DEINDUSTRIALIZATION AND CRIMINALIZATION

BY STUDENT

It can be seen from the Bureau of Justice statistics that the Latino/a prison inmate population in the United States has drastically increased since the 1990's. In the year 2004 Latinos/as were incarcerated 2.6 times more often than whites (Bureau of Justice Statistics,2005). Less than one in eight United States residents are of Latino/a descent meanwhile one out of every four prisoners are Latino/a. While prison population regardless of race grew from 1971 to 2001 the largest racial increase could be seen in the Latino/a population. The average Latino/a inmate population jumped ten times what it was back in 1971 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2003B, 5). Similar to African Americans Latino/as appear to be subdued and oppressed by the mass imprisonment phenomenon. Many factors come together to create the surge in Latino/a prisoner population. The creation of race within the United States paves the way for the disproportional treatment towards Latinos/as in the criminal justice system. Is the influx of Latino/a prison inmate population a result of their portrayal in the mass media?

    In this blog post I argue that Latinos/as are more affected than whites by the United States prison population expansion.  The establishment of public policy regarding crime and the fear of crime displayed by the mass media are the main reason for the high incarceration rates of non-whites. The media promotes fear and puts out negative images regarding people of color (Morin 2009). Latinos/as are targets of accusations that link them to criminality because of their immigrant status. These accusations are a result of what the media puts out for the masses.  For example, a Time magazine employee went through East Los Angeles in 1967 and found "tawdry taco joints and rollicking cantinas," smelled "the reek of cheap wine [and] ... the fumes of frying tortillas," and heard "the machine gun patter of slung Spanish," (Impact of Mass Media, pg. 351). Such biased reporting did next to nothing to support inter-group understanding. Instead it reinforced the prejudices to the magazine's audience. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (1997,9) discovered that in the ten years from 1985 to 1995 the Latino/a prison population increased by 219%, with an average yearly increase by 12.3%. Unprecedented high levels of incarceration which are "markedly above the historical and comparative for all societies of this type" can be linked by the social phenomenon known as mass imprisonment.

     The fear of crime has become a major influence in policy making in the criminal justice system. This stems from the ongoing negative media portrayal Latinos/as receive that link them to crime.  The misconception of Latinos/as through the mass media stands in the way of the long overdue change that the criminal justice system desperately needs.  Loic Wacant (2001) found that in the penal system racial inequality becomes most noticeable when one compares the prison statistics from early on in the century to what it is today. At the mid century point the prison population went from 70% white to 70% African American and Latino/a. If these statistics are not just cause for change in the criminal justice system I do not know what is.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2003b. Prevalence of Imprisonment in the U.S. Population,

1974–2001, NCJ 197976, by Thomas P. Bonczar. Washington, DC: US Department ofJustice.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2005. Prisoners in 2004. NCJ 210677, by Paige M. Harrison,

and Allen J. Beck. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Victimization, 2005: National Crime

Bureau of Justice Statistics. 1997. Prisoners in 1996, NCJ 164619, by Chrisopher

            J.Mumola and   Allen J. Beck. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Wacquant, Loı¨c. 2001. Deadly Symbiosis: When Ghetto and Prison Meet and

            Mesh. In Mass Imprisonment: Social Causes and Consequences, ed. David

            Garland, 82–120. London: Sage.

Morin, Jose Luis. "LATINAS/OS AND US PRISONS." TRENDS AND CHALLENGES: 11-26.
     Print. 

Hiebert, Ray. (1988). Impact of Mass Media. New York; Longman Inc.

LATINOS AND HOUSING POLICIES

THE AMERICAN DREAM NOT SO AMERICAN AFTER ALL

BY ALEX D.

The value of land has an impressive priority in the Latino community, from a personal experience I have noticed and recognized that even my own relatives were investing their time and savings into owning property. Some individuals that I know have obtained houses back in their native land even though these houses won’t be occupied by them now they still value them enough to make the purchase. This is quite interesting due to the fact that they may not be able to live in these properties until they retire or are on vacations. After much thought this leads me to question the actual validity of the “American Dream.” When we think of immigrants who come to America to build a better life we say they came here to achieve the “American Dream” if that’s the case, why do they still work to obtain properties back in their native lands? Also, why do they still value this land property even though it is not an alternative for many to return to their countries?

           

When I came to this country the first information I obtained from family and friends was “that rent was too high.” All of my family resided within the five boroughs of New York City. It blew my mind that people would come from their native countries to live in New York, one of the most expensive cities in America. I was given explanations by my own parents that people came to New York to find work and survive. However, these “answers” just fueled my curiosity. As I searched for more sources of information I acknowledged that at this stage of my life the most reliable source was nothing more than just family gatherings so I focused more thoroughly on such gatherings.  In these family gatherings we had other relatives that would at some point discuss real estate whether it was in New York or back home. One thing that I was able to notice is that it did not matter where the property was located it still had a significant value to them. This ownership is magnified in the Latino community due to the history of having to leave their homeland whether it is overseas, as result of being displaced by gentrification or policy makers and as stated by Steven Bender: “The Puerto Rican legacy of loss in El Barrio also resonates with the gentrification experience …… new condominium developments replaced aging brownstones and retail catering to upscale residents replaced dollar stores.” This explains that even though Latinos that could very well be citizens and not immigrants such as in the case of Puerto Ricans, they are still also going through this property loss and displacement. In the case of immigrants the loss is greater because it includes the loss of their homeland right of place and their new established placed here in the U.S. As a result, magnifying the idea of value towards property, however such desire to own property by no means makes it exclusive to an idea of achieving an American quest. Hence, the “American Dream” is not exactly an American ideology, but just a human sense of belonging.  So what is the main reason for the term being as popular as it is? Media, and just mentioning the phrase “American Dream” can save a person the time taken to actually explain what it means personally to achieve the American dream. A prime example is if someone mentions that they want to go to America and achieve the “American Dream” there tends to be to no explanation required, People will typically form an idea for what is meant. However, for many of the Latino community the American Dream is the way through where they can own property and build somewhere they can call their own.

The value of property is present for some even if the property is across the border or overseas. I was able to solidify this notion based on the relatives that showed pride or just a sense of accomplishment after buying their own piece of real estate and not just locally, but overseas. Moreover, I also obtained more concrete information from the “Sixth Section, Alex Rivera, 2003” a Mexican coalition that even with constrained budgets and income went out of their way to make a piece of the homeland their own. One individual in the film even stated “if I could grow my crops and find a job I would head back to my country right now”. The main obstacle preventing people from owning property abroad, even though it might be easier to afford than American real estate, is that for some immigrants there is no viable way for them to visit their country. Even if they decide to stay back in their homeland in order to enjoy the property they worked so hard to attain, due to illegal status, going back is not an option. Moreover they might not be able to sustain themselves if they were too stay and work in their native land. In conclusion, the American Dream is more or less a rebranding of the sense of belonging that pertains to all humans; it is not just an American thing. A great amount of Latinos are left without the option of returning, so the only option available is to buy property in America which has the generalization of being part of the “American Dream”.

Bender, Steven W. (2010-09-29). Tierra y Libertad: Land, Liberty, and Latino Housing                wqwerr(Citizenship and Migration in the Americas) (Kindle Locations 2145-2147). NYU Press qqerqwrshort. Kindle Edition.

The sixth section. Dir. Alex Rivera. SubCine Independent Latino Film & Video [distributor], 2003.

                  

LATINOS AND HOUSING POLICIES

HOUSING AND THE HISPANIC SETTLEMENT

BY KEVIN S.

America, land of the free, where many come here for new opportunities, is not as glamorous as portrayed. Many immigrants take a chance when leaving their home environment and may not necessarily know what they are getting themselves into. They will be treated differently because of their status, their accent, and even their skin complexion. These undocumented individuals come in large numbers and settle in a set location forming their community. Those living in these communities prior to what some call an immigrant “invasion” are not used to such drastic changes and are unable to adjust. Such demographic changes can lead to situations, such as that which took place in the film 9500 Liberty. In the film many of the locals were very hostile towards the incoming immigrants, meanwhile these immigrants contribute to the economy by purchasing goods from local business owners and paying taxes. It is evident that these immigrants contributed to the local economy because when they were eventually driven out many of the local businesses began to struggle. It is then when people begin to realize the importance of the Hispanic community. Should these immigrants be asked to come back because of their role in the local economy? What else can the immigrants contribute to the community besides financial stability? If you were placed in the situation the immigrants were in how would you react and what actions would you take to such hostile neighbors?

These immigrants for the most part are hard workers and are just looking for a way to better their lives as well as the lives of their family. Their mistreatment is unjust because they are human as well and should be given the same opportunity to succeed as any other.  I believe with the constant rise in the Latino population the Hispanic community should be accommodated because of breaking numbers and should no longer be confined in small areas such as a barrio. The Hispanic community is rich in culture because the people are so diverse and this should be seen as an opportunity for others to learn about the Hispanic community rather then outcast them because of the differences.

If placed in a situation as those migrating I would like to be the individual gathering my people to stand up against those who oppose us being here but it is easier said then done. In order for change to occur someone has to lead the way, I believe the people of Prince William County went about the situation in a peaceful manner rather then violently protesting. I think housing for any new group settling would always be faced with opposition because those living there are so accustomed to their ways and are not willing to give an opportunity or a helping hand to those wishing to better their lives.

Work Cited

Dir. Annabel Park, Eric Byler. Perf.  Greg Letiecq, Corey A. Stewart, Col. Charlie T. Deane, Gaudencio Fernandez, Alanna Almeda, Elena Schlossberg, Frank J. Principi, and Martin E. Nohe. “9500 Liberty”. Self-Distributed 2009. Film. April 30^th

CAUTIOUSLY CELEBRATING LATINIZATION OF CITIES

BY OSCAR BUITRAGO

Dyckman is predominately a Latino neighborhood within the Washington Heights area. During1960s and early 1970s, Dyckman was an Irish dominated neighborhood; home to many Irish Bars, café’s and diners. During this time most residents were financially stable, the neighborhood was seen as culturally inviting and an ideal place to raise a family. Furthermore, both the Catholic and Public education systems were held in high standards. In the mid 1970s Latinos began moving into the Dyckman and Inwood area and quickly became the dominant group. From an economic perspective, Latinos were not as financially secure as the previous Irish population. Claiming this new territory meant a chance for opportunity and change. The changes I am referring to are known as “gentefication”. The New York Times defines gentefication is the process in which economic capital is brought to a community through cultural awareness and traditions.

For most neighborhoods that see a growth in Latino presence, businesses such as bodegas and barbershops opened up, however this was not the case in the Dyckman and Inwood area. Instead, developing businesses opened up to cater the incoming community. Many businesses owner’s were former residents of the community and claimed they understood what changes had to be made in order to give the neighborhood a positive reputation. Gentefication is the reason why former community residents became entrepreneurs and started a nightlife trend within the community. New venues such as restaurants, lounges and clubs were all added more or less five years quickly gaining wanted and unwanted attention.

Currently, the Dyckman and Inwood area is most famous for its recent addition known as La Marina. La Marina has established its reputation throughout the New York City and Northern New Jersey area creating many unwanted attention for local residents. This new addition has received multiple complaints from local residents because of traffic jams and noise complaints. When Latinos first started moving to the Dyckman and Inwood area, it was seen as a positive thing. Unfortunately, the neighborhoods reputation is no longer the same and is now seen as business opportunity. Entrepreneurs now have an understanding how profitable they can be in an area like this, and are seeking further interest in leasing spaces. The community is now seen as an investment as opposed to a place where you can raise a family and send your children to school. Most local residents they are now starting to struggle with rent payments due to inflation.

An Article by Timothy William titled “Cities Mobilized to Help Those Threatened by Gentrification” addresses ways on how to protect working and lower middle class homeowners. Similarly to residents of the Dyckman and Inwood area, these residents who have been living in the area for years are now facing competition with wealthier individuals. Darrell L. Clarke, president of the Philadelphia City Council has argued for these local residents and has demanded new alternatives on how to protect them and their homes. Gentrification is being applied throughout the country and local residents should all be defended when it comes to their communities and homes.

LATINO AND HOUSING POLICIES

LATINOS AND HOUSING POLICIES OF EXCLUSION

BY STUDENT

Introduction

The history of land lost and housing exclusion began following the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty ended the Mexcan-American War in 1848 and transferred more than half of Mexico’s territory into U.S. control (Bender, 17). Today, land lost and housing exclusion continues through the subprime lending implosion in the early 2000s, resulting in many Latino/as becoming a statistic of the foreclosure crisis (Bender, 45). As you can see, housing segregation for Latino/as in the U.S. developed slowly and deliberately and continues to characterize the present lives of many minorities in America (Seitles, 1). Some of those public policies are red-lining, a discriminatory rating system used by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) to evaluate the risks associated with loans made to borrowers in specific urban neighborhoods, zoning and building codes used to target the living arrangements of improvised Latino/as regardless of their immigrant or citizenship status, and ordinances directed at preventing undocumented immigrants from renting housing, as well as ordinances that are seemingly neutral but aim to discourage racial minorities and more generally the impoverished from living in the community by denying affordable housing or regulating the density of residential units (Bender, 57; Seitles, 3). Another practice of exclusion is steering implemented through private law. Steering is a practice whereby minority home purchasers are systematically offered housing in different neighborhoods than those in which they are interested. I believe the right to choose where one wants to live is a fundamental constitutional right. The question I propose in this blog post is: Are people of color today, allowed the right to choose where ever they want to live in the United States of America?

Model of a Latino geographic area of housing exclusion: East Harlem “El Barrio”

Puerto Rico is a common wealth of the United States and residents of the island became citizens in 1917 under the Jones Act (Bender, 113). Many Puerto Ricans migrated to the main land mainly due to the decline in the Puerto Rican sugar industry, affordable air travel in the 1940s and the lure of jobs in New York City (Bender, 114). The move to New York transformed the mostly farm workers into urban and industrial service workers, who mostly lived in East Harlem the epicenter for Puerto Rican migration (Bender, 114). In East Harlem, Spanish Harlem or El Barrio, living conditions were deplorable where the housing units were over-crowded, dilapidated and unsanitary (Bender, 115). It was not until the 1960s and 1970s that Puerto Ricans gain adequate access to public housing projects that displaced more of them than could be housed (Bender, 115). Bender writes, “The Puerto Rican legacy of loss in El Barrio also resonates with the gentrification experience of African Americans in neighboring Harlem, in which new condominium developments replaced aging brownstones and retain catering to upscale residents replaced dollar stores” (Bender, 114,115). In 1945, only 13,000 Puerto Ricans lived in New York City and by 1955, almost 700,000 Puerto Ricans migrated to the main land (Bender, 114).

Conclusion  

Examples of discrimination in federal housing policy persists today and they are as numerous as they are disturbing. An example of housing policy discrimination is currently being experienced by many Latino/as in Prince William County, Virginia. The suburban town of Manassas’ booming housing economy lured a wave of Latino immigrants, legal and illegal. Manassas benefited economically from the Latino immigrant population who were the main labor force in the housing construction industry. However, the presence of Latino/as in the Prince William County caused the existing conservative Anglo middle-class to initiate  the passing of the 287G (9500 Liberty). This is an Immigration Statute that would allow the police department to randomly check the immigration status of Latino/as in this community they think might be illegal (9500 Liberty). The 287G statute caused a division in the Manassas community, where the white residents wanted the Latino/as residents to leave due to over crowdedness in their schools, hospital, homes, gang issues, raising of chicken and corn in plain view (9500 Liberty). The difference of culture displayed by the Latino immigrants threatened Manassas’s normative middle-class lifestyle. This is personal to me because I am an immigrant who migrated to the United States to pursue the American Dream. The American dream in my opinion is to earn my college degree in order to get a great paying job, which will reward me with the middle-class life style. My parents brought me to America so that I can have the opportunity to have a better life than they had. This brings me back to the question I proposed in the beginning of my blog, “Are people of color today, allowed the right to live wherever they want to in the United States?” I have come to the conclusion that this is not possible because of the many housing barriers that prevents people of color from choosing their ideal place of residence.  

Cited Works

Bender, Steven W.: Tierra Y Libertad: Land, Liberty, and  Latino Housing. New York: New York University, 2000.

Park, Annabel and Eric Byler. 9500 Liberty. New York, 2010: www.9500Liberty.com.

Seitles, Marc. “ The Perpetuation of Residential Racial Segregation in America: Historical Discrimination, Modern Forms of Exclusion, and Incusionary Remedies. Journal of Land Use and Environment Law (1998): 89-123.