Suburbia: something both Left and Right can hate

By Adam Giuliano

Although last week's election brought some relief to opponents of the Religious Right, any detached examination reveals that the Religious Right remains a potent and potentially strengthening force in America. For the majority of the population that disagrees with some or all of the Right's views and methods, the question of how to deal with such a dedicated and persistent bloc looms large. The answer might mean identifying a way to cooperate on a "family values" program that serves both liberal and moderate interests and ends. Unlikely as it seems, the key might be the very place where many of the activists in question live: the suburbs.

Among other concerns, the Religious Right bemoans falling levels of family and community stability over the past few decades. Liberals disagree with the Religious Right on a host of related issues, including gay rights, abortion, and divorce. But what often goes unnoticed is that liberals agree with the Religious Right in the general identification of our nation's problems. A poorly educated underclass, ingrained prejudice, and economic disparity are all signs of a society divided. Both liberals and conservatives fixate on the atomization of American society and the replacement of common interest by self-reliance and self-indulgence. The obvious public conflict between these two camps stems largely from a difference in suspected culprits. If a cause can be agreed upon by both sides, united action can be taken, and that's where suburbia comes in.

You don't need to attend the School of Architecture to realize that the post-war burgeoning of suburbia encouraged the ills derided by both Left and Right. All you need is a basic familiarity with the cookie-cutter growth that sprawls across the country. Putting aside the highly questionable taste of many of the homes, strip malls, and parking lots that make up our suburban landscape, the relationship of buildings to one another feeds an increasingly anti-social society. Families are largely isolated from one another on widely spaced plots of land in sterile developments. Most of these developments consist of homes within a single price range, which can foster class-segmentation and racial segregation. The importance of the car for transportation from one's home means that those too young, or often too old, to drive spend their lives stranded without human contact.

The separation of work and home encourages a disinterest in the place of work, often a city, and commuting whittles away the time that families and couples can spend together. The closest thing to a communal space might be a McDonald's, a mall, or a multiplex theater, each self-enclosed and surrounded by parking lots. There exists little inspiring or communal in the vast expanse of American suburbs, and the resulting suburban "culture" of dissatisfaction draws obvious, though indirect, criticism.

Many of our nation's social ills stem from how we have chosen to physically model our country, a fact which many architects and urban planners confirm. There are movements, such as "New Urbanism," that already seek to address these problems from an architectural viewpoint. The opportunity that exists is to marry an acknowledged unease with our nation's infrastructure to other socio-political causes that people champion—revealing the connection between the two could trigger a resolution of both.

Neighborhoods designed to be livable, enjoyable, and active can ease the social problems that evolved out of the suburbs' isolated living and working conditions. The government played a leading role in creating the suburbs, through policies from local zoning laws to national transportation and mortgage regulations. A concerted political effort for change, then, is appropriate. Meanwhile, the social activism of groups such as the Christian Coalition can address the individual and business decisions out of which the suburbs developed. Pursuing a strategy of cooperation between the Religious Right and the Left and Center will not end partisan rancor. But if it's directed appropriately, it might serve to focus the energy of confrontation toward constructive ends. The reality is that while fundamental differences do exist, there is a significant degree of general agreement between elements of our ideological spectrum. One of those areas, the breakdown of social, familial, and communal ties, can be traced to a tangible problem—the key is to overcome our shortsightedness and grasp the convergence of interests.

Adam Giuliano is a senior in Pierson.

Back to Opinion...