The Black Zone: How the Progressive Movement Created the Modern Ghetto

Zoning laws have only been around since the early 1900s. Their intended purpose was about industrial encroachment into residential areas. Los Angeles, CA was the first in the nation to institute zoning ordinances. By 1913 This new authority, which was later solidified by two landmark SCOTUS decisions Hadacheck v. Sebastian (1915), and Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Corporation (1926) was in full swing. Most historians these days forcus on the "master planning" and industrial regulation that led to the modern metropolis as the gift of Progressive Era zoning policy. While this area of study is important, an equally important and often ignored intent of these new regulations was to stop immigrant and black slums from encroaching into better neighborhoods. This was one of the very first attempts by the Progressive movement of the early 1900s to experiment with social engineering.


According to Zoning and the American Dream By Charles Haar this new wave of urban planning was created by "idealists and special interest groups". Their goals for zoning laws were camped in "social reform" and land use controls. This social reform sought to keep all that was "good" in society while keeping locked away the slums that, in their experience, were damaging to prosperity, property value, and the overall aesthetics of the city. The "undersireables" in these slums were almost always Blacks, Chinese, and Hispanic immigrants, though Blacks were the main focus. These zoning laws changed the meaning of the word 'blight'. A disease that strikes trees and rots them from within, in this case, the 'blighted' neighborhoods were places were minorites were often forced to live due to Jim Crow laws, and later zoning ordinances that reflected the contempt for the black and immigrant communities of the early 1900s.

Yale Rabin(Author of Expulsive Zoning: The Inequitable Legacy of Euclid) empahsizes the social origins of zoning laws. In the South, zoning and planning ordinances were more often than not used to enforce segregation laws cordoning off entire populations of blacks into blighted enclaves. The modern ghetto was born. Rabin writes "While northern Progressives were enacting zoning as a mechanism for protecting and enhancing property values," - "southern Progressives were testing its effectiveness as a means of enforcing racial segregation." in 1910 Baltimore was the first to institute racial zoning ordinances, and by 1915-1917 the use of zoning laws to cordon off the black population was widespread. In 1917 the SCOTUS struck down a racially based zoning ordinance in Kentucky as being unconstitutional. Buchanan v. Warley, incidentally, would not go very far.

Baltimore Mayor J. Barry Mahool, a known "social justice" Progressive supported the city's racial zoning ordinances and signed them into law in 1910. Mahool- "Blacks should be quarantined in isolated slums in order to reduce the incidents of civil disturbance, to prevent the spread of communicable disease into the nearby White neighborhoods, and to protect property values among the White majority."

The Progressives at the time knew they couldn't cordon off entire populations in contravention of SCOTUS decisions, but they could zone industrial production, factories, and processing plants in these neighborhoods...As a result many black families and other minorities were forced out of the city, as it became unbearable to live in those conditions. Although the South invented and used racial zoning, they relied on Northern urban planners(and their lawyers) to to come up with ways to segregate Black communities using zoning laws, while still maintaining a legally defensible position. It was, as it is today, the truncation of the meaning and spirit of law by the lawyers of those with a twisted agenda. It was the urban planning version of eugenics, and fit very well into the philosophy of Progressivism.

While this thread focuses on only a few cities and states, the racial zoning laws of the Progressive era were at the time, and in my opinion still are, a nation wide phenomenon. We see evidence of this in redistricting, only now it isn't so much to cordon off the black and immigrant communities. Today those zoning laws and redistricting practices are mainly used to lock in minority votes, and the plight of the modern ghetto is still perpetuated, in my opinion, for political purposes.

The Kerner Commission was established in 1967 to investigate the causes of the race riots of 1963 to 1967. The Report(PDF) was the first study to put together how zoning laws contributed to the sense of desperation among the Black community that for decades had been festering in the blighted ghettos the Progressives had pushed them into. Florence Wagman Roisman(PDF) said this regarding the Kerner report and what it revealed:

"The Commission noted that 'discrimination prevents access to many non-slum areas, particularly the suburbs; where good housing exists.' The riots following Dr. King's assassination on April 4, 1968 further underscored the outrage of many African-Americans against residential racial discrimination and segregation."

Even after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, and all that has transpired since, has not changed the policy of racial zoning and planning. The focus, however, has since changed from seperation, to political opportunism. The ghetto is still the ghetto. Today the ghetto is not much different than it was then. Drugs, violence, prostitution, and all manner of crimes. Zoned away from the prosperity on the other side of the Progressive brick wall set up around them over 100 years ago.

reply to post by projectvxn


Interesting thread. I would suggest that, though, zoning was a tool and it was the politics of the day that chose to wield it as social engineering. When one considers how box stores influence local economy, one might even be able to extend this argument into the modern day.
Secondly...apparently the sobriquet "Progressive" has evolved since then as well...at least I hope so. S&F for you!

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


I don't think so. I think the motivations have changed. Today it isn't popular to say you wanna cordon off the minority communities. But it is perfectly fine to use the existing structure created during the Progressive era to lock in votes, part of that strategy is to use the same tactics today, but to political ends.

It's still racist, in my opinion, to use these laws for political opportunism.

Originally posted by projectvxn
The ghetto is still the ghetto. Today the ghetto is not much different than it was then. Drugs, violence, prostitution, and all manner of crimes. Zoned away from the prosperity on the other side of the Progressive brick wall set up around them over 100 years ago.

edit on 6-11-2010 by projectvxn because: Spelling errors, grammar

edit on 6-11-2010 by projectvxn because: Spelling errors, grammar, formatting

at the risk of coming off as a captain obvious, nobody in USA is forced to live in a ghetto. tell me this, if i were to move to a dilapidated ghetto and decided to improve the overall living conditions would i be stopped by law? are blacks? are blacks prohibited from,say, beautifying their own neighborhoods? can blacks buy property in white neighborhoods if they wish so or not? or are black people absolutely denied entry in suburbia?

you know there are tons of piss poor and illegal immigrants from Eastern Europe, none of them live in a ghetto. in most cases they dont have necessary papers such as SS# and Driver License yet somehow manage to succeed in this environment. blacks, in turn have all these rights, arent restrained by any means and yet all you hear is how blacks are kept down.

Zoning nowadays can be used for purposes of large land developers to get their way. I remember the debacle back in Fresno when Donald Trump was going to purchase some land that was another developers project. The city was cutting deals left and right to attempt to get Trump in to finish or change the project. Everything fell through and it stayed in the hands of the original developer. Problem was, he was having problems with finances and the city was not offering any of the deals that they offered Trump.

If you know about development of property, the government requires the developer to provide all necessary property improvements, like fire service, water, electric, roads, etc etc etc.

Now, if you got some big time developer come in, the government thinks they are going to make a killing on property or other forms of taxation. This where they will screw over the existing property owners by using eminent domain. Depending on the area involved, the government will leave it up to the neighbors if they will allow a zoning change, other areas could care less. They are all into that money.

Thanks for the read projectvxn. I never liked the zoning laws per se. I think they should be set up where the immediate neighbors should have the entire voice. Plus people moving in later and complaining about existing farms or factories should be told to take a hike. I believe the law should be set up just like the basic Golden rule, if the neighbor is not harmed by what is done with the said property, no one should be able to tell you what to do with your own land.

Take the recent fine handed to someone for growing too much food in his garden. Idiocy.

reply to post by delicatessen


During the progressive era these ordinances were also used as a means to prevent businesses from opening up in black neighborhoods. You have to consider a long line of historic trespasses against the Black community from slavery, Jim Crow, and then the progressive era. Many of these policies had to change their face value while maintaining the status quo. To this day, zoning laws are used to determine who gets what public resources. It's why you'll find, in the same school district, great schools in the suburban neighborhoods, and all the piss poor schools in the ghettos.

While I agree that Blacks and other minority groups no longer have many of the same roadblocks as back then, it is important to understand that several decades of these policies have created a certain mentality and culture that is self destructive in nature.

There can be no justice unless these policies and this history is acknowledged and these policies reversed entirely. As I said in my OP, it is not so much about racism anymore so much as it is about political opportunism- using minority groups for political gain.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by delicatessen

 

During the progressive era these ordinances were also used as a means to prevent businesses from opening up in black neighborhoods. You have to consider a long line of historic trespasses against the Black community from slavery, Jim Crow, and then the progressive era. Many of these policies had to change their face value while maintaining the status quo. To this day, zoning laws are used to determine who gets what public resources. It's why you'll find, in the same school district, great schools in the suburban neighborhoods, and all the piss poor schools in the ghettos.

While I agree that Blacks and other minority groups no longer have many of the same roadblocks as back then, it is important to understand that several decades of these policies have created a certain mentality and culture that is self destructive in nature.

There can be no justice unless these policies and this history is acknowledged and these policies reversed entirely. As I said in my OP, it is not so much about racism anymore so much as it is about political opportunism- using minority groups for political gain.

edit on 6-11-2010 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

them days of barring rights to minorities left and right are long gone. let`s say ghettos are denied great schools like in suburbia, then how come the sons and daughters of recent immigrants from backwards hell holes like post Soviet and Eastern European countries show unproportionately greater level of academic success as compared to poor old folk from ghetto?

reply to post by delicatessen


Did you read my entire last post?

You must have missed the part where I said that decades of these policies have embedded a certain mentality and culture that is SELF-DESTRUCTIVE. Policies that continue to this day.

These policies have created a culture of dependency. This dependency stems from decades of social marginalization. The black ghettos today are communities being razed by a lack of education this lack of education creates a lack of entrepreneurial spirit, extreme poverty, and such leads to crime, and dependency on the very political bloc that needs them to stay ignorant and poor in order to keep their positions of power. As I said, twice already, the policies haven't changed, but the goals are slightly different, though in my opinion, no less racist.

You can go to any city in America and see the effects of these zoning laws.

American's pass by the segregation and poverty every day, to deny that it exists is ridiculous. What people don't realize is how many laws and policies are on the books that fuel the institutionalized racism we see today. Most of these laws have their roots in the Progressive era of 1890s-1920s. It was Progressives that segregated a previously integrated military, it was the Progressives who thought up eugenics, they're the ones who believe in social justice rather than equal justice. What social justice alludes to has not changed at all, only how it is presented.

Today, if you're poor and live in one of these Progressive social justice neighborhoods, they are your "friends". If you point out that they're a bunch of tyrannical opportunists preying on uneducated people who desperately need opportunity in their lives, you're a right wing extremist.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by delicatessen

 

Did you read my entire last post?

You must have missed the part where I said that decades of these policies have embedded a certain mentality and culture that is SELF-DESTRUCTIVE. Policies that continue to this day.

These policies have created a culture of dependency. This dependency stems from decades of social marginalization. The black ghettos today are communities being razed by a lack of education this lack of education creates a lack of entrepreneurial spirit, extreme poverty, and such leads to crime, and dependency on the very political bloc that needs them to stay ignorant and poor in order to keep their positions of power. As I said, twice already, the policies haven't changed, but the goals are slightly different, though in my opinion, no less racist.

i sure did- i am at work. this certain mentality, you speaking of, is not foreign to post Soviet countries. Soviet regime used to run on a culture of dependency. after its collapse, many of the countries that comprised the Soviet block, were 1000 times worse than the worst ghetto in The US. although, by western standards, the post Soviet countries like Ukraine and Kazakhstan are still considered hell holes, they are growing pretty fast and nowhere near what they used to be. also they survived through Stalin`s repressive regime and artificially created famine that wiped off millions and millions. guess what, they got over it and moved on. how come American ghetto cant? that`s right, because so long as there are folks who tend victim mentality in the black community, THE GHETTO wont grow up!!!

reply to post by delicatessen


Agreed.

But that's part of the mentality I'm talking about. We have the Progressive Black "leaders" like Al Sharpton who use and help justify the perpetuation of the ghetto, and the racial divide that is promoted by the left(anyone rich and white, or just well-off and white) that tells them they are under the thumb of someone else, that it is only the Progressive movement that can save them, and that they need to depend only on the good graces of government. Those good graces are the "projects", the subsidized housing, the "low-income neighborhoods". Call that what you will, it is the ghetto. It is a place to put poor uneducated black people so "everyone else" doesn't have to see it.

Add that the police have been historically the most visible form of institutionalized racism over the last few decades, and you have a situation that leaves these people entirely on their own, and we're all just paying them off to never leave the ghetto with our tax dollars. If they get caught up trying to survive in the ghetto, they wind up in prison. And they're never in poor company, many go along with other family members. Mostly on drug and gang related charges. It's all they know, and that's what we have to change.

I'm saying that we can fix this. Together. It's not a THEY issue, as they too are Americans, it is an US issue. We need to fix the system that promotes this status quo, not dismiss it because one group of people have handled their situation better than others.

Originally posted by projectvxn
Rabin writes "While northern Progressives were enacting zoning as a mechanism for protecting and enhancing property values," Rabin writes, "southern Progressives were testing its effectiveness as a means of enforcing racial segregation."

Once again,
Racism is seen through the eyes of the racist.
The north did it to "Protect and enhance property values" (A good thing ?)
The south did it to "enforce (ing) racial segregation." ( A bad thing.)

This is the same blighted and bigoted nimby attitude that exists today in the "Progressive North" of the USA.

The northern liberal and progressive mindset is bolstered and justified by the idea that they are "better" than their "racist" southern counterparts.

Fact is that there is more racism in the north than in the south but it is a twisted and condescending type of racism that continues to stir up ongoing social problems and is a two faced and widespread version that eclipses southern racists by a huge margin.

In the south there are racists but it is a minority of people who are outspoken and easily identified. You see it more because they don't care what you think.

Up north the racism is much more widespread and hypocritical. They will smile at you and pretend to be friends while running you down behind your back.

I've lived up north and down south and can tell you that northerners in the US hold onto their predjudices and their zoning like no place else in the world.

I really have to laugh when I listen to my yankee friends in Massachusetts spout the all embracing liberal dogma and then turn around and cry because the new 'project' in their sleepy little Norman Rockwell town has brought in black families.

They love to hate the "racist south" and stand up for minorities as long as those minorities stay where they belong.

Remember this folks. These people are still around us. Hillary Clinton is a progressive, she considers herself a modern progressive who idolizes people like Margaret Sanger(Eugenicist, progressive, racist and created the framework of what would become Planned Parenthood).


These people have not changed the core of their philosophy in 100 years. And they won't.

Sounds like the "Progressives" of yesterday are the "Conservatives" of today, trying to legislate their version of morality. Progressives in the past tried to limit brown skin people by segregation. Conservatives today will segregate them by putting them in jail and creating anti-immigration laws. Progressives had Prohibition and Conservatives have the "Drug War". I really don't know who is who anymore. Labeling people and insisting on an ideology as the answer will always cause problems. The best answer is to use what works for the problems we are faced with.

interesting.

Now that you have stated the obvious....what do you think we can do to teach our people to value and love each other without such ugly predjudices?
Though i have to admit that a great many very successful people are in favour of eugenics.i myself find the whole concept reprehensible.

great thread man and very well read you are sir project i can tell you from my own experience from living in a ghetto all the way through the teen years it is like a warzone at all times you show weakness you get beat down and you had to eye your stuff all the time during the blood and crips heyday it started out as you had to choose a side red or blue you could refuse but you had to have a tight group of friends if you were just out and about it was i guess about having a thug mentality at all times. The only thing that lured me to be in the gang or set i was in was the respect and power you could have doing pretty much whatever you wanted

I can see already that the OP has brought us
a choice steak dinner served with a very fine wine,
but the fast food culture of some responses show that
by swallowing it whole and eating without chewing they know
all about it, and are right back to arguing who to vote off the island.

May I suggest that this OP is real food, something to digest slowly, and
even sleep on. Come back in a day or two and make a comment that adds content.



On topic:
From the dates given in the OP I have dug up this comment made by the first Progressive President, Wilson, in Mobile Alabama in the fall of 1913. This is not relevant to the issue of zoning laws per se, but show the Progressive policies that were started in regards to International Issues. This speech was made in an era of Dollar Diplomacy, which was shifted by Wilson into something called Gunboat Benevolence, or Progressivism by the Sword.


David Grouchy

His remarks were aimed especially at Mexico, but encompassed the small republics as well. He utterly disavowed imperialist intent. "The United States will never again seek one additional foot of territory by conquest," he declared. Rather, he sought "the development of constitutional liberty in the world." As for economic penetration, while he denounced the extortion of unfair interest rates and concessions, he encouraged American businessmen to be active overseas, in an ethical fashion.

-A History of The United States, Since 1865
T. Harry Williams, Louisiana State University
Richard N. Current, University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Frank Friedel, Harvard University
(c) 1959

Very skillful US versus them thread Pro!!!

Clearly this use of local governance is against the constitution and solely born of racist considerations.

I am sure you would like a hog rendering plant erected next to your home and in the slight chance you would not, I would suggest you are a racist for harboring such opinions.

On another note this narrative is fairly ridiculous

OP please account for the historical fact that ethnic groups, races and specific nationalities have been coalescing in neighborhoods, by group, long before the invention of progressivism???

I think it is not wise to constantly villify and presume the worst to progress your political agenda, black and white
age old propagation - hooray!!!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6d95ec177d87.jpg[/atsimg]


Here is one example of what a zoning law tells people they can and cannot do. This is a side view.
It shows how much room must be left in front of, and behind, the property, limits the height, and in this one from Chicago can even impact the shape of the third and fourth floors.

And that just covers the physical limits of construction. Zoning laws also cover all utilities, with a separate ordinance and blueprint diagram for every phone wire, water line, sewage line, drainage, electrical, cable, the permissibility of external mount satellite dishes. Pretty much everything one can think of.

On top of all this is another layer of archaic and forgotten ordinances that are still on the books, and can be used as political tools when ever needed. For instance in the City of Baton Rouge, there is still a law requiring a hitching post for horses every 100 feet. As there are none, every single building and it's owner are in violation. In other words, every business downtown stays open and remains unfined as long as the government chooses not to enforce it.

In the OP it is implied that the reason poor areas of town have plenty of package liquor stores but no real grocery stores, is because of zoning laws. There may be some substance to this argument.


David Grouchy