Society is Failing, Now What?

Architecture is the stage upon which we play out our lives. The architecture in which we are raised, where we sleep and eat, laugh and cry, and learn who we are in the world is continually exerting its influence on us. It is simultaneously the framework through which we understand the world and the world we are understanding.

The power of the built environment to exert a profound and fundamental influence on our lives has been grossly abused in the interest of capital. Unfortunately, Architecture has been corrupted into a tool to perpetuate inequality and reinforce social injustice. Of course, this isn’t a new development; the built environment has always been a mechanism to assert power over the ruled class. Consider the Pyramids, the Coliseum, the White House, every celebrated monument in history built by enslaved people to express the wealth and legacy of their oppressors. 

The role of the built environment in shaping political and socio-economic landscapes in modern-day America is unique. The illusion of the American dream, the white picket fence, is intrinsically tied to the built environment. As the illusion shatters, the issues stemming from a built environment shaped by capital interests are exposed. Owning a home remains an unattainable goal for most, while the wealthiest members of society hold an unprecedented magnitude of wealth. The migration of the upper-middle class away from the suburbs and to the city causes gentrification and mass displacement. Simply put, we’ve created a society in which the built environment of the majority of the population is neglected. 

Under capitalism, there is no incentive for developers to invest in areas where the working class live unless the goal is to redevelop and gentrify an area to drive out the working class and attract tenants who have a higher profit margin. Developers are not in the business of improving people’s lives as their almost exclusive motivation is to make a profit through property holding and land-lording. I believe it is the responsibility of architects to be proponents of sustainability and social justice, but with the way our society is set up to reward profits with no regard for non-economic benefits, it’s no surprise our built environment continues to fail the marginalized members of our society.

If our current system is failing, how then do we improve the urban environments of the working class? The obvious answer is that urban developments should be motivated by and measured against their role in improving lives and offering resources to the disenfranchised, rather than profit margins. However, that requires an overhaul of two centuries of policies and thinking. Even if a city's motivations were pure, there is simply not enough capital available for these developments. This is a result of the lack of an equitable distribution of wealth. The wealthiest residents of a city do not contribute enough in taxes to local government; rather they hoard wealth or invest it in developments for the upper class. If we are to have any chance at changing our approach and subsequently manifesting our built environment, there needs to be a radical shift in how wealth is distributed. The wealthiest must pay their fair share so capital can be invested back into creating more equitable built environments.

It is my sincere hope to see our society progress in this direction, but without fundamentally changing the economic and political structure of this country, it will remain but a utopian dream. How can we, as Architects, begin to enact concrete change? One strategy is cross-subsidization. Mixed-income housing that uses market-rate units to subsidize affordable housing. A similar strategy can be deployed in commercial districts where amenities like public libraries and post offices occupy the bottom level of highrises. This seems to be an ideal solution because, in theory, it encourages community across socioeconomic classes and puts less burden on public funds. However, it builds inequality into architecture through vertical stratification. While differently priced units might occupy the same neighborhood or even the same building, material differences and social cues communicate a clear message of elitism. I can’t help but be struck by the imagery of an inaccessible monolithic skyscraper that looks down on a ground floor library as a physical manifestation of the stark socio-economic stratification in this country. I feel that it is essential that spaces be equitable in quality, materiality, and respect, but I’m not sure of the practical way for us to fund and enact this.

Another issue with most American urban fabrics is the lack of free public space. Plazas lined with shops, food courts, and more upscale parks are all disguised as public spaces when in fact they remain off-limits to “undesirables,” namely homeless individuals, along with other groups. True to the capitalist nature of our society, public space is only well maintained if it has some economic value, and if an individual isn’t there to spend money, then they are not welcome. When the presence of these “undesirables” makes potential customers uncomfortable, they are explicitly discouraged from these spaces through hostile architecture, and in some cases physically removed. If these individuals are being priced out of their homes because of gentrification and they are unwelcome in designed public spaces, where are they to go? They must remain out of sight, god forbid their presence lowers property values. As much as politicians may try to ignore them, we all see them gathering in the discarded, undesigned, unsafe public spaces under bridges, at the fringes of the city. It is inhumane to force individuals into these dangerous spaces just to survive.

I do not know how it will manifest, or how it will be funded but I know for certain that we need egalitarian public spaces. Truly free-designed public spaces where anyone is allowed to simply exist without spending money or conforming to society’s standards of acceptability. I would like to use my voice and power working in the field of architecture to try and create this kind of space. I believe it will start to repair the extremely fragmented class hierarchy fueled by capitalism. It will host welfare programs and community resources that will allow individuals to reintegrate into society. I was involved in Community First! The village is a community of 430 micro-homes for the formerly homeless. It sits on a 50-acre site just outside Austin city limits because city legislators and homeowners thought having such a community would lower real estate prices. Today it is a thriving community where residents receive physical and mental health care, grow their own food, and even host outdoor movie nights that attract many of the homeowners that forced the development outside of their neighborhoods.

Finally, in addition to perpetuating mass inequality, the current practice of architecture is killing our planet. While the profession is becoming more aware of the risk climate change poses and is trending towards sustainability, we are not doing enough. We must also acknowledge that Architects only design a small percent of what gets built in the United States. If the primary motivation for developers is profit, it is easy to see why the built environment is so harmful to the planet. We’re already seeing the effects of climate change across the world, and it is no secret that climate catastrophes have been and will continue to affect the poor, reinforcing inequality in our society. The materials and methods by which the built environment is constructed need to be seriously investigated. Architecture needs to be driven by a true desire to improve people's lives, be more equitable, serve all members of society, and be more sensitive to the climate. It seems like an insurmountable challenge, but there is incredible power in the built environment and if harnessed correctly, it might just create a better society for all.