Re:The Look of Gentrification
by zozbot234 on Tuesday March 22, 2022 @12:21PM
(#30768028)
It's worth noting that most of these issues impact urban areas where "moving", in or out, is just part of the territory. If you really want to look at resilient "strong communities" where people just stay put, sometimes for multiple generations, that's very much a feature of smaller towns and more rural areas. (That's actually one reason why the modern suburb attracts such strong criticism; it's not self-sufficient in the way a rural village or town is, so it has no real chance of developing a "strong community" of its own from scratch.)
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Look of Gentrification
by Dracophoenix on Wednesday March 23, 2022 @07:32AM
(#30777362)
Is a strong community desirable in and of itself? What normally comes with strong communities is little tolerance for individualism or "idiosyncratic" behavior.
And strong, small communities exist outside rural areas in the form urban ethnic enclaves and suburban HOAs.
Over time, idiosyncratic behavior tends to develop into splinter communities that are just as strong as the original, if not more so. Look at the history of LGBTQ+ subcultures and you can very much see that happen.
Re:The Look of Gentrification
by Dracophoenix on Wednesday March 23, 2022 @10:16AM
(#30778677)
That usually happens in cities and this occurs as a consequence of reaching a critical mass of individuals with whom one forms a subculture. You can find thousands if not tens of thousands of kooks in New York City that will share any given outlandish belief. That's a benefit for cultural diffusion, but a disadvantage for cultural cohesion. In contrast, the weakest areas for LGBT representation are rural areas which already have a tight-nit church-going society and dominant Christian subculture. Communities with the strongest cultures are the ones are least likely or be changed or influenced by others.