ECONOMICS: Louisiana pols fiddle with facts while Japan’s reactors burn | TheLensNola.org

Louisiana pols fiddle with facts

while Japan’s reactors burn

By Mark Moseley, The Lens opinon writer |

 

The onslaught of disasters in Japan right now stuns the imagination: a huge earthquake, a devastating tsunami, overheating nuclear power plants, and even an active volcano. Thousands have perished, hundreds of thousands are homeless, and millions are enduring winter nights without reliable power. The human suffering is appalling.

While I understand that U.S. TV news coverage can’t focus solely on the overlapping calamities Japan, is it possible to have a news segment that doesn’t relate Japan’s profound problems to our own domestic energy situation? Good gracious! You’d think that the severity of the troubles in Japan would be captivating enough in themselves, without the need for speculation about how their disasters might impact our own energy industry sometime down the road.

Worse yet, the TV networks get politicians from Louisiana to weigh in on the mess, and within seconds they’re saying the real trouble is… high gas prices.

So please pardon me while I respond to some of this tommyrot.

If last summer’s oil disaster in the Gulf taught us anything, it was how overblown the initial concerns about governmental “overreaction” against Big Oil were.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Let’s review some of these chestnuts of bogus prognostication. On April 28 Scott McKay at The Hayride web site predicted that the real disaster wouldn’t be the spill itself so much as the “bad government policy” following it. In particular, he worried that “cap and trade” legislation would pass, that it would be “the death” of the oil industry, and “an economic cataclysm” for America. For him, that was the most ominous concern. Even if you buy into his fear about cap and trade, as some continue to do, the legislation never had a chance of passage. If it did, it never would have died in the Democratic Senate even as a massive oil gusher polluted the Gulf.

What about President Obama’s drilling moratorium, then — wasn’t that a highly destructive overreaction? Nearly all of the politicians in Louisiana acted like it was, loudly protesting the measure. With the help of the oil industry, they even put together a Rally for Economic Survival – “Survival!” – in Lafayette on July 21. The Rally’s media guide baldly claimed that Obama’s moratorium meant “the pink slips of tens of thousands of Louisiana citizens.”

Now, the moratorium was certainly a significant measure, one that erred on the side of caution. But stopping new offshore drilling during an oil disaster and its investigation isn’t tantamount to an industrial death sentence. Further, the moratorium ended early and only a small fraction of the feared job losses occurred. (Much more on this last point in a future post.)

Despite the defeat of cap and trade and the lack of moratorium-related job destruction, Louisiana politicians remain undeterred. They’ve seized on recent crises in the Middle East and in Japan, in order to argue that the Obama administration end its slow permitting process for deepwater oil drilling.

Ever the eager demagogue, our own Senator David Vitter (R-LA) cited this “permitorium” as the cause of higher gas prices, even as he commented on the Mideast turmoil.

The Interior Department’s de facto moratorium has destroyed jobs in Louisiana, contributed to the bankruptcy of at least one major employer and could force everyone to have to pay for $4.00 per gallon gasoline.

 

None of us want to see $4.00 a gallon gas again, and a simple solution starts in Louisiana, just off our coast.

Vitter made the same argument when commenting on Japan’s nuclear crisis:
“I think we need to calm down and assess the facts and base our reaction on facts and science and not political ideology and hysteria,” Vitter told Neil Cavuto Monday. “We did the latter after the BP disaster and it shut down the Gulf for months and months and we’re still virtually shut down in the Gulf and we’re paying the price now as the price of gas goes up and up and up.”
This is clever politics on Vitter’s part, especially as oil hovers around $100 per barrel (again), and  industry insiders predict $5-a-gallon gas by next year. He repeatedly claims that fast-tracking  exploratory permits for drilling in the Gulf is the answer to the current rise in global crude prices.
There’s almost no truth to Vitter’s “simple solution.” In fact, domestic oil drilling has risen significantly since 2009. Rigzone.com reported in February that

 

“Oil-drilling activity in the U.S. has accelerated to a pace not seen in a generation as energy companies, oilfield contractors and landowners rush to exploit newly profitable sources of crude.”

Rigzone reports that the number of rigs aiming for oil in the U.S. is at “its highest since 1987.” New oil shale reservoirs in Texas are expected to reach 1.5 million barrels a day by 2015, which is about the same amount of oil produced in the Gulf of Mexico, “the equivalent of nearly 30% of current U.S. production.” In addition, Chevron recently decided to invest $4 billion in the Gulf of Mexico.

So, drilling activity and investment are up significantly. But what about current production? Well, if you can trust those bomb-throwing anarchists at the Financial Times, they recently reported that

US oil production last year rose to its highest level in almost a decade….
As a result, analysts believe the US was the largest contributor to the increase in global oil supplies last year over 2009, and is on track to increase domestic production by 25 per cent by the second half of the decade.
All that extra U.S. oil production, yet gas prices have simultaneously risen dramatically – if not yet as high as they rose under Vitter’s fellow Republican, President G.W. Bush.   The only question of interest is whether our self-styled leaders are lying or ignorant when they claim that issuing drilling permits will affect the price of a global commodity, when the real price pressures are demand in China, Middle East tension, dubious Saudi reserve estimates, speculative traders, and a thousand other real-world factors.

 

Predictably, U.S. Rep. Jeff Landry (R-New Iberia) is in lockstep with Vitter.  In January, Landry appeared on Fox and Friends to discuss the implications of Middle East turmoil on oil prices. During the interview, Landry actually stated:

“If we had a sound, affordable domestic energy policy, the issues going on in the Middle East would not be a concern to us today.”

By “sound” and “affordable” he primarily means unregulated oil drilling everywhere. The second part of his statement is just hopelessly out of touch. The Fox host then asked Landry for updated information on the oil spill in the Gulf, and on the effects of the dispersants poured in the waters. Landry had nothing to say about these topics, so he made a quick pivot back to his Big Oil cheerleading:

Again, my concern right now, today, is to make sure that every American regardless whether they live in Louisiana, or up in Iowa, or over in New York City doesn’t wake up in the next couple of weeks and find that the price of gas at the pump has doubled.
This is the man who wants to represent all of coastal Louisiana for the foreseeable future.
How Vitter and Landry and others think a country that consumes 25% of oil production and possesses only 2% of the world’s reserves can simply drill its way to energy independence and lower global oil prices is beyond comprehension. An embarrassment to widespread assumptions about the state’s average IQ level, they appear regularly on Fox to tout their “drill baby drill” solutions to rising gas prices. They don’t mention conservation or efficiency, and they certainly never allude to the impacts of oil and gas drilling infrastructure on wetlands loss. They simply repeat the need for more drilling, while dismissing the possibility that there would be any negative trade offs on Louisiana’s coast, on the American lifestyle, or on the world’s climate.

 

To them, more drilling in the Gulf equals lower prices at the pump. I wish this were true, but it isn’t. The proof is in the numbers: even though there’s been an increase in drilling throughout the country, and a record amount of production in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, gas costs have risen dramatically.

In 2009, the U.S. Energy Information Administration studied the effect of opening domestic offshore drilling sites in the Atlantic, Pacific and Eastern Gulf of Mexico, which were previously under moratoria. These vast fields total some 18 billion barrels in estimated oil reserves. If all of them were opened and put to use, we wouldn’t see any effect on gas prices until 2030, and then — hold on to your skirts — all this theoretical new drilling would lower gas prices by a total of … 3 cents per gallon.

If new future finds in the Gulf exceed the baseline projections by a similar amount, we might save a few pennies 20 years from now – if pennies still have any value at all following the enormous transfer of wealth overseas thanks to politicians like Vitter and Landry who insist so strenuously on sustaining our addiction to fossil fuels instead of developing alternatives. Ah, but in the short term – and Vitter’s and Landry’s perspective is nothing if not short — the political value of all these misleading soundbites from Big Oil’s political handmaidens are worth their weight in gold to the oil lobbyists who finance their re-election campaigns.

Despite the so-called moratorium and permitorium, Big Oil is investing more, producing more, and enjoying record profits. But they’re not satisfied. After one of the worst environmental disasters in U.S. history, oil lobbyists used their stroke in Washington to preserve lucrative tax breaks, royalty loopholes and liability subsidies for the industry. Then they get their apologists to appear on TV networks and whine about potential regulations.  They scream like stuck pigs over the specter of new regulations, and send their lawyers to fight any penalties for the spills that pollute our waters and destroy our coast. (More about this in an upcoming post, as well.)  Worse, their apologists also link international disasters and crises to the need for more domestic drilling, as if this will have an immediate and noticeable affect on gas prices. It’s nauseating.

It takes no guts to simply tout “drilling” as a simplistic cure-all, especially if you ignore all of the significant production, refining and infrastructure problems that new drilling can entail. It gets even easier when you dismiss any notion of conservation and environmental trade-offs. But that’s like saying candy is healthy, or tax cuts raise revenues. The truth is that we’re in for higher gas prices no matter how much we drill in the Gulf, and no matter who’s in the White House. Domestic drilling is not a simple and easy “solution” to our energy predicament.

If Big Oil’s political courtiers in Louisiana spent as much time alerting the nation to our slow-motion coastal disaster as they do defending the most profitable industry in the world, I think we’d be a lot better off. One thing I can guarantee you is this: in 2030, South Louisiana’s top concern won’t be that gas prices are a few cents higher than they were projected to be in 2011.

 

HAITI: Taina Bien-Aime: Haiti's Women in the Aftermath of Disaster

Taina Bien-Aime

Taina Bien-Aime

Haiti's Women in the Aftermath of Disaster

In the early morning hours following the shattering news that an earthquake hit my parents' homeland January 12, the phone rang. "Alain's in-laws died," said my sobbing cousin. Tragedy had hit home. Our anxiety increased as we wondered about the status of Alain's parents, as well as the dozen other cousins, uncles and beloved family members in Haiti. The countdown to find them began, despite limited means of communication into the besieged country. Intermittently glued to the TV screen searching for familiar faces and pretending to focus on the pressing tasks at my desk, every call brought feelings of fear, luck and guilt, while Port-au-Prince lay in ruins. Two heart-wrenching days later, we rejoiced as we heard that our immediate family was alive. In shock, they wondered how long their food and money would last. I also questioned the situation of women's safety in Haiti. Calamity continuing to unfold, the Haitian women's movement mourns three of its fiercest leaders, Myriam Merlet, Magaly Marcellin and Anne Marie Coriolan.

For many of us born of Haitian parents, tales of the westernmost portion of Hispaniola filled our childhood, depicting contrasts of beauty and struggle. While they bemoaned Haiti's tumultuous history as karmic payment for having dared to become the first black independent nation of the New World, in the same breath they sang its praises as the "pearl" of the Caribbean in their time, dominating in art and bearing natural genius for biting wit and poetry. I developed my own sense of Haiti as a land where entrenched patriarchy reigns and justice is scarce, but is nevertheless inescapably sustained by its women, pillars unrivaled in strength and grit, despite pervasive violence in their homes and on the streets. Who would ensure their protection in the aftermath of disaster?

The dust will not settle for some time in Port-au-Prince, but long before it does, human vultures will step into the mayhem, and target the most vulnerable for profit and human misery. The collapse of the capital's prison means some of the incarcerated have scattered back into the neighborhoods they once terrorized. The Haitian police, feckless in the best of times, have now tossed their hands to the heavens, scrambling to care for their own families and survival.

Violence against women is an unaddressed catastrophe in Haiti. Kay Fanm, a Haitian women's rights organization, estimates that 72% of Haitian girls surveyed have been raped and at least 40% of women are victims of domestic violence. Human trafficking and sex tourism were thriving businesses the day before the earthquake. In the aftermath of the tsunami in Asia, many feared a potential increase in human trafficking and urged respective governments to remain vigilant. With limited government capacity in Haiti, we can only shudder at the potential havoc criminal profiteers could trigger there, with probable impunity.

Scores of international agencies have documented the particular consequences of disasters on women and children. Following the tsunami, the US Agency for International Development in 2006 issued data from various organizations on the link between humanitarian emergencies and increased exposure of women and children to sexual violence and exploitation. Disaster relief efforts also often fail to give attention to the basic needs of women, the report indicated, which further jeopardizes their lives and safety.

Protection of human rights, particularly those of women and children, is as important as providing immediate medical attention, food and shelter. In Haiti, women come last in terms of protection from violence. One small example of the urgent need to establish special contingencies for women in post-earthquake intervention is underlined by images of men fist-fighting over UN-delivered food, while women, barely keeping hold of their babies, struggled in vain to reach the relief truck. Emergency assistance teams must ensure that coordinated security is in place to protect the most vulnerable and that the full participation of qualified women, in particular Haitian women, is secured to tackle gender issues in the response and management of disaster relief.

Invariably, foreigners leave Haiti enchanted by the kindness, easy smile and resilience of its people. If we want to invest in Haiti's recovery through which prosperity and stability will replace despair and chaos, we must ensure that protective measures and security systems for women and children are in place. Let us learn from our past mistakes and urge all international agencies in the earthquake relief efforts to implement urgently established guidelines (see for example the IASC Gender Handbook on www.ochaonline.un.org) to prevent avoidable unspeakable suffering and violence against women. Then perhaps, out of the dust, a diamond shall replace tears, and women will dance with hopes to thrive in a Haiti of their dreams.

Taina Bien-Aimé is the executive director of Equality Now, an international human rights organization.

 

VIDEO: "WOMEN ARE HEROES" on Vimeo

WOMEN ARE HEROES - Part of 28 Millimètres project by JR 

More infos on the website : womenareheroes.be 

__________________________

 

With a camera, a dedicated wheatpasting crew and the help of whole villages and favelas, 2011 TED Prize winner JR shows the world its true face.

Why you should listen to him:

 

 

Working anonymously, pasting his giant images on buildings, trains, bridges, the often-guerrilla artist JR forces us to see each other. Traveling to distant, often dangerous places -- the slums of Kenya, the favelas of Brazil -- he infiltrates communities, befriending inhabitants and recruiting them as models and collaborators. He gets in his subjects’ faces with a 28mm wide-angle lens, resulting in portraits that are unguarded, funny, soulful, real, that capture the sprits of individuals who normally go unseen. The blown-up images pasted on urban surfaces – the sides of buildings, bridges, trains, buses, on rooftops -- confront and engage audiences where they least expect it. Images of Parisian thugs are pasted up in bourgeois neighborhoods; photos of Israelis and Palestinians are posted together on both sides of the walls that separate them.

JR's most recent project, "Women Are Heroes," depicts women "dealing with the effects of war, poverty, violence, and oppression” from Rio de Janeiro, Phnom Penh, Delhi and several African cities. And his TED Prize wish opens an even wider lens on the world -- asking us all to turn the world inside out. Visit insideoutproject.net ...
"I would like to bring art to improbable places, create projects so huge with the community that they are forced to ask themselves questions."
JR, Beaux Arts Magazine

>via:http://www.ted.com/speakers/jr.html

 

GRAPHICS: Audio slideshow: Mapping Africa > BBC News

Audio slideshow: Mapping Africa

From one of the earliest depictions of the continent - to the colonial scramble for land - the maps of Africa reveal a great deal about the people who have lived there through the centuries.

To try to shed new light on the African archives held by the Royal Geographical Society, London-based African community groups were asked for their views on the documents.

They spoke to Cliff Pereira and Zagba Oyortey - both African-born - who explain here how the maps tell the story of a changing continent.

GO HERE TO VIEW AUDIO SLIDESHOW

Rediscovering African Geographies can be seen at the Royal Geographical Society in London between 22 March - 28 April 2011.

Exhibition images copyright RGS (with the Institute of British Geographers) - supported by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council.

Music courtesy KPM Music. Slideshow production by Paul Kerley. Publication date 14 March 2011.

Related:

Royal Geographical Society

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external websites.

 

ECONOMICS: Confessions of a Black D.C. Gentrifier - Washington City Paper

Confessions of a

Black Gentrifier

When demographic change doesn't involve color

Illustrations by Robert Meganck

If you ask Aisha Moore about gentrification, her first inclination is to scoff.

Moore, a black resident of Congress Heights, says her Ward 8 street is “100 percent black” and that’s not likely to change soon.

“Nobody leaves,” she jokes. “On my block, if new people bought a house, it’s because an old lady died.”

Yet Moore isn’t from D.C. and has only lived in the city since 2002, after she finished an undergraduate degree at the University of California at Berkeley. In 2004, her boyfriend bought a house in Congress Heights and she moved in with him in 2009.

Which, by every metric except one—skin color—makes her as much of a gentrifier as the young white residents unloading moving vans near U Street NW every weekend. As we talk, Moore says she’s frustrated by the dozens of stories that feature handwringing over D.C. becoming “less black,” because they paint an incomplete picture.

“I get it, in terms of numbers, but it’s annoying. The story over here, east of the river, is all about black gentrification,” she says. “Black people are moving back to Anacostia and the Congress Heights area.”

Moore, who grew up in Los Angeles, suggests that since most black Americans were raised in metropolitan areas, perhaps there’s a natural inclination to live in cities. She adds that her neighborhood is seeing a return of young black professionals who were either born in the city or have family in D.C.

“There are different types of people here, but that doesn’t water down the chocolate,” she says, with a laugh.

Just how watered down the District’s chocolate is getting has been a subject of considerable worry over the last decade. The capital city that inspired a Parliament album a generation ago might not do the same now; within the next few years, demographers expect, D.C. won’t be majority black anymore.

When I moved here last summer, all I could see were the changes in my neighborhood. I’d attended Howard University from 2002 to 2006, and while I knew that the city was where I wanted to stay, I got a job in New Jersey and worked there for a few years.

It was pure luck that when I made it back, I found a house for rent in LeDroit Park, right around the corner from my old dorm. The change that had occurred in four short years was stark.

To put it bluntly: There were white people, everywhere. Now, they trek between Bloomingdale and U Street NW by way of the busy intersection of Georgia and Florida avenues, where just nine years prior, it was a place where black college students butted up against unemployed brothers lingering on corners.

This shouldn’t have been a surprise. The shift was happening even when I was in school, and it was quite noticeable then. A college friend noted at some point between freshman and senior year—after 2003, when Magic Johnson opened a Starbucks connected to the Howard University Bookstore on Georgia Avenue as part of a community development program called “Urban Coffee Opportunities”—that there were, as she put it, “just more white people around.”

Johnson sold his shares in the UCO program to Starbucks last year, and company CEO Howard Schultz bragged in a press release: “Together we opened several successful locations, including our Harlem store, which led the redevelopment of that now vibrant neighborhood.” While the Georgia Avenue store may not have helped economic development on that strip—there seem to be as many, if not more, empty storefronts as there were in 2003—it became a pretty reliable place to find white people on an otherwise largely black stretch.

White professionals and hipsters trickled in, slowly, visible even through the bubble of being a black college student, surrounded by 10,000 other black college students, in a largely black neighborhood, in a mostly black city. By 2004, they were regularly spotted making their way to and from the Shaw–Howard University Metrorail station. And by the time I graduated, white people were jogging up 4th Street NW through the campus, and walking their large dogs on the green lawn of Howard’s Louis Stokes Health Sciences Library—something longtime black residents never did.

The change was disconcerting, in a way.

More disconcerting, though, is that five years later, I walk my own large dog on the library’s green lawn.

The story of the black gentrifier, at least from this black gentrifier’s perspective, is often a story about being simultaneously invisible and self-conscious. The conversation about the phenomenon remains a strict narrative of young whites displacing blacks who have lived here for generations. But a young black gentrifier gets lumped in with both groups, often depending on what she’s wearing and where she’s drinking. She is always aware of that fact.


For neighborhoods where it suddenly feels like white people are “everywhere,” the U.S. Census Bureau says the vast majority of residents in LeDroit Park and Bloomingdale (and Petworth, and Brookland) are still black—more than 80 percent of the residents in some gentrifying census tracts in a 2009 estimate.

Perhaps that’s because just as “black people” is a proxy term for poor people in D.C., “white people” is a proxy term for the young professionals who have moved in—and neither term is being accurately used.

The proportion of black folks in my neighborhood of LeDroit Park remains higher than the average black population in the city, around 70 or 80 percent in some census tracts. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey three-year estimates, the black population in D.C. dropped from 56.4 percent to 54.2 percent between 2005 and 2009. Despite breathless accounts of D.C.’s changing demographics, that’s actually not all that much of a dip. And maybe concerns about that dip are beside the point.

D.C. has been largely insulated from the recession. The number of families below the poverty line has actually decreased in the last three years. The Washington metro area has less than 6 percent unemployment, compared to the nation’s roughly 9 percent jobless rate, putting it 29th in the Bureau of Labor Statistics list of metropolitan area unemployment rates. (In contrast, my hometown of Stockton, Calif., has 18 percent unemployment, placing it about five slots from the bottom of the list, at 368th.)

Wages have also risen for non-family households—like the group houses many city newcomers share with strangers or friends to save on rent.

Or perhaps it’s a chicken-or-egg situation. The metro area’s high marks on the American Human Development Project’s well-being report are tempered by signs that the rising tide isn’t really lifting all boats. Blacks in D.C. have the shortest life expectancy of black people in any metropolitan area, extraordinarily high infant mortality rates, and some of the lowest rates of education. Unemployment in parts of Ward 7 and Ward 8 is more than 20 percent, as anyone who listened to the constant debate in last year’s mayoral campaign over whether gentrification is actually good for the city may recall.

The well-being report’s co-author, Sarah Burd-Sharps, told The Washington Post that D.C. is “a place that attracts people with high levels of education to high-paying jobs.” What seems like a rising tide is really just a case of averages getting skewed toward the higher end of the scale by those of us who arrived here degreed and prepared to work high-skill, high-paying (well, perhaps not if you’re a journalist) jobs.

Simply put, for some of us, the Washington metro area is one of the best places to move to in the country. For the rest, not so much. Newcomers to D.C. of any race tend to arrive for the same kind of high-powered jobs, the kind of jobs you can’t get without education and social capital. The people who are already struggling to find work when newcomers get here, though, are likely to be black.


It should go without saying, but often doesn’t, that regardless of race, newcomers end up in LeDroit Park and Bloomingdale for the same reasons. Rents are relatively cheap and the neighborhood is close to a Metrorail station and bus lines, and is within walking distance of U Street NW’s commercial corridor and downtown employment.

Monica Potts moved to D.C. from Connecticut in January 2010 for work. “I didn’t think a lot about the character of the neighborhoods or the history, because I didn’t know any of it,” she says. Like most people moving to town, Potts says she was focused on getting a good apartment for a reasonable rate, and that other neighborhoods she looked at—like Columbia Heights—were either too expensive or not as nice as the place she settled on.

Potts, who is white, ended up moving into an English basement, on a quiet, tree-lined block in Bloomingdale. She estimates the homeowners on the block come down in a 50-50 percent black-white split, but that nearly everyone “rents out their basements. There are a lot of black homeowners renting to white people.”

Like Potts, Alicia Williams, a black surgical resident from Virginia, moved to Bloomingdale for the low rent when she started her medical internship, mostly unaware of the neighborhood’s history and dynamics. “I just found a really good Craigslist deal for a top-floor apartment that was brand new,” she says.

If you poll newcomers to Bloomingdale on why they chose the neighborhood, it’s likely you’ll get answers similar to Potts’ and Williams’. Small wonder: It’s one of the last affordable, transit-accessible residential neighborhoods that’s close to employment, entertainment, and amenities that are clustered in Ward 1 and Ward 2.


Aisha Moore, the Congress Heights resident, previously lived in Mount Pleasant, the U Street NW corridor, and briefly, Bloomingdale. She says she just kept pushing boundaries.

“When I first moved here [to Mount Pleasant],” Moore says, “people told me not to go past Georgia [Avenue]. When I went past Georgia, they told me not to go east of the river.”

But she didn’t listen, noting that none of those neighborhoods were “as bad as people said.” The biggest downside? She says her friends tease her for living so far away.

Decker Ngongang moved to Columbia Heights in 2008 after leaving investment banking to work at a youth-focused non-profit. He says he recognizes what’s happening in the city because he saw it happen when he was growing up in Charlotte, N.C.

“I went to predominately African American schools, in the downtown Charlotte area,” says Ngongang, who is black. “I was able to see gentrification happening there. You saw the neighborhoods and the projects getting re-zoned and bulldozed to build condo towers.”

Still, Ngongang thinks that kind of turnover is to be expected. “You can’t really knock it, because anybody would want to buy something cheap and sell it for more.”

It’s funny that he says “anybody,” since the story that gets told most often is about an influx of whites taking advantage of low rents and high wages, displacing solid black communities that have occupied territory for generations. Yet black people of means—who certainly fit the category of “anybody”—do the same.

While D.C.’s black majority has never controlled the city’s wealth, a strong black middle class developed during the middle of the last century thanks to federal government hiring. Although these positions were rarely high-level ones, they were dependable jobs with benefits—something hard to come by for people who were often the children of sharecroppers—and they’re what some of us still laughingly refer to as “good gub’mint jobs.”

At some point, though, things changed. Crack cocaine hit D.C. and many black people with money—like most people with money would—headed to the suburbs. Those who couldn’t leave, and those who stayed to fight, had a ravaged city to contend with. This is the story we know.

But now, living in the city is cool again, thanks in no small part to development incentivized by government investment. And because we live in a “nation of cowards” (as U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder put it) where perhaps the only thing harder to talk about than race is class, it’s unsurprising that worries about gentrification boil down to white versus black, instead of educated and privileged versus uneducated and underserved.

That’s not to say that what we talk about when we talk about gentrification has nothing to do with race. The opposite is clearly true. White people don’t just “happen” to be better off, in general, than blacks. There’s systemic injustice that’s obviously based in racism. But instead of using that knowledge to spark a discussion about larger societal issues, there’s just pearl-clutching aplenty about the color of the new faces in the neighborhood.

“Gentrifier” can’t be equated with “white person.” After all, most poor people in this country are white (though it’s definitely a numbers game; whites are still less likely to be poor than blacks and Latinos—there are just more of them). The gentrifier is a person of privilege, and even if she doesn’t have much money, she’s got an education and a network of friends who are striving like she is, and she has the resources to at least try to get what she wants.


I moved into my home near Howard University, a three-bedroom semi-detached rowhouse that I share with two other journalists, sight-unseen. Google Maps revealed that it was spitting distance from my old dorm, which tickled and worried me at the same time.

A couple of months later, after hearing of an armed robbery at the LeDroit Park Market on 4th Street NW, I joined the local neighborhood e-mail message board. (The market closed for renovations shortly thereafter, but never re-opened.) The list became a reliable source of information about crime in the neighborhood, yet it seemed to be actively used mainly by white residents—though perhaps there were some black lurkers like me.

In November, between the car robberies, a couple of burglaries—including the burglary of the house of a white friend of mine—and a mugging or two, it wasn’t uncommon to see an e-mail fly across the list, copied to Metropolitan Police Department Chief Cathy Lanier: “Residents of Ledroit Park are being terrorized in broad daylight. There has been an increase in car break ins, physical attacks, and robberies. This situation is beyond untenable I implore you and the commander to increase police presence at all hours. Residents are enraged, livid and afraid some solutions must be found starting with arrests and convictions.”


There weren’t many arrests and fewer convictions, but there was an increase in police presence, and the spike in crime dipped shortly after, in December.

That run of crime, however, revealed to me what may be the biggest gift of the black gentrifier: The ability to fly under the radar. While it can be frustrating to be ignored in conversations about neighborhoods in transition, there’s one major upside. Black gentrifiers typically don’t feel unsafe in our neighborhoods, despite reports of muggings and property crime.

It’s hard, though, to decide whether that feeling is born of naïveté or if it’s grounded in something real. That is, being black, when one is new to a black neighborhood, may be emboldening. Perhaps it’s an extension of how Black Men of a Certain Age will often greet one another when passing on the street, whether they know each other or not; perhaps it’s that feeling of being part of a larger black whole, left over from the 1970s, of being in this—what’s quickly becoming a poorly defined space—together.

Williams says that despite having her car broken into once in Bloomingdale, she never felt unsafe. “It was probably just ignorance, but I remember hearing [through the local e-mail message board] about this group of teenagers that was terrorizing people as they walked around, but either I never saw them, or if I did, they didn’t bother me.”

While MPD’s 3rd District, which includes my neighborhood, has the highest rates of robbery in the city, I feel no more wary in LeDroit Park than I do in Georgetown or Foggy Bottom. It’s not possible to get victim stats broken down by race, though the public outrage meter suggests that in LeDroit and Bloomingdale, it’s not black neighbors getting mugged. But what may be equally likely is that fewer of those black neighbors are tweeting about it, or notifying the neighborhood blogs, or posting outraged messages to e-mail boards.

Ngongang says the local kids in Columbia Heights call him “‘Big nigga on a bike,’ because I’m the only black dude riding around on a bike.”

He recently stopped to talk to some of those kids, and they showed a stunning self-awareness. They told him, “[White people] should know we don’t fuck with them. We mess with each other.” Ngongang adds, “The fact that a 12-year-old or a 13-year-old understands the cultural dynamics is pretty amazing. They know the cops will shut down this block if a white girl got shot or killed.”

Ngongang judges gentrification in Columbia Heights by a deceptively simple metric: “You can tell by the willingness certain people have to walk around late at night,” he says.

Describing one night on Sherman Avenue when an intoxicated white woman was walking at 3 a.m. with her iPod earbuds in, Ngongang says he guesses that the line of demarcation between “safe” Columbia Heights and “the ‘hood” had shifted from 11th Street NW to Sherman Avenue during the last two years.


The District has changed fast enough in the last few years that even a short time away can leave a neighborhood looking different. Chris Wallace, who grew up in Upper Northwest and Near Northeast, graduated from high school in 1999 and attended Southern University in Louisiana, and those years away from home opened his eyes to changes.

“I’d come home from school and ask ‘when they build that?’” Wallace says, referring to shiny new luxury condos or stores or restaurants.

He returned to the metro area in 2004, and now lives in Columbia Heights in a house that belonged to a family member who used it as a rental property for years. As she grew older, she became unable to manage the property.

“Her tenants stopped paying rent, and effectively became squatters,” he says. “My family kicked them out, and the house sat empty for about three years.”

In early 2009, Wallace began rehabilitating the house—cleaning out drug paraphernalia, piles of dirty clothes left behind by those who broke into the house, and broken glass in the back yard—and moved into the house with his girlfriend in June of last year. (His family is currently embroiled in a tax battle with the city over the years when the house was unoccupied and subjected to a higher vacant property tax, despite the fact that exceptions can be made for homes undergoing renovation.)

Living in Columbia Heights, Wallace feels conflicted. His reception in the neighborhood varies by what he’s wearing. If he changes out of his suit and into sneakers and jeans after heading home from his job as a mortgage loan officer, getting a drink at a local watering hole, now overrun with young professionals, can feel uncomfortable. But it cuts both ways.

“Even the younger people of color in the neighborhood, how, what, or if they speak to me depends on what I’m wearing,” he says.


When he and his family first kicked out the squatters in 2006, many houses on Sherman Avenue were boarded up. Now they’re almost all occupied. Despite the internal conflict, Wallace is glad the neighborhood has “come back to life.”

Still, he shakes his head as he describes the changes he’s seen come to the city, like dog parks, which he began noticing in 2007. “When dog parks first started popping up in D.C., I thought it was a little weird. I didn’t know what a dog park was. The whole idea of reserving some land for some dogs was kinda weird—not that I don’t use it,” he adds with a smile, mentioning his milk-chocolate colored pit mix, an overgrown puppy named Scooby.

But “gentrification makes people feel like they don’t belong in certain places. Not everyone can regularly afford $15 cocktails at Room 11.” While he’s a patron of the Columbia Heights restaurant, he wishes it and places like it would market themselves to the neighbors, not to people who live farther afield.

“Wonderland is an oasis of whiteness, a place of recreation for people who don’t live in my neighborhood,” Wallace says, referring to the Kenyon Street NW bar. “You see cabs pulling up and think, who needs a cab to go to Wonderland who lives in this neighborhood?”


Being a black gentrifier is, in many ways, just like being a white gentrifier. It means doing the best you can with what you have—even if what you have is often more than what your neighbors have. Everyone I interviewed agreed that the priority is finding a reasonably priced, relatively safe place to live, and it’s a bonus if there are a few local bars and coffee shops nearby.

Yet, being part of that black whole—or a diaspora, if you will—is hard to shake. And maybe we shouldn’t shake it. It isn’t possible to have a real discussion about race and class and systemic injustice without trying to start at the beginning. And the beginning requires an understanding of the set of external circumstances that led us to where we are. For me, that’s being the child of two black people suffering from wanderlust—a Jamaican immigrant and a Virginian who ended up in California—both of whom had an extraordinary thirst for higher education. And because of them, I’m not like most Americans, only 27 percent of whom hold a bachelor’s degree. That number drops to 17 percent for black Americans.

Innumerable tiny incidents have added up to me being where I am now. Precious few of them have anything to do with my own innate specialness. It is important to remember that in order to frame the conversation about why most Americans who look like me aren’t doing as well as I am. Some may say it’s too much of a burden—living Blackness with a capital B all the time—but it has to at least be acknowledged.

“I’m a black male in D.C. and I have never been to jail and I have a job. I can’t help but be present to that,” Ngongang says. He describes a recent outing when he took the day off from work: “I walked to the Starbucks at 14th and Irving and there may have been 100 black males that I passed who were doing nothing in the middle of the day.” It’s frustrating, he adds. “A lot of my black male peers are lost sometimes. What the hell do we do?”

Wallace doesn’t have an answer, either. “I feel like a lot of the rampant unemployment is not due to lack of opportunities, it’s due to lack of education.”

Meanwhile, Moore is sympathetic to the folks who have been living in these neighborhoods for a generation or more: “When we talk about gentrifiers, we talk about someone coming in and making the neighborhood ‘better.’ But a lot of times, people have been fighting, and they’re just tired of fighting.”

Ngongang says it’s even more challenging when figuring out how to give back to your new community. He describes watching the State of the Union address at Meridian Pint with bar full of young white progressives who were outraged that it wasn’t liberal enough; he ruefully notes that these are people who can mobilize for Egypt, but probably don’t know that several students have been involved in shootings at nearby Cardozo Senior High School this school year.

He suggests part of the problem is that unlike people in Egypt or Iran, young black kids in D.C. don’t want the interference, and it shows. “Kids aren’t dumb,” he says. “They know that the game is rigged. They live it. The fact is the only successful black men we can point to are outliers. Random circumstances made them what they were.”

Ngongang deals by finding “little things” he can do, like talking to kids in his neighborhood, and using his seat at a table with other non-profits to help them understand the context underperforming students are living in. And he sees the problem with gentrification as two-fold: One, he says, “We’re building bubbles where people can live and not really understanding the lives of people around them.”

Sure. While walking the neighborhood with one’s greyhound, it’s easy to spend much of the time eagerly peering at apartments up for rent, renovations of rotted-out townhouses, and new commercial projects. It isn’t as easy to learn details about the local public schools or the people who send their kids there.

And those of us walking fancy dogs, gawking at fancier renovations, but who happen to look like most of our neighbors, don’t necessarily have better insight into what’s going on around us than the white folks do. The class differences can yawn almost as wide as racial ones—almost. Soon enough, “D.C. will be majority rich people,” Ngongang says. “The statistics of D.C. will match what corporate America looks like.” It stings for a minute, because I’m not quite sure which side of that statistical warning I want to identify with.

 

VIDEO: Jesse Boykins III “Prototype 3010, a Short Film” « Clutch Magazine

Watch This: Jesse Boykins III “Prototype 3010, a Short Film”

Wednesday Mar 16, 2011 – By Britni Danielle

Ever so often you come across a song or an artist that you fall in love with and you want to share it with everyone you know. Last year, Jesse Boykins III’s remake of Andre 3000’s song, “Prototype,” was that rare gem.

Despite the awesomeness of the original, Boykins manages to add his own touch to the song, giving it just a little something special and making it just the right joint to come home to after a long day. Ever since Boykins’ video for “Prototype 3010” hit the ‘net a few days ago, I can’t keep my eyes off of it.

Chicago-born, and Jamaica and Miami raised, Jesse Boykins makes music for the soul. At just 16 he was selected as one of the singers chosen for the Grammy Jazz Ensemble, which later led him to study Jazz and Contemporary Music at New York’s venerable liberal arts university, The New School.

Jesse Boykins’ voice is made for love songs. Smooth as velvet and with a depth of emotion lacking in a lot of music these days, Boykins’ voice is as warm and welcoming as home. If you love good music, please, do yourself a favor and get acquainted with this man’s work.

Jesse Boykins III | Prototype 3010, a short film from LightUp Film on Vimeo.

 

PUB: Walter Mosley Panel at PAMLA (Nov. 5-6) Submission Deadline Mar. 25 2011 | cfp.english.upenn.edu

Walter Mosley Panel at PAMLA (Nov. 5-6) Submission Deadline Mar. 25 2011

full name / name of organization: 
Pacific Ancient and Modern Language Association Conference
contact email: 

This session will examine Walter Mosley’s fiction. Papers that examine any aspect of Mosley’s fiction may be submitted. Particularly welcome are papers that explore Mosley’s use of setting and his exploration of the city, especially Los Angeles. Also encouraged are papers that explore Mosley’s use and adaptation of genre.

Please submit proposals by 25 March 2011 to the PAMLA website: http://www.pamla.org/2011/. The conference will be held November 5-6, 2011 in Claremont, CA.

 

PUB: BOMB Magazine: BOMB Magazine's 2011 Fiction Contest

BOMB Magazine's

2011 Fiction Contest

We are now accepting online submissions. Click here to upload your story and pay the reading fee (to pay online but submit by mail, scroll to the very bottom of this page). All submissions read anonymously.

 

-1.jpg
 

BOMB is excited to announce its 5th Fiction Contest, judged by novelist and essayist Rivka Galchen!

Deadline April 16 (Postmarked by April 16th). The winner of our 2011 contest will receive a $500 prize and publication in BOMB Magazine’s literary supplement First Proof.

Founded in 1981, BOMB has championed and encouraged the literary efforts of both established and emerging writers for more than a quarter-century, with a contributing editorial board that boasts contemporary giants such as A.M. Homes, Patrick McGrath, Amy Hempel, and Jonathan Lethem, all whom have generously judged our last four fiction contests.

 

All submissions will be read anonymously.

 

Fiction Contest Submission Guidelines

• Winner receives $500 and publication in BOMB Magazine
• Final Judge: Rivka Galchen (author of Atmospheric Disturbances)
• Deadline: April 16, 2011
• Reading Fee: $20 — includes a free one-year subscription to BOMB (for Canadian addresses add $6, for addresses outside US and Canada, add $12); make all checks and money orders payable to BOMB Magazine.

We are now accepting online submissions. Click here to upload your story and pay the reading fee.

If you prefer to mail your entry but pay online please pay below. Note: if you choose to upload your submission you will also pay there, so you should not use the below to make payment.

• Manuscripts of one story maximum must be less than 20 pages (around 5,000 words regardless of single or double spacing).
• Include cover letter with name, address, email, phone number and title of story; do not write a name on the actual manuscript, as all entries will be considered anonymously.
• Simultaneous submissions OK, but reading fee is not refundable.
• Story must be previously unpublished.
• Multiple entries OK as long as you pay the reading fee for each story submitted, however only one subscription to BOMB will be given per entrant.
• Email generalinquiries (at) bombsite (dot) com with any questions.

 

Rivka Galchen is the author of Atmospheric Disturbances and was recently named one of The New Yorker’s “20 under 40” list. She has also has been featured in BOMB in conversation with Nathan Englander, and BOMB’s Summer 2007 First Proof.

 

Winners and runners-up will be announced on our website in July 2011; the winning story will be published in an upcoming issue of BOMB’s First Proof (Issue 117).

 


If you would prefer to mail in your submission, you can still pay online with PayPal here (as a result of PayPal fees the cost to you for paying with PayPal is slightly higher):

Select your location
I live in the United States – $20.88 I live in Canada – $27.05 I live outside of the United States and Canada – $33.23

Or with google checkout here:

I live in the United States – $20.00 I live in Canada – $26.00 I live outside of the U.S. and Canada – $32.00

 

Mail entries to:
BOMB Magazine
2011 Fiction Contest
80 Hanson Place, #703
Brooklyn, NY 11217

• If you pay online, please be sure to note your 15 digit Google Checkout Order # or your 17 digit PayPal Transaction ID on your cover letter, if the name on your PayPal account is different from the name of entrant, please also note name on PayPal account with Transaction ID number on your cover letter.

 

PUB: Producing Race: Technology and the African Diaspora | cfp.english.upenn.edu

Producing Race:

Technology

and the African Diaspora

full name / name of organization: 
Columbia University

contact email: 

PRODUCING RACE:
TECHNOLOGY AND THE AFRICAN DIASPORA

Recent scholarship has witnessed a proliferation of critical inquiry into the intersection of technology and race. This body of work asks us to think through technology as an extension of so-called human faculties. Within the terrain of literary studies, technology has allowed us to engage questions of publication, poetics, and the archive. This graduate student symposium seeks to put literary scholars in conversation with scholars in fields such as, but not limited to, anthropology, history, musicology, and sociology. As such, we are interested in exploring the implication of this technological turn within the field of African Diaspora Studies more broadly.


From the slave ship to the human genome, the daguerreotype to the digital camera, the chain gang to the prison industrial complex, technology has been intimately intertwined with black social life and its cultural artifacts. Within this intimate bond, one might consider: How might the phonograph not only produce beautiful sounds but at the same time perform the political work of recording history? Also, how do we come to consider the instrumentality of the black body—wielded both for repressive and radical ends? Indeed, what would it mean to imagine race as a technology?


While the possibilities for thinking about race and technology are endless, this graduate student symposium is ultimately concerned with mining new categories of the human and otherwise. We invite paper submissions on topics that include but are not limited to:


• Literary experimentation and mixed media

• Science Fiction

• The Archive

• Gender and Sexuality

• Film, Photography, and Visual Culture

• Music, Soundscapes and Social noise

• Incarceration, Law, and Governmentality

• Performance and Performativity

• Geography and Space

• Affect, Corporeality, and the Sensorium

• Genetics, Biopolitics, and the History of Science

 

This graduate student symposium will be held at Columbia University on Friday, October 28, 2011. Symposium keynotes include:

• Brent Hayes Edwards, Department of English & Comparative Literature, Columbia University

• Fred Moten, English Department, Duke University

• Alondra Nelson, Department of Sociology and Institute for Research on Women and Gender, Columbia University

 

To submit a proposal, please email your name, institution, email address, and a proposal abstract of no more than 500 words to ProducingRace@gmail.com by May 15, 2011.

 

A limited number of travel stipends are available for graduate students who are traveling from a considerable distance and cannot procure travel funding from their home department. These travel grants are available on a first-come, first-serve basis.