Skip to main content

Michael Fleming and Leland Ware are right: We all need to be concerned with fixing Wilmington

Too bad the problem is actually the government . . .

First, I have to say I agree with this:
The sad, steady decline of our state’s largest and most important city should deeply concern every Delawarean. Just as we are all invested in the health of the First State’s natural and economic resources – our beautiful coastline, our world-renowned courts, the University of Delaware, etc. – for reasons both moral and practical, we all have a serious stake in Wilmington’s fate.
The future of Delaware, if it involves having a failed city along the lines of Camden, is bleak.

And, have no doubt, as Professor Leland Ware observed in a recent op-ed that everyone couldn't wait to ignore, government played a major role in destroying the city:

A few of the online responses to The News Journal article, “Wilmington mired in violence,” attributed some of the city’s crime problems to the decision to ram I-95 through the heart of the city, destroying neighborhoods and dividing what was once was lovely, walkable city. 
This is an accurate observation. For most of the 20th century, policymakers at the federal, state and local levels pursued development strategies that had a detrimental effect on central city communities.
Fleming's article is an emotional call to action; Ware's piece is a dissection of government interventions gone wrong.  As such, I think Ware's column is more critical to addressing the problem.  Read the whole thing if you missed it, and pay attention to his conclusion:

The demographics of cities like Wilmington are not, as many assume, the result of the private choices of individual families. They are the direct result of decades of urban planning policies developed and implemented by federal, state and local governments. 
Public agencies and private organizations such as the Wilmington Renaissance Corp., Riverfront Wilmington, the Delaware Historical Society and other groups are working to reverse this trend by revitalizing downtown Wilmington. They deserve our support.
They deserve our involvement as well.  This one's too important to the quality of life in all of Delaware to leave to politicians and government bureaucrats.

Or else we can just start erecting the wall around the city limits and send for Kurt Russell when a helicopter crashes.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...