Gentrification Pros And Cons

The right to the city is a debatable conundrum, because of what’s going on in the city. Everyone claims to have a stance in the way the city works, but who is really privileged in the city? In a perfect world, the people own the right to the city, however, we don’t live in a perfect world. In the real world we live in, the big businesses, governments and developers own the right to the city. The reality of the situation is that it’s far more than the individual liberty to access urban resources, but it’s really another type of human right; the right to the city. The freedom to make and remake our cities and ourselves is, I want to say, one of the most precious yet most neglected of our human rights. We live, after all, in a world in which the rights of private property and the profit rate trump all other notions of rights.
There’s a big difference in who has a right to the city, and who should have a right to the city.
But the effects of gentrification are complex and contradictory, and its real impact varies. Many aspects of the gentrification process are desirable. Who wouldn’t want to see reduced crime, new investment in buildings and infrastructure, and increased economic activity in their neighborhoods? Unfortunately, the benefits of these changes are often enjoyed disproportionately by the new arrivals, while the established residents find themselves economically and socially marginalized. The effects of gentrification are not beneficial for the humans living within the area, they are forced to watch their culture and heritage be warped in front of their eyes. If the actors really wanted to help, they would donate and offer enhanced education to see the growth of the people, which would be great, not use it as an unethical opportunity to oppress and make more