The Legacy of Inequality
Equity and Justice Series Content
A critical tension exists between racial equality and equity today. Racial equality has been achieved in theory through Constitutional amendments as well as laws like desegregation or anti-miscegenation laws; equality by itself is not enough, and as such, there are increasing efforts for racial equity.
With the current wave of social movements demanding justice, there have been efforts to provide opportunities that foster equity within marginalized communities in the United States. Increased opportunities will create solutions that encourage a more equitable distribution of wealth and power, and subsequently, political power.
Inequality is written in our history, and its legacy influences how we exist today. Equality is no longer sufficient because the prior inequalities thoroughly embedded themselves and have continued to manifest. In this way, we cannot solely treat everyone equally in present society because the communities of color — who were the victims of racial inequalities in the past — need extra support to participate in society to the same degree as those in white communities.
Cities function as hubs. It is imperative that we make changes to our cities to alleviate such inequity to ultimately create inviting, livable, and safe communities. Disparities across white and POC communities have always existed, as had the need for change. The divides and incongruencies between communities are especially noticeable today, amidst a pandemic that has both illuminated and exacerbated pre-existing inequalities.
To understand how this came to be, we must recognize that everything today is a consequence of the beliefs, attitudes, and systems that were founded in the past. Today is yesterday’s legacy, and nothing about our current society is without a history of racial disharmony and disunity.
Redlining is one policy in particular that has had a lasting, detrimental impact on communities of color, and Chicago is a prime example of a modern city still plagued by redlining’s discriminatory principles.
Chicago, the third most populous city in the country, can be divided in a number of ways. Arguably the most common division is into three sides, in reference to the Chicago River: The North Side, South Side, and West Side. These areas encompass a total of 77 communities, but the communities did not develop equally. In fact, there are stark divisions between the city’s north side and its south and west sides.
The northern side of Chicago is largely home to white individuals with higher incomes and higher levels of education than those residing on the south or west sides. The South Side and West Side are also known to have higher crime rates and, more recently, more deaths by Covid-19 than their northern counterpart. These demographics did not happen by chance. They are the true consequences of discriminatory policies from decades ago, such as redlining.
Redlining was a process established by the Federal Housing Administration in 1934 to intentionally bar black people from residing in certain — white — neighborhoods, while also preventing them from purchasing homes in predominantly black neighborhoods. The only option left was to rent what was available in black neighborhoods. In this way, the government had total control over the demographics of the city. They created a rating system by which city boundaries were color-coded on a map based on their eligibility for mortgage or other insurance loans. Green areas were deemed prosperous, as they were neighborhoods without a black presence. On the other hand, red areas were marked as unqualified for mortgage loans. These red areas were always the black communities. The lines were drawn solely based on the race of members in a community. There was no real consideration of income, what we would largely consider as the basis for loan approval.
The red-lined neighborhoods became deep pits that black Chicagoans were thrust into, with no ladders to climb out. The North Side had a concentration of job opportunities available to those with higher educations and in a closer proximity to where people lived; whereas communities on the south and west sides lacked access to quality education and quality transit to job centers. This rendered people of color on Chicago’s South and West Side trapped in their struggling communities.
Although redlining was prohibited in 1968, the 34 years that the policy was active were enough to leave an impact that is still visible 52 years later. Today the South Side and West Side are both predominantly black, lower-income communities. Furthermore, those neighborhoods are still disadvantaged when it comes to availability of job and educational opportunities. Residents of those neighborhoods are trapped in that same pit as the residents before them. It is evident that communities of color ultimately lack access to the systems, policies, and infrastructure that would improve their quality of life by means of better education, affordable housing, quality public transit, and access to quality healthcare.
Yet, the consequences of redlining are deeper than those economic strains and matters of accessibility. Redlining was fundamentally a way for white people to systemically exert power over black communities, and that power dynamic was not a new concept. We have witnessed the mass incarceration of black people in the U.S., as the incarceration rate of black people is over five times that of white people. Additionally, only 3.2% of executive roles are held by black adults in the U.S., a noticeable lack of black people in corporate positions of power. Both serve as additional examples of the systemic oppression that is prevalent in our society and has been for decades.
These forms of oppression are about preventing power from reaching the hands of black people. The power was concentrated (and still is) with white people. Redlining was a means of ensuring that black people would not have the opportunity to enter into their spaces, receive their education, seek their jobs, and reap their success. It was a blatant attempt at silencing black communities and limiting their autonomy because those in power did not want to disrupt the systems that benefited them.
But now, a half-century after the policy was outlawed, communities of color are still hurting. So, we must ask ourselves: How can we relieve this tension between racial equality and equity?
Since the past systems of inequality linger in our present, the solution has been to lend support to disadvantaged communities so that they can live within those systems. When advocating for equity in cities and communities, we are asking for members of disenfranchised communities to be met with the tools and support they need to be successful within their own communities. In these cases, support often takes the form of programming, like job or affordable housing programs.
However, these solutions are temporary.
We are trying to reach long-term goals with short-term solutions, and that is not sustainable. Our primary goal, as a country, should be for marginalized communities to have justice. Though, before we have just communities, we need equitable ones.
Equitable communities are diverse areas in which all members have adequate support systems to live and be successful in their community without discrimination. A just community, on the other hand, is one in which equity has been sustained to an extent where those support systems are no longer necessary.
If we only focus on creating equitable communities, our solutions will be inadequate since support systems are perceived as permanent solutions. But equity is the crutch that supports the broken leg of disadvantaged communities. Support systems must be viewed as temporary, for no communities should have to seek such extensive support to simply function and experience success within society. We must be motivated to look beyond provisional solutions in equitable communities to instead envision lasting solutions in just communities because while equity helps the communities heal, justice is what allows those communities to walk.
But it takes time to heal, and justice will not come overnight. If we truly want to work towards racial justice, then we need to first reach a level of racial equity that can feasibly be maintained over the years to come.
Focusing on sustainable development is one potential path for promoting equity within communities to ultimately achieve justice. Urban equity is about investing in marginalized communities and transforming their neighborhoods from deep pits into healthier and more habitable cities.
One place to start is to invest in better public transit so cities are more financially and geographically accessible for people in disenfranchised communities. The hope is also to have affordable housing options closer to job centers in the first place, which may be achieved through the use of green building materials that lower utility bills. An advantage of larger cities is that many diverse buildings are in close proximity. Investing in mixed-use developments and ensuring that residents can access essentials (e.g. housing, schools, offices, grocery stores, etc.) within walking distance is critical to promoting equity within communities.
These community developments can diminish the legacy of inequality, and when sustained over time, they can effectively lead to both equitable and just communities. However, it is imperative that we do not hold equity to be the ultimate objective. The crux of the tension between racial equality and equity lies within the existing societal systems. As long as the structure of society remains as it is today — that is, subjugating marginalized communities and lacking visions of justice — then no real justice will be achieved. We must call for a complete restructuring of our society so that no community is put at a disadvantage from the start, and no one needs a crutch to walk.
