I will vouch that up to the alignment with Shiller this is a fair historical account. After that, I don't know as much about the details but it doesn't appear too biased. I'll leave that to others.
I am sure this link will receive a lot of comments so I would just implore fellow readers not to just call them a cult and move on. We spend a lot of time embracing pre-1950's Uptown but not a lot of time learning about Uptown of the 1960s, 70s and 80s because we think we know it. This is a great time for reflection.
To anyone reading from JPUSA, you said, "...in this missed opportunity to communicate with one's neighbor, the greater error belonged to the Christians--us." I would say that you are missing an opportunity to communicate with the neighborhood now and that your alignment with Shiller has resulted in a number of outcomes that harm the poor. It is not a simple battle between "good" and "evil."
The thing that has always bothered me is the constant hammering on the qualifiers "RACIALLY" and "ETHNICALLY" diverse. It misses "religious", it misses "sexual orientation", it misses "age", it misses "educationally", and I think most importantly to many, it REALLY misses "ECONOMICALLY" diverse. To be honest--I want to see ALL qualifiers to "diverse" eliminated from the vocabulary in Uptown, so the neighborhood eventually becomes the most stable type of all: JUST PLAIN "DIVERSE".
And something I hope JPUSA and others like them will learn is that if THEY HELP US to go after landlords (including CHA) that don't maintain their buildings and who don't screen and watch their tenants to keep dangers to families and children out of their buildings and the neighborhood...we can maintain together that rental housing AND give the residents a sense of safety and hope that does not exist right now. They can't do that if they're constantly picking fights with the *people* who buy into AND LIVE IN the condos. After all, we live here...we have our life savings here, and it's a hell of lot easier to trash an apartment you rent (frequently with subsidies) in a building you don't own--then move on to the next one--than it is to sell your home and move. JPUSA could and *should* try to understand and work with average, mortgage-paying condo owners...they could take the lead again in creating new and stronger allies instead of fostering continued conflict.
This makes for interesting reading. Thoughts?
I will vouch that up to the alignment with Shiller this is a fair historical account. After that, I don't know as much about the details but it doesn't appear too biased. I'll leave that to others.
ReplyDeleteI am sure this link will receive a lot of comments so I would just implore fellow readers not to just call them a cult and move on. We spend a lot of time embracing pre-1950's Uptown but not a lot of time learning about Uptown of the 1960s, 70s and 80s because we think we know it. This is a great time for reflection.
To anyone reading from JPUSA, you said, "...in this missed opportunity to communicate with one's neighbor, the greater error belonged to the Christians--us." I would say that you are missing an opportunity to communicate with the neighborhood now and that your alignment with Shiller has resulted in a number of outcomes that harm the poor. It is not a simple battle between "good" and "evil."
Here's my reflection on the 70's and 80's era Uptown:
ReplyDeleteWhat a ****hole.
The thing that has always bothered me is the constant hammering on the qualifiers "RACIALLY" and "ETHNICALLY" diverse. It misses "religious", it misses "sexual orientation", it misses "age", it misses "educationally", and I think most importantly to many, it REALLY misses "ECONOMICALLY" diverse. To be honest--I want to see ALL qualifiers to "diverse" eliminated from the vocabulary in Uptown, so the neighborhood eventually becomes the most stable type of all: JUST PLAIN "DIVERSE".
ReplyDeleteAnd something I hope JPUSA and others like them will learn is that if THEY HELP US to go after landlords (including CHA) that don't maintain their buildings and who don't screen and watch their tenants to keep dangers to families and children out of their buildings and the neighborhood...we can maintain together that rental housing AND give the residents a sense of safety and hope that does not exist right now. They can't do that if they're constantly picking fights with the *people* who buy into AND LIVE IN the condos. After all, we live here...we have our life savings here, and it's a hell of lot easier to trash an apartment you rent (frequently with subsidies) in a building you don't own--then move on to the next one--than it is to sell your home and move. JPUSA could and *should* try to understand and work with average, mortgage-paying condo owners...they could take the lead again in creating new and stronger allies instead of fostering continued conflict.
How can JPUAS maintain their 501(c)3 status with such overt political support for Shiller over the past 20 years, including last year's election?
ReplyDeleteAnd then they complain about developers getting 20% breaks on property taxes.