Urban planning community | #theplannerlife

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: A message of hate from "The Stranger"

  1. #1
    Nov 2004
    On Deck

    A message of hate from "The Stranger"

    I was extermely disappointed in the choice of Planetizen to highlight the screaming,self-pitying rants of the editors of The Stranger in their "It's the Cities,Stupid" article. The article spews invective after invective that those from the red states (excluding those in the major cities) are racist, homophobic, rubes,fools, hatemongers (what is the article if nothing but hatemongering?), and everything else their limited imaginations can bring forth to put down. All this from the "most compassionate among us". I do realize the prevalence of liberal thought amongst the planning profession, but are divisive attacks against conservative, red-staters (like myself), the way to build a consensus for thoughtful, comprehensive communities? If not, why did Planetizen feel compelled to present this piece of crap?

  2. #2
          mentarman's avatar
    Nov 2003
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Why not know what they're saying? You're not required to agree with it. It's an opinion piece that some will agree with, others will find shrill and full of hypocritical invective, and still others will agree with even though they find it shrill and full of hypocritical invective.

  3. #3

    It's the stupid cities......

    It's amazing to me with some of the rants that the editors had to go on. It's all about perception folks. Being from Washington State, where the rest of the State had the "privilege" of funding SAFECO field and the new Seahawk stadium, it's amazing how the west side of Washington controls the purse strings for the rest of us Washingtonians on the east side of the Cascades.

  4. #4
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Mar 1996
    Upstate New York
    Blog entries
    Quote Originally posted by Hoss
    If not, why did Planetizen feel compelled to present this piece of crap?
    I don't know. Chris or Abhijeet would have to answer that.

    I was a little bit thrown back at the article. It just perpetuates the meme that it's only liberals are condescending and arrogant, and that they mock the electorate. Then again, BOTH sides are that way; it's only when a liberal does it that it seems to be pointed out.

    You'll find many progressive planners like yourself that have a right-leaning mindset in the Cyburbia Forums (the host for the PLANetizen forums).
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  5. #5
    Nov 2004
    Tulsa, Oklahoma

    The main problem with this essay...

    The major flaw in the premise of this essay is seen in the following paragraph:

    With all the talk of the growth of exurbs and the hand-wringing over facile demographic categories like "security moms," you may be under the impression that an urban politics wouldn't speak to many people. But according to the 2000 Census, 226 million people reside inside metropolitan areas--a number that positively dwarfs the 55 million people who live outside metro areas. The 85 million people who live in strictly defined central city limits also outnumber those rural relics. When the number of city-dwellers in the United States is quadruple the number of rural people, we can put simple democratic majorities to work for our ideals.
    Anyone familiar with census bureau maps will know that most metropolitan areas include not only the county of the primary city, but also most of the surrounding counties. These outer counties are typically comprised of not only suburbs, but quite often small towns and rural communities. This makes the "226 million" figure rather ambiguous.

    We are then presented with the more plausible "85 million" figure, which works out to less than 1/3 of the total US population. The author hopes not only that the US urban population will increase by at least 50 million citizens in 8 years (to "dwarf" those whacky rural voters), but that all these new residents will enthusiastically embrace the Democratic Party based solely on urbanism, which appears to be loosely defined as "cityscapes, rapid transit, and crowds of people."

    It is quite necessary to read things written by authors with viewpoints differing from your own, if only to be better informed. However, this essay lacks direction and degenerates into a general rant. I am quite disappointed that Planetizen decided to link to it twice (same essay, but two different locations) and hope that such narrow-minded, preachy pieces are avoided in the future.


+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 5
    Last post: 14 Sep 2011, 9:38 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last post: 20 Nov 2004, 12:31 AM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last post: 14 Nov 2001, 11:07 AM