smooth

pigglet,
in the specific case of yerba buena, the center is run by a non-profit organization. That isn't always the case, however, and I understand roachboy's point to be that in situations like that the "public good" speaks to a particular class level and people similarly situated.

the poor people swept out of the way to make room for the center aren't likely to ever enjoy it, have time to visit the center, or really be preoccupied about anything other than living day to day (not that they wouldn't necessarily enjoy a multicultural arts center--but when would they visit it and would its presentation be relevant to them; it might only become relevant to them at the expense of relevancy to the citizens it's aimed at caputuring...after all, eminent domain is and always has been about revenue)


but in the main, we might consider that the meme put out by conservatives over the past decades has been that privitization is and always will be necessarily better than government. That the free market is an "good" end in and of itself, rather than a means to achieve freedom for the people within the market.

So then we have the interesting dilemma that when these projects are undertaken, they are constructed by private companies for corporate gain and often run by private companies for profit--or "non" profit as the case may be. But the idea that a portion of the downtown area be bracketed off for public consumption at no cost is pretty repugnant to the main conservative view--they would much rather private interests become involved and develop that space into a strip mall or business renovation or anything that will generate revenue (perhaps if I studied the context of this art center more I might find whether the proposal anticipates revenue generation from the visitors to the surrounding businesses or if the poverty housing units were eyesores and devalued the surrounding areas).

Well, from my understanding, eminent domain has lotsa times been used for business interests and seldom for non-profit construction. Yet, roachboy's point doesn't hinge on that, I think. We might question why the low-income housing can't be understood as a "public good." and this ties to the processes of hegemony we both brought to the table in an earlier discussion...


so here conservatives are faced with a gnarly proposition...they have to deal with a glaring inconsistency in the internal coherence of their politics: how do they resolve the fact that in order to keep their personal property they need the government's protection to shield them from corporate interests, yet this same government, by its nature and increasing presence in their lives, violates their personal liberties.

Ordinarily this wouldn't be so problematic. Roachboy already outlined in what some are referring to as his "racist" post the release valve that is traditionally utilized: us vs. them. but in this case, the "us" and the "them" are problematized by the fact that the middle class are not provided with an "us" to align with...they are surrounded by "thems"--the people they would ordinarily thrust on their asses for development, the elites who want to strip them of their property, the judicial system that can't seem to follow what they believed to be the tenents of the Constitution in regards to individual liberty.

So then they have to make sense of their position in the world, what they are being hit with. All humans do this, in my opinion, I'm not flaming conservative ideology or particular peoples--it just doesn't really help in this particular situation and so I'm speaking about it in this particular thread. As they cast about for an appropriate "them" we get characters who perform as though they are an "us" (Bush & Co., which by all standards is anything but an "us" to most people milling around the United States) telling the people to calm down...we have identified the "them." Luckily, the threat is external...we just need to unify...go to war...kill them...save us...track them down...we are secure...we are safe...we can overcome adversity as long as we are the same...think the same...act the same...beieve the same...we do believe the same...we are great...our nation is tops...our ideals are tops...never regret...stay the course...keep the resolve...do not question...do not fear...bush is here...

and you'll this stuff replicated throughout the years to come...and you'll notice it was replicated throughout our history. If Bush's speechwriters were better at their jobs, or if they had more confidence in their listeners' historical knowledge, they would be able to incite a hella lot more jingoism. But perhaps they have accurately judged the apathy of many people and don't really need to incite the kind of following past leaders have obtained.

so here in this case, we have a crack in the institution of capitalism, and some people are going to put their fingernail in it and probe the crack, pry it open, peer into it, see what's behind that curtain...

how do the people make sense of their context? why can't they be capitalist, why not own their land and lease it out, are they not part of the owning class? but they certainly are not part of the non-owning class, right? caught in some no-man's land...a very precarious situation for the working-class conservative just trying to raise a family and live his life...

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman