63alfred’s Comments (group member since Aug 25, 2010)

63alfred’s comments from the Q&A with John Kossik group.

Jeannette,

A preview of my book is available on Google Books that can accessed by clicking on the Google Preview logo under the book cover on the Goodreads page for it (note Google Books currently has the back cover of the book as the first page of the book instead of the front cover, I have to fix that). You can also download the first two chapters of my book in PDF form from Scribd at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/29676313/63....

Lastly, if you are interested in some pictures that go along with the story see my website at: http://www.63alfred.com.

Of course you can always purchase the book from the various outlets if you find the first few pages enticing (which I think you will).

Yes, they may be gone or left in ruins but that does not mean no value is left. A story is still to be told, we just have to expend a little more energy to uncover it.

You are correct in the healthy nature of small farms, my article in the Guardian was by no means against them. It was just to note that they are not the savior of Detroit. Matter of fact there are many, many small farms in southern Michigan, a quick look at the Google map of the area will confirm that. As a result the market for produce from small "healthy" farms in the area is already saturated. Yes, a small garden for an individual family or community in Detroit is a great thing but it will not have any affect on the overall economic health of the city and surrounding area.

As I mention in my book, this problem exists in many of our communities to varying degrees it just so happens in Detroit it was particuarly vilurent when combined with other situations the area had to react to. In the Detroit area this problem was not limited to the public sector but actually originated in the private sector due to the monopoly the Big Three had for such a long time. Unfortunately both the public and private sector (the population as a whole actually) ignored the warning signs until it was too late. Now their efforts to extract themselves from the hole they themselves dug will be that much more difficult.

I think you would be interested in my book, you can download the first few chapters for free here at Goodreads or on Scribd

Many of the problems in bringing Detroit out of its current state deal with the local population admitting these problems to themselves and making communal commitments and sacrifices to change them. As with Third World countries Westerners are seemingly always trying to "fix" lasting solutions can only be found and successfully implemented by the local population itself. If we cannot do this in one of our own American cities what makes us think we can do it anywhere else in the world?

One of the issues elaborated on in my 63 Alfred Street: Where Capitalism Failed: The Life and Times of a Venetian Gothic Mansion in Downtown Detroit is the evolution of an "Entitlement Mentality" in both the private and public workplaces in the Detroit Metro Area and how this attitude enabled the decline of the economy there and continues to dampen its recovery.

What do you think of this?

Detroit has (or had) one of the greatest collections of pre-WWII skyscrapers in the US, not to mention the iconic 19th century structures like the Ransom Gillis house mentioned in my book. A great place to see them, or in most cases what is left of them, is at www.detroitfunk.com and buildingsofdetroit.com

In my book I outline the numerous failed attempts at urban renewal in Detroit. The primary reason I outlined for this failure was the lack of incorporation of the suburbs in the surrounding metropolitan area in these efforts. The city by itself never had the tax base once the White population fled to have an honest chance at improvement of the condition of the city and its inhabitants.

There are many reasons for this, what do you think?

One of the chapters in my book, 63 Alfred Street: Where Capitalism Failed: The Life and Times of a Venetian Gothic Mansion in Downtown Detroit, deals with Chaldean immigrants to Detroit in the early 20th century and mentions the ethnic (Turkish vs. Christian) violence that occured in Adana (Turkey) in 1909 that drove them from their homeland. The results in Adana in 1909 were horrific and on a much larger scale than anything we have seen in the US, but the origins of this conflict have many similarities to those between Blacks and Whites in Detroit in the mid-20th century. From my book

"The Essa brothers again found themselves in the middle.
In Adana they were caught up in a conflict between the
majority Turks and the minority Armenians. Then their race
and religion had thrown them in with the minority, with tragic
results. In Detroit they were lumped in with the majority by
means of their Catholic faith and the color of their skin. The
basic causes for the conflicts in Adana and Detroit were more
similar than people would like to admit. In both cases the majority
population was insecure about the future, and succumbed
to the need to find a scapegoat to explain changes occurring
around them of which they had no control. The magnitudes
of these two conflicts were much different though.
Individually tragic as these events were, the overall results
were far less devastating in Detroit as they had been in Adana.
In the Ottoman Empire during the last decades of its existence,
the entire government structure and economy was collapsing.
These ills were so widespread that the government of the
Young Turks, no matter how well intentioned, had no means
(or motivation) to halt the guttural response of the populous.
The economic and social upheavals in Detroit (and other
American cities) in the 1950’s were a significant, but not an
overwhelming situation for the US government to mitigate.
The United States at the time was still a young and maturing
economy with vast amounts of resources to draw upon. There
were people and resources in far away locations of the country
that did not have an emotional attachment to the events occurring
in Detroit. Thus, these resources were quasi-neutral and
could be used on both sides of the conflict to limit the consequences
of violence simmering in the City. As a result, even
though local governments in cities like Detroit could do little
to stem this racial conflict, state and primarily Federal portions
of the government could inject resources (as a last resort in the
form of military troops) to keep the situation from descending
into genocide. This is not to say that these State and Federal
resources treated both sides of the conflict with an even hand,
in most cases they did not, but they were able and willing to
do much more to limit the bloodshed than the troops the
Young Turks sent to Adana in 1909. There was also the availability
of cheap and abundant land just outside the City limits
that allowed Whites the option to flee instead of stay and fight."

What is your take on this?

In my book, 63 Alfred Street: Where Capitalism Failed: The Life and Times of a Venetian Gothic Mansion in Downtown Detroit, I explore in detail some of the circumstances that I believe led Detroit to its current state. I summarized this in a recent article in the Guardian. I would like to know what you think?