i think they have made a pretty solid point of punching left and kissing right so it's not entirely without substance
i think they have made a pretty solid point of punching left and kissing right so it's not entirely without substance
Yeah, there’s a real attempt to disconnect these ideas from the left included here, which I find frustrating, as someone who thinks YIMBYism is good and is on the left. bsky.app/profile/pseu...
There are some nuanced cases to critique left on YIMBY/abundance (degrowthers, left-NIMBYs, navelgazers) but yeah the big pundits aren’t being that deliberate.
This is true and at the same time, in the cities and suburbs where the biggest need for housing exists, it is Democrats in charge. That said, it’s really about entrenched interests preserving a status quo that isn’t working for more and more people, and that should be the focus rather than party.
And there are definitely examples of blue state cities that are trying to do good things with housing policy like Minneapolis-St. Paul. But one of the best things blue states could do to help give themselves more power is to build housing like crazy so more people move there.
i agree, i just also do not at all think the tack they took where they tried to position their version of yimby as not yimby because yimby is left and left is bad was ... ahh ... a choice
Definitely. My hope is that people understand that despite the bad messaging from people that want to use YIMBY as a way to punch at the left, we should want to stop endless suburban/exurb sprawl and instead build denser communities with better access to transit and amenities.
We don’t have to “Manhattanize” everything. We can add housing so that communities can grow naturally instead of stagnating while the next subdivision down the road gets built, along with all the extra infrastructure that has to be paid for as a result.