White flight did not mean that all whites flew to the suburbs, of which I happen to be one. As for gentrification, it has yet to rear it's ugly head in my neighborhood, which has plenty of open space forests for exploring. With gentrification, those trees would hit the ground to make room for "high density" attached housing with bland boring chain coffee shops and la de dah restaurants with high prices catering to the new snobs who look down on those who have lived there for years in low height houses with large lots for gardens and animals. The developers and city hall keep chanting that high density is the future if we want to have good public transportation-- then someone tell me how our first class streetcar and trolley coach system made a profit up until it was fiendishly dismantled by then Mayor Hartsfield, and his bus magnate business pal, John Steinmetz, contrived and implemented the dismantling of our electric network for motor buses. High density is not needed for us to have better transport, it is a ruse for the developers so as not to say it is THEY who need the higher densities for higher profits. Gentrification once started is like kudzu and wisteria vines: it can't be tamed and managed. All the long blooming people planted in a neighborhood for years will be covered and smothered.
Laugh out loud, that the small scale vendors get blamed for tarnishing Atlanta's image. As I recollect, those lowly vendors were overcharged outlandish prices and many found that their locations were not getting the foot traffic. To save their asses and assets they moved to where the customers were. They don't own any blame for struggling to stay above water. The blame for tarnishing this "elusive image" of Atlanta goes to the greedy promoters who bowed to the mighty Olympic committee to do as it dictated, and they dictated alot-- from taxi driver attire to signage and prohibitions, like making the homeless invisible. As for the "third world city" charge, what's there not to like about an exciting third world city downtown that's full of color and life? I don't think Atlanta got a black eye from the "international viewpoint", because most thriving international cities have street vendors and musicians all over the place-- and public produce markets downtown. They would have no reason to find that a problem. Atlanta's image was tarnished when John Portman built one hotel that started the falling of the dominoes of everything on a human scale downtown. It grew gray and lifeless, and now the pump is running 25 hours a day to try to get the lost liveliness back. Fairlie-Poplar seems to be the biggest success, and the reason why is: It was NOT leveled by John Portland. All of downtown was an expanded Fairlie-Poplar at one time. Back to the small scale vendors getting the blame by the elitists: same old tune that still plays today.
This eviction has always been about "land grab" by Atlanta's elite downtown developers! Their smears worked. Their bought judge ruled in their favor. Their greed won.
As we all know, a couch is impossible to climb over. Was the couch ablaze? Did it contain a bomb? It was a couch! A violent couch! The people of Baghdad would be happy if all we did when we invaded is set couches in front of doors.
Freedom park starts where Freedom parkway ends at Moreland, so no need to drive the length of the parkway. As for CL reporting, that is past tense after the bankruptcy. It is fluff now. As for the cat and mouse police and mayor foolishness, it's time the bullies grew up and looked in the mirror at what unholy a-holies they are. The city monies are paying them to run roughshod over first amendment rights. If it were not for the irresponsible over-reaction (and unConstitutional) violence of the police, there would be no great expense and no reason for pulling cops from neighborhoods. They had a cast of hundreds with helicopters and horses to arrest 54 people which certainly paints them as inept at their job. And there was nary a broken window on Peachtree st. They should have admired the nonviolence. After the dressing down of Bloomberg by Keith Oberman, the reasonable tactic for Kasim Reed and his personal posse of bullies is to get another life and another career if they can't protect and serve the ordinary citizens while upholding the right to peaceably assemble in public spaces, namely PARKS. I would like to link with people of Atlanta who are fed up with this invasive, nit-picking, illegal and unConstitutional "police stalking" and want to work together to let our revengeful Mayor know that we will no longer cater to or tolerate his costly temper tantrums.
About showing "both sides"-- the article ends telling both sides to "grow up", as there are "ways to enact change without faces being shoved in the pavement." Now, which side of the both sides was doing that? The mayor's police posse, that's who. As for CL's concern about the battle over the park curfew, that is not why Occupy came to be in Atlanta...again, that is the issue raised by the Mayor's over-reaction, an obvious ploy supported by the Chamber of Commerce and Central Atlanta Progress to get the conversation away from the real issues that CL itself seems to support. The Mayor made it a First Amendment issue, and his denial of those rights is something that all of us should not take lightly, so he is the one who brought that into play. And now about the snub and divisiveness in the statement about "the desire of a small subset" of the protesters who chose to set up a familiar cop vs. protester imagery-- that is so far off base as to question just how far down Creative Loafing has subgrown. After all, it was CL's own editor-in-chief who, after the arrest of one of his staff at the Peachtree St. round-up, gave a light tap on the wrist to the city for doing so but said he would let it drop. Just like that... let it drop. Looks like it has dropped pretty darn low when freedom of the press is at stake.
The money the mayor wasted on screwing with the first amendment rights could have gone far in providing improvements to the homeless shelter at Peachtree-Pine that they want to evict. In the winter. Adding countless more homeless to find shelter on the streets and under the freeway overpasses. It really must be embarrassing for city hall to see the homeless from their windows of old city hall, reminding them with each glance how hard hearted they are, and how incapable they are to actually DO something positive rather than resort to simply moving the problem out of sight. Too many of our elected officials who are occupying city hall, along with too many citizens and downtown power players, have no vision beyond knowing how to bully and make life harder for the people who live in this city, those with homes and those without. Some of the comments on this site sadly reveal the reality of the heartlessness and coldness that possesses so many who must really be miserable living day in, day out trapped and unable to get away from their hatred of their fellow sentient brothers and sisters. Are they doomed to forever sit lazily at their keyboard pecking out the best they got, i.e., providing us with the answer "to euthanize"? I hope not.
All Comments »
Atlanta City Guide
Powered by Foundation
Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation