The Obama administration is pushing the controversial agenda of “regionalism.” And it will transform the way you live and the community you live in… regardless of whether you like it or not.
Allegedly, it is about “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” by forcing neighborhoods with no record of housing discrimination to accept low rent public housing. The disaster that this causes is all to real, but Progressives do not care. They would rather the poor suffered even worse, just as long as the “affluent” hoi polloi were knocked down a peg or two, for the Progressive elite need the dependency of others. In effect, this is a broad attack on our freedom and the very fabric of society and ” just the latest of a series of attempts by HUD to social engineer the American people.” What this rule does is broad in scope indeed:
“The new HUD rule is really about changing the way Americans live. It is part of a broader suite of initiatives designed to block suburban development, press Americans into hyper-dense cities, and force us out of our cars. Government-mandated ethnic and racial diversification plays a role in this scheme, yet the broader goal is forced “economic integration.” The ultimate vision is to make all neighborhoods more or less alike, turning traditional cities into ultra-dense Manhattans, while making suburbs look more like cities do now. In this centrally-planned utopia, steadily increasing numbers will live cheek-by-jowl in “stack and pack” high-rises close to public transportation, while automobiles fall into relative disuse.”
Theirs is an urban utopia. Artificial equality is pushed. But it is not he equality of some science-fiction socialist affluence, but of one where the conditions that allowed places like Detroit to become living hells are allowed to spread and infect everyone else (those who are more equal than others excepted, of course).
The California Grand Soviet Legislature is playing along and pushing a law that would put “the burden of proof on local jurisdictions accused of housing discrimination.” The need to “correct” society of its inherent “Whiteness” and discrimination is simply presented as a given.
The plans go beyond housing, though. There is a “proposal to create a giant, seven-county metropolitan school district to enable apportionment of students by race and income across current district lines. This plan would be the product of unelected regional bureaucrats, not local officials.”
But then, the enlightened planners know best. The inner cities, whose school districts are even more in the death grip of the Progressives, clearly fail because there are schools that succeed that contrast with said failure. The way to eliminate that and achieve equality is to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator.
Rather than allow different cities, communities, &c. do as they will, the Progressives want to impose a one-size-fits all solution, namely, their solution. Some communities thrive while others fail because they are different. The failing communities can learn from the successful ones, and thus have the opportunity to adapt and become successful themselves.
Progressives can’t stand that, and are so enamored by their cult of equality, that they’d happily destroy the successful communities if the result was an equality of misery (the more equal than other crown exempted, of course). Such policies do not spread the wealth; they destroy it. Failure is allowed to flourish at the expense of prosperity and good communities. Better to force people to live how and where they do not want to live, than for the urban utopian dreams be admitted to be the failures that they are.
The one thing it does do, is it punishes those who fled decrepit inner cities to provide their families a better life. How dare they put their loved ones above the plans of the self-selected elite. After all, the Progressive vision of the future is an increasingly childless one:
“Much of contemporary urban theory rests on the idea of weakening family connections: fewer marriages and lower birthrates will decrease the appetite for lower-density housing. Families do not make up the prime market for dense housing; married couples with children constitute barely 10% of apartment residents, less than half the percentage for the population overall.”
The Progressive elite see the hoi polloi as serfs, or perhaps more accurately, rats in a cage to experiment on. If actual experiments with rats shoved cheek-to-jowel is any indication, the Progressive future is a bleak one indeed.
The elite don’t want everyone shoved into a rat-cage of a city, however. After all, who else would live in the quaint Potemkin villages while the elite drink their quaint sparkling water and eating their quaint arugula salads while they chat about how quaint it all is?