In this short reply, I attempt to address my critics in the limited space allotted. I show, inter alia, how the Anti–Exclusionary Zoning (Anti-EZ) Project: (1) brutally reproduces White supremacy, rather than subverting it; (2) employs pernicious neoliberal and antidemocratic means to achieve its—at best—inherently modest ends; (3) emanates from and reflects the elitist politics of the liberal professional-managerial class that locks in the neoliberal status quo, instead of building upon the emancipatory potentialities and power of grassroots, street-fighting mobilizations for housing justice and the right to the city; (4) takes massively uneven capitalist development as a given, rather than the object of contestation and resistance; (5) denies lower-income/working-class people of color vital human longings; and (6) embraces the same progrowth mentality fueling the climate crisis. We must stop worrying (so much) about EZ and fight our real enemies: neoliberalism, White supremacy/racial subjugation, elitist skepticism of democracy, and the growth machine.
DeFilippisJamesFraserJim. 2010. “Why do we want mixed-income housing and neighborhoods?.” In Critical Urban Studies: New Directions, edited by DaviesJonathan S.ImbroscioDavid L., 135–48. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.
4.
EinsteinKatherine Levine. 2019. “The Privileged Few: How Exclusionary Zoning Amplifies the Advantaged and Blocks New Housing�and What We Can Do About It.” Urban Affairs Review57 (1): 252–68.
5.
ElkinStephen L.1987. City and Regime in the American Republic. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
GoetzEdward G.2018. The One-way Street of Integration: Fair Housing and the Pursuit of Racial Justice in American Cities. Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press.
11.
GoetzEdward G.2019. “Democracy, Exclusion, and White Supremacy: How Should We Think About Exclusionary Zoning?” Urban Affairs Review57 (1): 269–83.
12.
HankinsonMichael. 2018. “When Do Renters Behave Like Homeowners? High Rent, Price Anxiety, and NIMBYism.” American Political Science Review112 (3): 473–93.
13.
HarveyDavid. 2004. “The ‘New’ Imperialism: Accumulation by Dispossession.” Socialist Register40:63–87.
14.
ImbroscioDavid L.2010a. Urban America Reconsidered: Alternatives for Governance and Policy. Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press.
15.
ImbroscioDavid L.2010b. “Keeping it Critical: Resisting the Allure of the Mainstream.” In Critical Urban Studies: New Directions, edited by DaviesJonathan S.ImbroscioDavid L., 89–103. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.
16.
ImbroscioDavid L.2012a. “Beyond mobility: The limits of liberal urban policy.” Journal of Urban Affairs34 (1): 1–20.
17.
ImbroscioDavid L.2012b. “American Cities and American Political Science—A Look at Thick Injustice: A Discussion of Clarissa Rile Hayward and Todd Swanstrom’s Justice and the American Metropolis.” Perspectives on Politics10 (3): 736–38.
18.
ImbroscioDavid L.2016a. “Urban policy as meritocracy: A critique.” Journal of Urban Affairs38 (1): 79–104.
19.
ImbroscioDavid L.2016b. “Meritocracy, Still Without Merit: Reply to Responses.” Journal of Urban Affairs38 (1): 116–22.
20.
ImbroscioDavid L.2019. “Rethinking Exclusionary Zoning or: How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love It.” Urban Affairs Review57 (1): 209–46.
21.
LakeRobert W.1993. “Planners’ Alchemy Transforming NIMBY to YIMBY: Rethinking NIMBY.” Journal of the American Planning Association59 (1): 87–93.
22.
LindblomCharles E.1977. Politics and Markets. New York: Basic Books.
23.
LindblomCharles E.1982. “Another State of Mind.” American Political Science Review76:9–21.
24.
LoganJohn R.MolotchHarvey L.1987. Urban Fortunes. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
PeckJamie. 2016. “Economic Rationality Meets Celebrity Urbanology: Exploring Edward Glaeser’s City.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research40 (1): 1–30.
30.
PendallRolf. 2019. “Growth + Climate Emergency: We’re Already Too Late Getting Ready Exclusionary Zoning Makes Matters Worse.” Urban Affairs Review57 (1): 279–92.
31.
PikettyThomas. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Translated by Arthur Goldhammer. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press.
32.
Rodríguez-PoseAndrésStorperMichael. 2019. “Housing, Urban Growth and Inequalities: The Limits to Deregulation and Upzoning in Reducing Economic and Spatial Inequality.” Urban Studies57 (2): 223–48.
33.
Spinner-HalevJeff. 2010. “The Trouble with Diversity.”In Critical Urban Studies: New Directions, edited by DaviesJonathan S.ImbroscioDavid L., 107–20. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.
StoneClarence. 1989. Regime Politics: Governing Atlanta, 1946-1988. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
36.
TobiasJimmy. 2018. “Meet the Rising New Housing Movement That Wants to Create Homes for All.” The Nation, May24. Accessed November 4, 2019. https://www.thenation.com/article/the-way-home/.
37.
TrounstineJessica. 2018. Segregation by Design: Local Politics and Inequality in American Cities. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
38.
WeaverTimothy P. R.2018. “By Design or by Default: Varieties of Neoliberal Urban Development.” Urban Affairs Review54 (2): 234–66.
