Walking:From Grand Central To East 4th And Avenue C Thinking About Anarchism and Gentrification

Yesterday,I was walking to the east village from Grand Central in Manhattan thinking about Anarchism,gentrification,young people,my future and old friends.I came down on the train from Saugerties,N.Y to see a number of old friends from elementary school.As I was riding down,I was planning what I was going to do to "kill" three hours before our meeting.I had planned to go to the Museum of Modern Art but I decided against it because it cost $20 to get in. The state or federal government should fund this and many other museums in the country and stop charging citizens to see and explore the arts. Artists should be on salary just like a dentist,doctor and an assortment of jobs now in the private sector.So the question for me was what to do in Manhattan for three hours.I thought about walking through Central Park(love the green) from the east side(72nd ) to the west side winding up at the Beacon Theater. I wanted to people watch and see what the west side had to offer these days.With this rejected,I decided to just walk to the east village because I wanted to explore the Murry Hill section south of 42nd street for a possible relocation in the future. As I walked down Park Ave. passing The Kitano Hotel(Japanese..with a nice jazz club inside), I decided to go down to 3rd to see the type of stores that were in the area.Again,I'm looking to see if I could relocate from the country to live with my beautiful wife after I retire from teaching in a year or two. I picked this area because it's one stop from LIC(Queens) where my daughter lives. I wanted to be close to her yet live in Manhattan so I could cab it on late nights from jazz clubs in the village or the upper west side(The West Village,Battery Park City are also on my list as well as LIC).

As I'm walking down 3rd towards to east village(I walked more than 60 blocks total),I began to realize there are only a few citizens older than me. Most of the people are in their 20's and early 30's, talking on phones and eating brunch at an assortment of overpriced restaurants.It was also very crowded and the stores didn't hold my interest.Eating out and drinking is a the main activity for a lot of New Yorkers,especially young ones.Something inside of me was not adjusting to this scene so I carried on to the east village. The atmosphere was better (organic food stores,etc.) but again where were the people my age. Every bar was packed with very young people(Halloween costumes) eating and drinking as if they were in a glorified college town.Where were the freaks and aging hippies in this mecca of anarchism(Williamsburg)?Football was on the screens instead of discussions on how to undermine the capitalists pigs who have run America into another recession.In the bar where I met my old friends,we were 35 yrs. older than the "kids" who wore revealing outfits as they discussed reality shows and stocks(really don't know what they were talking about).

I walked down to Avenue C/4th just to see what had changed over thirty-forty years.In the early seventies, this was a rough neighborhood due to poverty and drugs.Time has changed a lot since then because the east village has been gentrified and I understand this can be positive but it's also boring.As I walked through the streets, I realized living in Manhattan might be a problem for me.It is very congested and overpriced.Stores don't interest me in general and even the ones in the east village didn't seem inviting except one guitar store with $2,000 axes.A few years ago, I wanted to live in Manhattan and had no doubts. Those doubts are growing since I turned sixty.I'm enjoying my upstate environment more and the space it provides. I would like to have the best of both worlds.LIC does have a little slower pace than Manhattan.My daughter expressed that thought last week and now I tend to agree with her.I feel fortunate that I have some choices because most Americans don't.

One of my old friends is an anarchist.I recently did some research concerning their approach to community problem solving. It's my understanding that anarchists don't want the two party system we have in America. They want a problem solving system that enables the most informed citizens to lead committees(all democratically elected through modern technology). Each committee would make recommendations for the citizens in a given area(village,town) to vote on.Once the recommendations are approved and ideas applied,the committee could be disbanded if it isn't needed.Tax money might be more transparent and controlled under this system.The information leaders would not have party affiliation like we do today. Elections would only be for the person with the best information.If you think about this approach,it makes sense for small communities.Everyone could have ownership through the voting process. This process can be made efficient with new technology(computers,phones,passwords,etc.).Anarchism could be taught in schools to solve related problems to give ownership to the students.Students might turn up with the best research for a given problem and share it with the larger community.The possibilities are endless. This process is good for towns and small cities. As the population increases, the social problems become more complicated and might be difficult to manage.It would be interesting to try regardless of the outcome.Our present system,with one or a group of individuals elected for terms,seems outdated in the era of new technology.Citizens also need transparency and ownership of tax money due the failures of capitalism to bring prosperity to the majority(middle class losing members each day).