tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post3859837039777744040..comments2024-03-18T06:18:29.163-04:00Comments on Discovering Urbanism: Cities and Libertarianism(s?)Daniel Nairnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14127732825472374125noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-79525840886114821172017-10-11T07:50:27.978-04:002017-10-11T07:50:27.978-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03222186550150751164noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-77060581438621316732009-09-04T07:49:50.776-04:002009-09-04T07:49:50.776-04:00Just came to this late, following a link back from...Just came to this late, following a link back from my blog.<br /><br />This is an interesting exercise, but fundamentally I think it boils down to the fact that Wright was an architect and Friedman was an economist, and like all professionals they tended to reduce the complexity of life to the frame of their particular profession.<br /><br />When you express Wright's ideas in words, they sound pretty simplistic and even daft. But the drawings of Broadacre City are very powerful. Wright wrote when he needed to, but he thought in pictures. No economic argument is going to touch his ideas where they really lie, which is in the images themselves.<br /><br />It's like those famous Corbusier drawings of <i>La Cité Radieuse</i>, the big towers in parks with strangely unclogged freeways running between them. Any transport planner will tell you that's absurd, but so powerful as a drawing that it inspired architects for a half-century, and we will be cleaning up their mess for another half.<br /><br />As a transit planner I'm very sensitive to the hot nerve that Wright touched. Broadacre City looks like a world where people feel free and experience freedom spatially. That's why, for example, I constantly emphasise that in its own ideal context -- the dense large city -- transit can be the instrument of freedom, delivering people not just to jobs and society but also to the green spaces that great cities have, and that Broadacre City impossibly imagined that everyone could live in.Jarrett at HumanTransit.orghttp://www.humantransit.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-37924847952395974422009-05-27T18:08:55.002-04:002009-05-27T18:08:55.002-04:00Epar, that's a great way to frame the distinction....Epar, that's a great way to frame the distinction. Process vs. results. I think it makes sense of the two different camps. <br /><br />As far as NIMBYism (or lobbyist funding for that matter) goes, I do think raw self-interest plays an important part in the positions people take, but it seems like many people genuinely think the Leave-it-to-beaver world would be a better place to live in. Some people seem to be fighting hard for this even when there is no direct personal stake involved.Daniel Nairnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14127732825472374125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-80326610879042059292009-05-27T16:12:15.203-04:002009-05-27T16:12:15.203-04:00In college I was taught that the most prominent di...In college I was taught that the most prominent distinction between libertarianism and liberalism was the value placed on process vs. outcome. As I understand it, libertarianism is much more concerned with setting up a political framework that maximizes individual freedom than the outcomes that result from that framework. Liberalism, conversely, focuses on outcomes and permits a more active government role in the economy to achieve those ends.<br /><br />But the "Wright Libertarianism" really flips that schema on its head. It assigns priority of rights with the purpose of achieving a normative outcome - namely, the mandating of a Leave it to Beaver suburb. In doing so, it restricts the rights of others in ways that would make traditional libertarians very uncomfortable. Would a libertarian really say that the "right" of a wealthy person to live among other wealthy people trumps the right of a family of more modest means to live peaceably where it chooses? More generally, Wright libertarianism conceives of an expansive right for incumbent property owners to impose their preferences on prospective property owners. In my mind this gets you the worst of both worlds - bad process and bad outcomes. It is little more than selfish NIMBYism that undermines democracy.eparhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17870819845855913892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-89061705570813656102009-05-20T10:38:28.761-04:002009-05-20T10:38:28.761-04:00Regarding Houston, check out this article by a gue...Regarding Houston, check out this article by a guest author, Stephen Smith: <A HREF="http://marketurbanism.com/2008/12/10/is-houston-really-unplanned/" REL="nofollow">Urbanism Legend: Is Houston Really Unplanned?</A>I disagree with the author about the roll of associations and deed restrictions.<br /><br />Additionally, I think overspending on roads and highways has the biggest blame for Houston's land patterns.<br /><br />I think Pre-zoning New York was a good example of a relatively free-market city. I attribute its present vibrancy to the fact that it was mostly developed pre-auto and pre-hardcore zoning. (although some zoning existed long ago, it would be considered minimal by today's standards)<br /><br />Regarding Homeowners associations, a libertarian should have no problem with any voluntary association. What a libertarian would object to is any coercion used by a government or individual to force people to do something they didn't specifically agree to.<br /><br />However, a libertarian would not be in favor of publicly funded and maintained roads that benefit such an association at the cost of outsiders. The association would have to take full responsibility for its infrastructure. <br /><br />To describe the libertarian ethic succinctly in its most radical form: all interactions among individuals should be voluntary; thus all forms of coercion are inherently violent and intolerable. This test can be used to examine any issue, even non-political ones.<br /><br />I plan to tackle similar issues in posts that I am currently planning.Market Urbansimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13153442286191334637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-2819011824968268652009-05-20T10:03:27.011-04:002009-05-20T10:03:27.011-04:00Seth, Houston is an interesting question. I've hea...Seth, Houston is an interesting question. I've heard that many deed-restricted properties and homeowners' associations have stepped in the gap to cover zoning there. I think there are also building codes and other such ordinances that shape things. Then, of course, the state and federal stuff you mentioned. It does beg the question for libertarians: what do you make of homeowners associations? Are they a legitimate function of the market or are they just really small (and unusually restrictive) governments? I'd love to hear someone tackle this ...<br /><br />Eric, thanks man. Next time I'm near a library (wife has put a moratorium on book-buying until I build a new shelf :) ) I'll take a look at the McClung book you mention.Daniel Nairnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14127732825472374125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-44943095173566823592009-05-19T00:27:23.517-04:002009-05-19T00:27:23.517-04:00Daniel...So far, a forerunner candidate for "most ...Daniel...So far, a forerunner candidate for "most incisive blog post" of the year. Seriously. <br /><br />As a sideline comment: many in the Friedman group are ambivalent and even conflicted about public transport...They still favor the vehicle, so in my book there is a pink/lavender shade of quantity obsessed "Atomized Urbanism" kinda wafting implicitly in the ideological background of libertarian blog posts I've noticed...I see it esp. in proponents of toll road economies. Maybe it's Broadacres vs. Radiant City all over again.<br /><br />In a similar spirit, any chance you've read The Architecture of Paradise by William A. McClung (which contrasts Broadacres with Radiant City)? Bill McClung is also the author of a fascinating book on dual (and subtly contrarian) American idealisms called Landscapes of Desire, which talks about the paradoxical utopian motivations shaping and imaging LA. <br /><br />Hey that other Charlotte-towne up there is producing good stuff. ') Cheers!Eric Orozcohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00320742140050171881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-23322366043047397882009-05-18T19:54:00.000-04:002009-05-18T19:54:00.000-04:00I would be strongly in favor of the second camp as...I would be strongly in favor of the second camp as an experiment to see what the market will bear in terms of smart growth development. Unfortunately, one of the most well known examples of laissez faire planning - Houston - is hardly a role model for smart growth. That might be a result of pro-auto federal and state policies. However, from what I understand, it is a poly-centric region with dense employment centers scattered throughout. There is potential in the built environment for a sustainable city.<br /><br />Also a good example of free market approach is London. Autos have high registration fees, high gas taxes, tollways and congestion charges. One could argue that drivers are paying their fair share for roadway construction, maintenance, and externalities on the environment. However, transit riders also pay essentially full-cost fares (bus rides are $3-5 and the Tube costs $10-15 a ride). In light of this, London has high alternative transportation mode share.<br /><br />One other tid-bit: market research study in California suggest that single family homes are overbuilt and multifamily units are something like 30% underbuilt.Sethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08643435362392936515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-77009083290065225232009-05-18T18:00:00.000-04:002009-05-18T18:00:00.000-04:00That's interesting. Now that you mention it, I re...That's interesting. Now that you mention it, I remember our Professor saying something about Wright when we watched Fountainhead in Arch 100.<br /><br />It makes sense. Wright is the prominent figure of Romanticism in architecture, and Rand is the prominent figure of Romanticism in in libertarianism. Both are controversial figures, especially within their respective categories.<br /><br />Interestingly, I vaguely remember Wright being involved with some far left movements. <br /><br />(I studied Architecture in WI, where they have a unique affection for Wright - not that it makes me an expert...)Market Urbansimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13153442286191334637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-48881305047113370742009-05-18T17:20:00.000-04:002009-05-18T17:20:00.000-04:00I know that Wright was considered to be the inspir...I know that Wright was considered to be the inspiration for the protagonist in Ayn Rand's Fountainhead. His conception of Broadacre city was pretty explicit about maintaining the individualism of private lots. Beyond that, I don't know much more about his political views. Some of his architectural plans did seem to require some authoritarian control, however. Maybe calling him an orthodox "libertarian" in terms of laissez-faire economics is a bit of a stretch. Not sure.Daniel Nairnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14127732825472374125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5079297043552042968.post-86717641836841175032009-05-18T12:03:00.000-04:002009-05-18T12:03:00.000-04:00Wow, Dan!
This is quite a piece. I hope this spa...Wow, Dan!<br /><br />This is quite a piece. I hope this sparks up some conversation. I never thought of libertarianism in terms of Wright...<br /><br />I guess I would label that pro-suburb camp as in favor of autonomy rather than a true laissez faire doctrine. Ironically, autonomy as an ideal could be compared to modern liberalism in philosophy.<br /><br />It's interesting also in terms of the classic contrast between Wright, the romanticist and Le Corbusier the modernist. The planning movement most closely related with Corbu is deplored by both libertarian urbanists and suburban autonomists. Ironically, his modular ideas would be compared with progressive or even fascist philosophy. <br /><br />I guess this makes me comfortable in asserting that Market Urbanism is more consistent with the core libertarian philosophy. While, other ideologies seem to be out of step with their own core philosophies, when it comes to development patterns. I guess, progressives are not inconsistent philosophically with respect for their fondness of planning, but the progressive movement has been inconsistent in its advocacy of single family auto-dependence at first, as well as corbusian urban renewal, but now New Urbanism/Smart Growth. (I guess, they're less wrong now, in my opinion) And, of course, pro-suburban "libertarians" are completely out of step with laissez-faire philosophy...<br /><br />I think you've framed this discussion in a way that makes for very interesting conversation. I'll link to this, and probably write more later today...Market Urbansimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13153442286191334637noreply@blogger.com