Systemic Racism in Housing
Originally posted 6/6/20
Systemic segregation continuously traps minorities, specifically African-Americans, in poverty. In light of the current Black Lives Matter movement, it is important to discuss entrenched oppression in this country's history through the three popular urban theories of power. As the ecological power theory presents gaps in its ignorance of enforced segregation, a combination of the elitist and pluralist perspective best accounts for the development and segregation of urban areas.
From unfairly designated red zones to denying loans and rent to colored homeowners, legalized discrimination in residential living accounts for many of the issues suffered by minorities today. In 1930, Franklin D. Roosevelt started a program that gave out loans depending on the color-coded red “bad” or green “good” zones, later known as redlining. The red zones were designated disproportionately in more diverse areas with large populations of minorities, and those living in red zones were unable to receive these loans (4). Green zones were mostly composed of white people, who received the means to buy houses, accrue wealth, and take advantage of market fluctuations. The Federal Housing Administration’s introduction of redlining from 1934 to 1968 allowed 98% of home loans to go to white families. Eventually, these divisions compounded, and the segregation affected not only living situations, but also education (higher property taxes meant more well-funded schools) and a disparity in the influx of businesses attracted to the area. Even after these laws were abolished, minorities were trapped in poverty with little to no opportunity for upward mobility, and illegal discrimination still amounted to around 40 million cases per year (4).
The ecological perspective lacks in explaining this phenomenon. Sociologist Ernest Burgess, proposer of this theory, describes the “white flight” from immigrants and poorer minorities replacing them and moving up the economic ladder. His view of a metabolic market does not account for enforced segregation that prevented minorities from the same opportunities. Additionally, the implication that politics do not matter as much in this theory are also flawed, given that racist laws not only negatively affected people of color when they existed, but even after they were abolished. Thus, it must be reformative, proactive legislation that can solve the inequality in urban growth. Urban design professor Richard Florida makes a compelling argument when he said “this is not a problem the magic of the market can solve or that cities and mayors can solve for themselves: It will take a full-on national effort (1).” Clearly, the self-sufficient nature of the ecological perspective does not stand under close scrutiny.
Therefore, the elitist and pluralist theories are most relevant to urban segregation. The elitist power theory, best described as a rigid, established power structure, manifests in a racial dimension. Many of the “elite” in America are white; there is no doubt that segregation has accounted for the generational wealth, privilege, and power Caucasions have enjoyed. For example, while only representing 72% of the population, white people — men, moreso — make up 97% of Republican officials and 79% of Democratic officials (2). The impenetrable structure of power that represents elitism is closely intersected with race; thus, it is no surprise that those suffering the effects of segregational urbanization are still trapped in poverty. For example, while developers such as William Levitt prevented non-whites from living in his wealthier towns, the government actively supported and enforced these racist policies (3). The segregation of urban areas also highlights the pluralist perspective, which argues that power lies in decision-making and mobilization of resources. However, nonwhites have little access to these political resources because of other racist policies that keep them out of power — because of race elitism. As a result, it was and is difficult for POC to reach political resources and decision-making power that would reverse many of the inequalities established by archaic laws. It also leaves them vulnerable to modern discriminatory laws, such as freeways being built into black communities or banks intentionally charging black homeowners more than white ones with the same credit (5).
Given the history of segregation in urban growth, the elite and pluralist theories of power can explain the struggles that black Americans have faced and can begin to explain how to rectify these deep-rooted inequalities.
Bibliography
Budds, Diana. “How Urban Design Perpetuates Racial Inequality–And What We Can Do About It.” Fast Company, Fast Company, 9 July 2018, www.fastcompany.com/3061873/how-urban-design-perpetuates-racial-inequality-and-what-we-can-do-about-it.
“Despite Diverse Demographics, Most Politicians Are Still White Men.” U.S. News & World Report, U.S. News & World Report, www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2017-10-24/despite-diverse-demographics-most-politicians-are-still-white-men.
Gross, Terry. “A 'Forgotten History' Of How The U.S. Government Segregated America.” NPR, NPR, 3 May 2017, www.npr.org/2017/05/03/526655831/a-forgotten-history-of-how-the-u-s-government-segregated-america.
Hannah-Jones, Nikole. “Housing Crisis: Widespread Discrimination; Little Taste for Enforcement.” ProPublica, www.propublica.org/article/housing-crisis-widespread-discrimination-little-taste-for-enforcement.
Madrigal, Alexis C. “The Racist Housing Policy That Made Your Neighborhood.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 30 Apr. 2015, www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/the-racist-housing-policy-that-made-your-neighborhood/371439/.
“Why It Costs More to Borrow If You're Black.” Magazine, www.wealthsimple.com/en-us/magazine/data-racial-borrowing-gap-us.