A lot of conservative critics argue that urbanism is just another way for the government to take away freedom—forcing people out of cars, limiting choices. Urbanism is about expanding options, not restricting them. Not every trip needs to be made by car, and it’s not about eliminating cars altogether. It’s about choice and flexibility—nothing more American (or conservative) than that https://substack.com/home/post/p-158780811
As a conservative urbanist myself, I think it's a little bit of both. Look at El Segundo, in Southeast LA. It's attracting a lot of young very evangelical conservative techies, who are marketing their services to the tech defense industry. Then, there is the University Of Austin. I think there is a trickle-slow movement of some conservatives back into the cities, but there has also always been a quiet, behind the scenes, conservative element living in the cities. Not everyone working for the Heritage Foundation lives in Bethesda, and not everyone working for the Manhattan Institute, lives in New Jersey. The reasons why we conservative urbanists like cities, are the same reasons why liberal urbanists like cities: public transportation ( if you live in the city, you really don't need to own a car), the restaurants, the theater, the symphony, the opera, the really cool ethnic street festivals, the professional sports teams, the museums, etc. For me, a wonderful afternoon is spending a few hours in the National Gallery Of Art. Gen Z seems to lean conservative. They also like urban environments. There is hope.
Yes! I have been grappling with this issue too. I dread urbanism getting pulled on one side or the other of the culture wars. I think they haven’t fully been so far (despite efforts from either side) because they span political spectrum.
One excellent way to sell urbanism to conservatives (coming from a conservative) is to frame the issue as a question of natural inequalities. Yes, wealthy people should be able to live in a giant mansion with lots of space all around it, just like they should be able to own a private plane or a Rolex. But poor people aren’t going to afford that and do you really want to see the homeless and have them panhandle you when you have to go into the urban centre? Wouldn’t it be better to have more housing in those areas to keep them out of your face and neighbourhoods? And wouldn’t it be better for those new neighbours to have more attractive buildings and greenery and businesses nearby for your own benefit as well as theirs? You can live in your own place and they in theirs.
American planning could be a wedge issue for both progressives and conservatives, but American planning is fundamentally conservative in substance, but progressive in apparatus and political control.
"The fact is, a stereotypical conservative, someone who’d describe themselves with phrases like 'traditional family values,' suffers under status quo planning and benefits from good urbanism."
I think you are missing the social history on this point. The American planning movement was at its core a radical social engineering project to promote "traditionally family values." Two texts that are relevant here are Diana Lind, Brave New World, but especially this paper: https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/Redburn_jnciyvd1.pdf
The early Victorians were much more flexible about household structures, but a radical reform movement opposed what would be called "the lodging evil" by the early 20th-century and the planning movement subsumed all of the Victorian reform movement under the rubric of scientific planning. Of course, what many people call "traditional" is not very traditional.
I hear you. I'm using terms that have modern baggage and that has downsides. I was also deliberately "saving ink" by not writing about the history of zoning in this post. It is a fascinating and ugly history though. It's eye opening and jaw dropping to read first and secondhand accounts of early 20th century progressives and how explicit they were in their desire for a group of elites (their word) to think for people who aren't capable of thinking for themselves. Restricting land use was a natural outcome of that.
Yep, a lot of this resonates… especially with the 'trad chads' I know. Many of them, living in the Montreal outer burbs, openly complain about their built environment... yet instinctively oppose anything associated with outgoing mayor Valérie Plante. The urbanist = leftist framing has become so entrenched that it’s impossible to even discuss solutions without it turning conspiratorial. Makes it hard to even find common ground, let alone build on it.
I’ve since moved to Berlin, where I’ve lived for two years, and I don’t think what exists here – 24-hour public transit across the whole city, parents enjoying a drink at a bar terrace with their toddlers in the inner city – can even register in their imagination. It’s a completely different model of urban life, and that’s already comparing to Montreal, Canada’s most urbanist metropolis.
I love Berlin. I would have to say, it's probably my favorite city in the whole world. The first time I was there, was in 1982. For some reason, it keeps luring me back. I had considered moving there at one time, and I like keeping my options open. I remember when the U-Bahn shut down for the night, buses took over for the rail routes, until the rail opened back up in the morning. I was thinking, why doesn't Metro in Washington, DC do that? Being military, the S-Bahn was off-limits. We were allowed to enter East Berlin, as long as we entered and exited through Checkpoint Charlie, you had to be in uniform, but no name tag, and you had to sign in and out. Back then, there were still buildings that were piles of rubble, left over from WWII, in the East. Look at Potsdamer Platz now. It's beautiful. The first time I saw it, it was a barren mine field, between the two sections of the Berlin Wall. Besides the families all out together, in a very walkable city, I like the fact that people bring their dogs into the eating establishments. It's like that, everywhere I was in Germany. Now I'm getting a craving for an Imbis stand currywurst, and a bottle of Shultheiss beer, at 2am.
I got to visit Germany last year but didn't have time for Berlin. Can't wait to experience it. Montreal is on my list too. Interesting to hear your observations given their urbanists reputation.
A lot of conservative critics argue that urbanism is just another way for the government to take away freedom—forcing people out of cars, limiting choices. Urbanism is about expanding options, not restricting them. Not every trip needs to be made by car, and it’s not about eliminating cars altogether. It’s about choice and flexibility—nothing more American (or conservative) than that https://substack.com/home/post/p-158780811
💯
As a conservative urbanist myself, I think it's a little bit of both. Look at El Segundo, in Southeast LA. It's attracting a lot of young very evangelical conservative techies, who are marketing their services to the tech defense industry. Then, there is the University Of Austin. I think there is a trickle-slow movement of some conservatives back into the cities, but there has also always been a quiet, behind the scenes, conservative element living in the cities. Not everyone working for the Heritage Foundation lives in Bethesda, and not everyone working for the Manhattan Institute, lives in New Jersey. The reasons why we conservative urbanists like cities, are the same reasons why liberal urbanists like cities: public transportation ( if you live in the city, you really don't need to own a car), the restaurants, the theater, the symphony, the opera, the really cool ethnic street festivals, the professional sports teams, the museums, etc. For me, a wonderful afternoon is spending a few hours in the National Gallery Of Art. Gen Z seems to lean conservative. They also like urban environments. There is hope.
Yes! I have been grappling with this issue too. I dread urbanism getting pulled on one side or the other of the culture wars. I think they haven’t fully been so far (despite efforts from either side) because they span political spectrum.
One excellent way to sell urbanism to conservatives (coming from a conservative) is to frame the issue as a question of natural inequalities. Yes, wealthy people should be able to live in a giant mansion with lots of space all around it, just like they should be able to own a private plane or a Rolex. But poor people aren’t going to afford that and do you really want to see the homeless and have them panhandle you when you have to go into the urban centre? Wouldn’t it be better to have more housing in those areas to keep them out of your face and neighbourhoods? And wouldn’t it be better for those new neighbours to have more attractive buildings and greenery and businesses nearby for your own benefit as well as theirs? You can live in your own place and they in theirs.
American planning could be a wedge issue for both progressives and conservatives, but American planning is fundamentally conservative in substance, but progressive in apparatus and political control.
"The fact is, a stereotypical conservative, someone who’d describe themselves with phrases like 'traditional family values,' suffers under status quo planning and benefits from good urbanism."
I think you are missing the social history on this point. The American planning movement was at its core a radical social engineering project to promote "traditionally family values." Two texts that are relevant here are Diana Lind, Brave New World, but especially this paper: https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/Redburn_jnciyvd1.pdf
The early Victorians were much more flexible about household structures, but a radical reform movement opposed what would be called "the lodging evil" by the early 20th-century and the planning movement subsumed all of the Victorian reform movement under the rubric of scientific planning. Of course, what many people call "traditional" is not very traditional.
I hear you. I'm using terms that have modern baggage and that has downsides. I was also deliberately "saving ink" by not writing about the history of zoning in this post. It is a fascinating and ugly history though. It's eye opening and jaw dropping to read first and secondhand accounts of early 20th century progressives and how explicit they were in their desire for a group of elites (their word) to think for people who aren't capable of thinking for themselves. Restricting land use was a natural outcome of that.
Yep, a lot of this resonates… especially with the 'trad chads' I know. Many of them, living in the Montreal outer burbs, openly complain about their built environment... yet instinctively oppose anything associated with outgoing mayor Valérie Plante. The urbanist = leftist framing has become so entrenched that it’s impossible to even discuss solutions without it turning conspiratorial. Makes it hard to even find common ground, let alone build on it.
I’ve since moved to Berlin, where I’ve lived for two years, and I don’t think what exists here – 24-hour public transit across the whole city, parents enjoying a drink at a bar terrace with their toddlers in the inner city – can even register in their imagination. It’s a completely different model of urban life, and that’s already comparing to Montreal, Canada’s most urbanist metropolis.
I love Berlin. I would have to say, it's probably my favorite city in the whole world. The first time I was there, was in 1982. For some reason, it keeps luring me back. I had considered moving there at one time, and I like keeping my options open. I remember when the U-Bahn shut down for the night, buses took over for the rail routes, until the rail opened back up in the morning. I was thinking, why doesn't Metro in Washington, DC do that? Being military, the S-Bahn was off-limits. We were allowed to enter East Berlin, as long as we entered and exited through Checkpoint Charlie, you had to be in uniform, but no name tag, and you had to sign in and out. Back then, there were still buildings that were piles of rubble, left over from WWII, in the East. Look at Potsdamer Platz now. It's beautiful. The first time I saw it, it was a barren mine field, between the two sections of the Berlin Wall. Besides the families all out together, in a very walkable city, I like the fact that people bring their dogs into the eating establishments. It's like that, everywhere I was in Germany. Now I'm getting a craving for an Imbis stand currywurst, and a bottle of Shultheiss beer, at 2am.
I got to visit Germany last year but didn't have time for Berlin. Can't wait to experience it. Montreal is on my list too. Interesting to hear your observations given their urbanists reputation.