The Properties of Whiteness

IF 3.3 2区 经济学 Q1 REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING
D. Williams, L. Delgado, Nicholette Cameron, Justin P. Steil
{"title":"The Properties of Whiteness","authors":"D. Williams, L. Delgado, Nicholette Cameron, Justin P. Steil","doi":"10.1080/01944363.2022.2144930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Problem, research strategy, and findings Land use regulations have contributed to the construction of White supremacist racial categories and the persistent conjunction of race and property in the United States. Drawing on archival analysis of documents regarding early 20th-century municipal segregation ordinances and legal analysis of court decisions regarding property and land use law, this study makes three primary contributions to the literature. First, it homes in on the origins of a persistent thread of a racialized collective right to exclude at the neighborhood scale, exercised by White residents through some of the United States’ earliest land use regulations. Second, it draws on foundational works in critical race theory to illuminate how land use regulations helped construct race and property, examining how courts’ efforts to reconcile property rights in land with property rights in Whiteness changed judicial conceptions of the viability of property regulations, specifically zoning and land use laws. It builds on this analysis to connect the thread of racialized exclusion in the Supreme Court’s most recent takings decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (2021). Third, it draws from Black geographies to suggest takeaways for planners in supporting Black spaces that can simultaneously support Black efforts to name the collective political reality and highlight the contingency of racial constructs in ways that can eradicate the substantive conditions of Black subordination. Takeaway for practice Planning practice and land use regulations are both a reflection of institutionally determined logics, such as judicial determinations of property rights, and, sometimes, challenges to those logics. Planners have a role to play in addressing racial domination by studying local histories of race and space, analyzing histories of White supremacist exclusionary practices, supporting thriving Black spaces, revealing the contingency of race, and delegitimizing and deconstructing spatial orders that continue to sustain class and race hierarchies.","PeriodicalId":48248,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Planning Association","volume":"89 1","pages":"505 - 516"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Planning Association","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2022.2144930","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Problem, research strategy, and findings Land use regulations have contributed to the construction of White supremacist racial categories and the persistent conjunction of race and property in the United States. Drawing on archival analysis of documents regarding early 20th-century municipal segregation ordinances and legal analysis of court decisions regarding property and land use law, this study makes three primary contributions to the literature. First, it homes in on the origins of a persistent thread of a racialized collective right to exclude at the neighborhood scale, exercised by White residents through some of the United States’ earliest land use regulations. Second, it draws on foundational works in critical race theory to illuminate how land use regulations helped construct race and property, examining how courts’ efforts to reconcile property rights in land with property rights in Whiteness changed judicial conceptions of the viability of property regulations, specifically zoning and land use laws. It builds on this analysis to connect the thread of racialized exclusion in the Supreme Court’s most recent takings decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (2021). Third, it draws from Black geographies to suggest takeaways for planners in supporting Black spaces that can simultaneously support Black efforts to name the collective political reality and highlight the contingency of racial constructs in ways that can eradicate the substantive conditions of Black subordination. Takeaway for practice Planning practice and land use regulations are both a reflection of institutionally determined logics, such as judicial determinations of property rights, and, sometimes, challenges to those logics. Planners have a role to play in addressing racial domination by studying local histories of race and space, analyzing histories of White supremacist exclusionary practices, supporting thriving Black spaces, revealing the contingency of race, and delegitimizing and deconstructing spatial orders that continue to sustain class and race hierarchies.
白度的性质
摘要问题、研究策略和发现土地使用法规有助于白人至上主义种族类别的构建,以及美国种族和财产的持续结合。本研究通过对20世纪早期市政隔离条例文件的档案分析,以及对财产和土地使用法法院判决的法律分析,对文献做出了三个主要贡献。首先,它揭示了白人居民通过美国最早的一些土地使用法规行使的在社区范围内种族化的集体排斥权的根源。其次,它借鉴了批判性种族理论中的基础性著作,阐明了土地使用法规如何帮助构建种族和财产,考察了法院在白人中调和土地产权和财产权的努力如何改变了财产法规,特别是分区和土地使用法的可行性的司法概念。它建立在这一分析的基础上,将最高法院最近在Cedar Point Nursery诉Hassid案(2021)中的判决中种族化排斥的线索联系起来。第三,它借鉴了黑人的地理位置,为规划者提供了支持黑人空间的建议,这些空间可以同时支持黑人命名集体政治现实的努力,并突出种族结构的偶然性,从而消除黑人从属的实质性条件。实践中的收获规划实践和土地使用法规都是制度决定逻辑的反映,例如产权的司法决定,有时也是对这些逻辑的挑战。规划者可以通过研究当地的种族和空间历史,分析白人至上主义排斥行为的历史,支持繁荣的黑人空间,揭示种族的偶然性,以及剥夺和解构继续维持阶级和种族等级制度的空间秩序的合法性,在解决种族统治问题上发挥作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
10.70%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: For more than 70 years, the quarterly Journal of the American Planning Association (JAPA) has published research, commentaries, and book reviews useful to practicing planners, policymakers, scholars, students, and citizens of urban, suburban, and rural areas. JAPA publishes only peer-reviewed, original research and analysis. It aspires to bring insight to planning the future, to air a variety of perspectives, to publish the highest quality work, and to engage readers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信