Quote:
Originally Posted by SSideAtty
You reference these parks as if you are living in a fantasy land. There is no "salve" in Washington/Jackson Park. That ship sailed about a good 50 years ago. You would do well while walking in those parks to avoid the bullet casings and drug paraphernalia strewn about. And you would do well to emerge from the either of the parks in question with your wallet, purse and your life in tact.
This is coming from a person who spends time in those parks. They are not anything close to what you are making them out to be. The are unkempt, overgrown and unsafe. They are nothing close to the sanctuary that you are trying to make them out to be. The only real hope for those parks to be what they were once intended to be is for the library to land on their grounds... because then those grounds would be manicured, cleaned up and made relatively safe. The security/police presence that an Obama Library would bring would be the real salve.
|
That may be the reality today (although I disagree it is as doom and gloom as you make it out to be. I have spent time there too). However as a poster above me noted, it may not always be the case and hasnt always been either. Once the land is turned over to another purpose it isnt coming back. It is about setting a poor precedent about what is and isn't permissible in public parks.
Implying that situating the Library inside the park is the one and only thing that could possibly ever bring about positive change is misguided. Having it anywhere nearby in the neighborhood, especially given the available vacant land, would have just as much as a positive impact and funnel the same level of investment into the area, without sacrificing the public land that has already been set aside. Yes, I would rather not get the library than set that precedent because it opens the floodgates to all sorts of other thorny issues about what is and isnt permissible on public land and about who has the final say. I do not want private interests of any kind on public parkland, whether its a fast food chain or the archive of a United States president. These issues should be treated equally.
Whats more sad is that we as city residents are taxpayers and already funding upkeep for the park...it shouldn't take a huge private outside interest to fix things up. There's no reason why tens of millions of dollars should get funneled to downtown parks and the neighborhoods are left with scraps. that is the real injustice here and where the justifiable outrage about conditions and safety should lie. (And i should note there are posters on this forum who freely advocate for heavy downtown investment and corporate handouts at the expense of neglected neighborhoods...which I dont)
Quote:
Last point, and I really hate to go here but unfortunately your writing prompted it and I cannot in good conscience fail to address it. I must say that I am getting the distinct impression that this may be about more than just the use park land with you ViaChicago. The metaphor that you referenced that dealt with a certain appendage is a strong tell that something else may be at play here. Even if you meant nothing by it you have to know that men of a certain race have been marginalized/lynched/murdered for centuries due to real or perceived inferiorities in regards to the appendage that you referenced. And on a much smaller level it is still happening today:
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative...o-2909508.html
One of the most common ways for the KKK to meet out punishment was for them to cut off that appendage and then burn and/or hang the body. I can't get inside your head or your heart but you show yourself to be no friend of the park or any culturally aware person but engaging in that type in insensitive rhetoric. You don't have to write with magniloquence but you should at least write with sensitivity and awareness.
.
|
Excuse me? My comment had zero racial component to it whatsoever and you're the only one "going there"....
Swinging Dick
Definitions
Slang
noun a forceful, powerful individual. The term evokes a large virile male and is in use particularly among financial traders, first in wall street, and subsequently in the City of London.
It was a stand-in noun for "rich guy". Yes i occasionally use slang to make a point. I think we're all adults here and can handle it. And as adults i think we can all also agree that disagreeing about a topic does not by default denote more sinister connotations especially when none is implied.
I know you're new here but we jostle a lot in these threads. Everyone here is genuinely passionate about whatever side they adhere to but its never personal and there's no need to read into things beyond what is actually said.