My previous blog located both Section 8
and “half-way houses” as issues that would bedevil Norristown after the mid-70s, and reminded readers
that Norristown’s decline had begun much earlier than that. My book, What
Killed Downtown? identified the collapse of Main Street as virtually
complete by 1975, making it perhaps the first component of decline to fully
manifest itself. I concluded the blog
with a reminder that Norristown police were forced to institute a K-9 patrol on
Main Street in 1972 to assure a public grown nervous over crime, years before
anyone had even heard of “Section 8.”
If we can’t blame Section 8 or
“half-way houses” for problems that had surfaced earlier, then perhaps we can accept
that Norristown’s problems—and, by extension, those of so many other
municipalities—were both broader and grew from deeper roots than can be
explained by any simple reference to one or two specific actions. Those of you who cannot accept this had best
cease reading here, as the discovery of facts can have a disturbing effect on
one’s preconceptions, and I would not wish to be held responsible.
By the mid-1970s Norristown, in company
with countless other urban communities of all sizes, had already seen a
substantial number of its more affluent and more connected residents flee to
suburban lifestyles of varying economic wealth.
The buzzword for this migration is “white flight.” An interviewee in my book summed it up by
saying “We all eventually sold to black people.” In Norristown’s case, the
image is incomplete. While middle and
even working class families were leaving in the 50s and 60s, their more
affluent neighbors had already left. By
1950, the borough’s traditional economic and political elite, the descendants
of those who had arrived the earliest, had already exited the mansions on
DeKalb and West Main Streets, often for the “Main Line.” There is a substantial argument to be made
that they did not leave because black people were moving into the neighborhood,
but because Italians were.
Norristown’s history, like that of so
many other municipalities, is the story of successive waves of immigrants
arriving, exhibiting their strange languages and customs and disconcerting the
existing population, even when the municipal services we take for granted today
barely existed, and those that did hardly constituted a tax burden. But to focus on ethnicity or race with the
perspective we now have is to miss the fundamental point. That point is economic: each wave of arrivals was of a lower economic
standing; a better life was their common reason for coming in the first place.
In the 20th century, Norristown’s
population changes, while producing a statistically stable overall population
(the number of those arriving was very close to the number of those leaving), had
an enormous cumulative financial impact.
Very broadly phrased, the 20th century saw the steady departure of those
residents whose economic contribution to the borough exceeded their need for
services, to be replaced by those whose need for services exceeded their
economic contributions. Within this
context, the most valid one in a worldwide market economy and local tax-based
services, race or ethnicity become the irrelevancies they are. In fact, to blame an ethnicity or race is to
serve those groups whose economic power do the actual manipulating, to their
own profit.
Today’s call to properly understand how
“the more things change” is this: the occupation of “slumlord” has proven to
be historically profitable long before Columbus ever saw the Atlantic Ocean. Here in America all that has ever been
required is identifying a community with depressed property values (although an
inattentive or corrupt municipal administration is always desirable). Local slumlords profited by cramming poor
immigrant Italians into the East End in the late 19th and early 20th
centuries, and the process has continued, shifting to African-Americans, and
more recently, Hispanics.
I will end this brief introduction to an enormously
complicated issue by offering a thesis that is likely to raise the hackles of
many:
Section 8 housing and
half-way houses were a SYMPTOM, not a CAUSE, of Norristown’s decline. They would both enlarge and accelerate that
decline, but to focus on them (and explicitly or implicitly, their inhabitants)
is to blame the victim, not the perpetrator.
Let’s hear what you think of that thought (I can’t wait!),
and in future posts I will elaborate and explain why I believe it to be true.