TED Conversations

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Sep 22 2013: George, I ask you to identify one good example (city) from the perspective of the poorest and disenfranchised with a majority (of those poor) echoing that perspective then and only then I would be inclined to believe you. But in my experience it's folks like you well healed with good jobs who are clueless about those struggling on the bottom. Please prove me wrong... it would do a body good...
    Get out and smell the poverty.....then work from the bottom up.... not the top down...
    • thumb
      Sep 22 2013: Craig, I'm not sure what your question is, but I appreciate the ad hominem argument.

      I'm not trying to convince you of the existence of a utopian city where all of the disenfranchised are enfranchised and happily participating in the mainstream economy. Instead, I would like you to believe in the possibility of Just Cities--cities that are prosperous, inclusive, fair, and sustainable. It is my hypothesis that cities that provide equal access to opportunity and engage those on the bottom to participate in the life of the city are likely to outperform other cities in the global economy.

      I can give you plenty of examples of cities that failed to consider the fortunes of those on the bottom and have suffered for it (economically, politically, socially). This is the story of the Arab Spring, Occupy Everywhere, or recent uprisings in Istanbul or Sao Paulo.

      There are many cities that have done a better job at bottom-up planning and development and are succeeding because of it. Examples like Medellin, Curitiba, and Vancouver come to mind. Even Detroit made a big leap forward by engaging more than 100,000 people in its recent Detroit Future City long term plan. In addition, cities that have embraced immigrants and inclusion have prospered--like the San Francisco Bay Area, New York, Minneapolis-St. Paul, or Toronto. This is not to imply that the latter cities are exemplars of bottom-up planning, but "better" has many dimensions.

      I have no illusions that I can convince you with these examples, but I hope you remain open to the possibility that we'd all be better off if we build Just Cities.

      It is true that well-healed people like me have the luxury of being idealistic, but many of us are working hard to make cities better by promoting bottom-up solutions.
    • Sep 23 2013: Here is another example: http://www.thenation.com/article/cleveland-model#axzz2fhtxq9tC
      Here is another example: http://www.amazon.com/Activists-City-Hall-Progressive-Response/dp/0801476550

      I don't think we should attack people because they have "good jobs." Rather, we should fight to make sure that more people have "good jobs." I would not be happy if another person had a "bad job." Therfore, why would I be happy if someone has a "good job." If you want to critique a specific think tank, you have to do a content analysis of their programs and indicate alternatives. People who have bad jobs can also have bad ideas. Think this through logically. People who are sheltered from problems may have less informed ideas, e.g. "standpoint feminism." Yet, this epistemological view is wrong because it preordains a priori a person's trajectory. It is one dimensional. You need an a posteriori content analysis as well. This was not provided.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.