24: Punishing Poverty Pt. 2

Question 1

containment zones

Answer 1

neighbourhoods where problematic street behaviours are allowed to occur and concentrate

certain areas where encampments are more or less tolerated by the city and city officials

Question 2

exclusion zones

Answer 2

problematic street behaviours and visible homelessness is vigorously policed and not allowed to happen

Question 3

fusing of civil and criminal legal authority

Answer 3

way to get around constitutional rights that unhoused people have

making various behaviours associated primarily with unhoused people civil infractions/citations

by making it a civil matter instead of a criminal matter, it allows them to circumvent constitutional rights to council and general due process that is guaranteed in criminal cases

Question 4

tough love ideology

Answer 4

coercive care (Herring)

origins in the ideas of parenting and entails the idea that children have to experience negative emotions as pat of the learning process

ideology repersonalises the structural issue of homelessness in America
- shifts causes of homelessness from broader structural economic issues and frames it as a personal choice

Question 5

annihilation of space by law

Answer 5

vast array of legal mechanisms aimed at making those left behind by broader neoliberal structural-economic shifts since the 1970s disappear from urban landscapes

remaking public spaces in the interests of global capital

Question 6

goal of annihilation of space by law

Answer 6

not to punish or to help, but just to get them to go away

Question 7

neoliberalism

Answer 7

argument that the existence of people living in deep, profound poverty is necessary to the logic of capitalism

Question 8

homeless people scare us

Answer 8

argued by Mitchell as being forced to confront the violence of capitalism as a system we built, and to confront the reality of your own precocity in the system as it does a rationalised fear of being victimised by crime

Question 9

hierarchy of needs

Answer 9

political argument in a democratic system where some people’s rights are more important than others
- some people’s rights to enjoy a landscape and to move unencumbered by people around that landscape is more important than other people’s rights to survive