城市发展的掠夺性修辞

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 ETHNIC STUDIES
Kevin L. Clay, Jasmine D. Hill
{"title":"城市发展的掠夺性修辞","authors":"Kevin L. Clay, Jasmine D. Hill","doi":"10.1017/s1742058x23000048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this article, we reflect on the pernicious nature of rhetoric aimed at soliciting Black community support for predatory urban development schemes. Highlighting recent examples of Urban One Casino + Resort’s development campaign in Richmond, Virginia, and the messaging leveraged by political leaders on behalf of SoFi stadium and the Intuit Dome in Inglewood, California, we find that discursive moves made by public and private stakeholders reflect what we call the “predatory rhetorics of urban development.” We argue that these rhetorics intend to enlist divested Black communities as supporters of development projects that concentrate wealth and power in the hands of economic and political elites. They do so by playing on Black desires for social and economic inclusion into American middle-class community life. Four common threads of predatory rhetoric appear across both contexts. They are 1) seizing the real needs and concerns of stigmatized places, 2) relying on representational politics to mitigate issues of trust, 3) the neoliberal framing of American internal colonization as a problem that requires extractive private development solutions and, finally, 4) dissimulating intra-community class interests to consolidate “Black needs.” We reflect on the outcomes supported by these rhetorics across both development projects and raise several points of further consideration as we hope for more organized responses to such rhetorics in the future.","PeriodicalId":47158,"journal":{"name":"Du Bois Review-Social Science Research on Race","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Predatory Rhetorics of Urban Development\",\"authors\":\"Kevin L. Clay, Jasmine D. Hill\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1742058x23000048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In this article, we reflect on the pernicious nature of rhetoric aimed at soliciting Black community support for predatory urban development schemes. Highlighting recent examples of Urban One Casino + Resort’s development campaign in Richmond, Virginia, and the messaging leveraged by political leaders on behalf of SoFi stadium and the Intuit Dome in Inglewood, California, we find that discursive moves made by public and private stakeholders reflect what we call the “predatory rhetorics of urban development.” We argue that these rhetorics intend to enlist divested Black communities as supporters of development projects that concentrate wealth and power in the hands of economic and political elites. They do so by playing on Black desires for social and economic inclusion into American middle-class community life. Four common threads of predatory rhetoric appear across both contexts. They are 1) seizing the real needs and concerns of stigmatized places, 2) relying on representational politics to mitigate issues of trust, 3) the neoliberal framing of American internal colonization as a problem that requires extractive private development solutions and, finally, 4) dissimulating intra-community class interests to consolidate “Black needs.” We reflect on the outcomes supported by these rhetorics across both development projects and raise several points of further consideration as we hope for more organized responses to such rhetorics in the future.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47158,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Du Bois Review-Social Science Research on Race\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Du Bois Review-Social Science Research on Race\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1742058x23000048\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHNIC STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Du Bois Review-Social Science Research on Race","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1742058x23000048","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我们反思了旨在征求黑人社区支持掠夺性城市发展计划的言论的有害本质。通过最近在弗吉尼亚州里士满的Urban One Casino + Resort的开发活动,以及代表SoFi体育场和加利福尼亚州英格伍德的Intuit Dome的政治领导人所利用的信息,我们发现公共和私人利益相关者的话语行为反映了我们所说的“城市发展的掠夺性修辞”。我们认为,这些修辞的目的是争取被剥夺的黑人社区作为发展项目的支持者,这些项目将财富和权力集中在经济和政治精英手中。他们利用黑人希望融入美国中产阶级社区生活的社会和经济愿望来实现这一目标。两种语境中都出现了掠夺性修辞的四条常见线索。他们1)抓住被污名化地区的真正需求和担忧,2)依靠代表性政治来缓解信任问题,3)美国内部殖民的新自由主义框架是一个需要掠夺性私人发展解决方案的问题,最后,4)掩饰社区内部的阶级利益,以巩固“黑人需求”。我们对这两个发展项目中这些言论所支持的结果进行了反思,并提出了进一步考虑的几点,希望今后对这些言论能有更有组织的回应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Predatory Rhetorics of Urban Development
In this article, we reflect on the pernicious nature of rhetoric aimed at soliciting Black community support for predatory urban development schemes. Highlighting recent examples of Urban One Casino + Resort’s development campaign in Richmond, Virginia, and the messaging leveraged by political leaders on behalf of SoFi stadium and the Intuit Dome in Inglewood, California, we find that discursive moves made by public and private stakeholders reflect what we call the “predatory rhetorics of urban development.” We argue that these rhetorics intend to enlist divested Black communities as supporters of development projects that concentrate wealth and power in the hands of economic and political elites. They do so by playing on Black desires for social and economic inclusion into American middle-class community life. Four common threads of predatory rhetoric appear across both contexts. They are 1) seizing the real needs and concerns of stigmatized places, 2) relying on representational politics to mitigate issues of trust, 3) the neoliberal framing of American internal colonization as a problem that requires extractive private development solutions and, finally, 4) dissimulating intra-community class interests to consolidate “Black needs.” We reflect on the outcomes supported by these rhetorics across both development projects and raise several points of further consideration as we hope for more organized responses to such rhetorics in the future.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
16
×
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