a line between improving your neighborhood
for yourself
and attracting invaders to the
neighborhood.
Some think tank ought to examine this
process, and tell us where the line is.
Does it come when people start planting flowers? The arrival of the first ATM? The opening of a smoke-free restaurant with beyond-the-meat-and-potatoes cuisine and servers who provide their names? The inauguration of cellular telephone service, or of Internet access as a local call?
One of these factors doubtless indicates that the line has been crossed, and that Eugene-style anarchy is all that remains as a response.
But we need to know which factor, and the think tank that finds it will help prevent anarchy, as well as assist in preserving a traditional way of life in any pleasant places that haven't been discovered yet.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 1999 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >