Скачать книгу

betters which, together with congestion, was believed to be the main source of their moral condition.35

       “The peril of this republic”

      “The vices of cities have been the undoing of past empires and civilizations. It has been at the point where the urban population outnumbers the rural people that wrecked republics have gone down . . . The peril of this republic likewise is now clearly seen to be in her cities. There is no greater menace to democratic institutions that the great segment of an element which gathers its ideas of patriotism and citizenship from the low grogshop.”

      Anti-Saloon League, Yearbook, 1914.

      Importantly, urban reform was henceforth predicated on scientific knowledge and technical expertise. It drew on statistics and sociological inquiry to characterize the negative features of the city environment in need of remediation. Early American sociology arose to satisfy this interest in studying problem populations so as to better manage them.36 The shift from “moral purity” to “social hygiene” marked the secularization and professionalization of sociomoral control in the metropolis. It fostered the birth of city planning as the profession devoted to creating the new environment fit to nourish moral unity and civic pride, and thereby recreate in the metropolis the imagined social and cultural cohesion of the village. For a brief moment in American history, the city appeared capable of producing the remedies to its own ills and elevating the social standards of the teeming masses.

      Immediately after World War II, unabated anti-urbanism dominated city and regional planning as well as federal policy. The massive public subsidy of suburban development provided homes and transportation for the millions of whites fleeing city centers as black migrants from the South moved in. Top-down schemes of “slum clearance” and “urban renewal” pursuant to the Housing Act of 1949 failed to staunch the exodus of middle-class households and factories, even as they tore through the fabric of black neighborhoods declared “blighted” to try and salvage white ones, boost property values, and rebuild the tax base.43

      The mass exodus of whites to the suburbs and the surging influx of blacks from the South caused alarm at the threat this posed to the established ethnoracial order. Thus, between 1950 and 1960, 678,000 whites moved out of Chicago while 153,000 African Americans moved in; based on this trend blacks could be expected to hold a numerical majority by 2000, not just in the Windy City, but in eight of the country’s ten largest cities, thus establishing “Negro control” over urban America. And there was no stopping this demographic tumble so long as the presence of blacks in the metropolis was “associated in white minds with crime, drug addiction, juvenile delinquency and slums.”44

      The sprouting of Black Power activists in cities across the country inspired sheer racial terror. With their militant rhetoric of black separatism, strident hostility toward “whitey” and “pigs,” invocations of Marxist revolution and colonial subjugation, and calls for armed struggle “against Ameri-KKK-a,” they seemed to corroborate the worst anxieties about the city as crucible of social violence and hellish dissolution. For many of its participants, especially young black men on the borders of the world of work, the rebellion produced a vivid, if fleeting, collective sentiment of agency, racial pride and unity.47 In the eyes of whites, the meshing of black power slogans and street riots portended a racial apocalypse; for government officials, it threatened a civic cataclysm unseen since the Civil War.

       The “spiral to urban apartheid”

      “If the Negro population as a whole developed an even stronger feeling of being ‘penned in’ and discriminated against, many of its members might come to support not only riots, but the rebellion now being preached by only a handful. If large-scale violence resulted, white retaliation could follow.

Скачать книгу