OTHER CITIES: 
Counterpoint: Woodwards
A recent discussion has developed on the topic of Woodwards, now that it dominates the downtown's easternmost skyline, by the blog Vancity Buzz whom, despite their unbridled enthusiasm for the project, I commend. I am not anti-Woodwards, something that puts me apart from other advocates for social change such as the AC, a group I've been accused of associated with, albeit falsely. But you must remember that we fought tooth and nail for the meager portions allotted to us, as a single brick facade is all that is left of the iconic department store. The point of the squat was, among other things, immediacy. In Europe, there is a proud tradition of squatting. City planners should view this temporary housing a blessing not a bane, as it fills the vacuum created by whatever historical/political/cultural/social/economic trends that happen to manipulate the urban landscape at the time. In the case of the DTES, the closing of Woodwards will only be mitigated by its reopening. In other words, the only vacuum it will fill is the one originally created when it abandoned the neighborhood.
Furthermore, what is being done to alleviate the condo mania that the Woodwards Development has ignited? So far Paris Block, Ginger, East, Terminus, V6A, and Concord Pacific's recent discovery of the DTES, have all contributed a total of zero units of social housing, while cashing in on the cheap real estate.
Furthermore, how many evictions have occurred since Woodward's? Right next door, the Dominion Hotel was one of the most recent to evict all its SRO tenants. Across the street The Golden Crown had plans to house Olympics workers, a decision that was ruled illegal, but just up the block on Pender, The Piccadilly didn't have the same problem turfing out its renters. Since the Olympic bid process began, over 1,000 units of affordable SRO housing units have either been converted to other uses or shut down permanently (Am Johal).
Furthermore, the Province's purchase of 16 SRO hotels doesn't mean NEW housing. They are just bringing the bed bug infested rat palaces up to a semblance of somewhere fit for human beings to live.
In an October 2007 visit by UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing, Miloon Kothari stated, "You have in government a legacy of misguided policy decisions which have led to this massive crisis in housing and homelessness. We didn't hear this in other places- the decrepit nature of SROs, the conditions of the buildings that people are living in, the very poor health. As has been the case throughout our visit, I was repeatedly struck by the contrasts in such a beautiful city. Because there has been so much investment, it is striking that a few blocks from million dollar condominiums there is such immense poverty".
But according to the either rosy eyed or naive Vancity Buzz, we're in a time of economic prosperity. But maybe, as with any neo-conservative, neo-Thatcherite government, the same policies that allow for economic prosperity for some, contribute directly to the economic downturn for others. Take the drastic cuts to welfare and a freeze on minimum wage, and you get the tripling of homeless in only a few short years. Does Vancity Buzz dispute the likes of the United Nations, The CCPA, the VPD, Dan Rather, the Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness, UBC Professor Michael Byers, the Carnegie Action Project, and anybody with a keen eye for the blatantly obvious?
Comments (27)
Recommend This
Tools
Report a Mistake
Add to Delicious
Digg This
Add to Facebook
Bookmark This
Print This
More...
Join the BeyondRobson Flickr group
Join the BeyondRobson YouTube Group
Suggest a Link
Both the writers of Vancouver Buzz and (some of) their readership seem to support the ideals behind Social Darwinism and Neoliberalism. The most unfortunate part is that they do not see the racist myriad of racist attitudes and practices both have historically and presently promote. I have highlighted the naivety promoted by one readers comment who espouses both Social Darwinism and Neoliberalism as some form of political 'cure-all'. It seems that these people were born with the silver spoon in their mouths, and if not over the years one has slowly worked its way up their assess. See below for my commentary:
"Doesn't anyone believe in survival of the fittest anymore. Fucking morons, those who fuck up financially should have to pay the price. The government should not bail any of these people out with handouts."
It is the ‘Social Darwinist’ comments like this that reveal your true racist naivety. I think that you might want to critically assess your mental state. Speaking of ‘states’, supporting the neoliberal state is nothing new. Why don’t you take your ‘Thatcherian’ mentality and support the invasion and exploitation of ‘third-world’ countries in a very racist ploy to ‘whitewash’ the globe into embracing western political concepts (psuedo-democracy for one or what Alain Badiou calls “authoritarian opinion”) and capitalism.
As for this quote: “why don't you present some ideas maggots?” … I must say, well, very dialectical of you. Social Darwinism and Neoliberalism are certainly not new concepts. Social Darwinism was espoused by Nazi Germany as a tactic and reason for their imperialistic war. Neoliberalism is the democratic means of imperialism where “at best it refers to a patient re-education, at worst to the right of military intervention by democratic paratroopers” (Badiou, 2005, p. 78)*. So, perhaps you should be obliged to come up with some enlightening comments that do not support racism, idiocy, or the further retardation of our social-fabric. Anonymity is a great way to participate in e-democracy too, isn’t it?
* Badiou, A. (2005). Metapolitics: Abrégé de Métapolitique. Verso.