In New Mexico, they claim to have a monsoon season. I only witnessed one actual day during our two years there that I would consider monsoonish. The streets flooded almost immediately. You'd be amazed at how fast rain can fall and cause havoc. Of course, that was nothing compared to 26" in one day!

Crooked Timberers are discussing Jared Diamond's, Guns, Germs, and Steel. It's an interesting debate on what environmental determinist perspectives might be omitting. It seems for the most part that certain people are upset with how this alters the colonialism debate.

My biggest issue is what the popularity of Jared Diamond means for geography in the public sphere. I'm afraid too many people will think geography is what Jared Diamond does. Instead I'd rather people looked to this guy, this guy, this gal, this gal, this guy, or this guy.

HUD, the Urban Institute, and Access Living conducted some testing research on discrimination against persons with disabilites in the Chicago region. As the Tribune describes the story in today's paper based on today's press release from HUD.

The study showed people with disabilities being discriminated against in 30% to 50% of the time based on type of disability. For example, blind people with service animals were not given an opportunity to rent because of no-pets policies. Under the Fair Housing Act, service animals are not to be considered pets. Deaf persons were often cut off on the phone when using relay services. People in wheelchairs were told they couldn't rent in some buildings without entering into reasonable modification or reasonable accommodation negotiations. In fact, they were not even allowed to state a case for why they wanted to live in the units they called on. By law, disabled persons are allowed to make reasonable modifications to inaccessible units if they are willing to pay for installation and (in some cases) removal of them.

Disability is a protected class at all levels of government in Chicago (federal, state, county, local). And, HUD plans on using the information gathered to actually enforce the law. So, there should be some good case law or ALJ agreements on disability rights in the near future.

This report came out to identify the costs of transportation in metropolitan areas. turns out that not having viable mass transit alternatives makes it more expensive to get around in a region.

Because I lived in and loved living in London for six months in my twenties, I often feel more when a tragedy happens there than in New York which I've only been to as a tourist. I lived very close to Russell Square and crossed it often to go to a favorite pub. (Russell Square is where the double decker bus was blown up today.)

London is such a wonderful place and I have very fond memories of walking along the Thames, long converations in pubs, lazy days in art museums, and just having that ex-pat feeling with others from the US and elsewhere. London is also the most cosmopolitan city I know of. Certainly, this is partly an echo of the British Empire. But, no other city I've spent a lot of time in has as many people from different cultures interacting with one another. It was so common for me to see kids of different colors and languages playing soccer together. Or, to see people of different races holding hands while walking down the street. In other words, if London is a target then the target is a liberal lifestyle.

Sure, this might sound a little too Hitchensian for some. But, unlike Christopher, I do not see the West as faultless freedom fighters. In fact, I think this problem is exacerbated by extremists on both sides of the issue. Do I possibly have a little more in common with the Western interests? Yes. Do I think that fighting violence with violence is the solution though? No. Indeed, I think one of the solutions is exactly what was interrupted by these bombings. Aid and fair trade and an equitable set of possibilities for all the world's people is what I think will make a difference.

Which is not to say I think people only become al-Qaida recruits because of poverty and despair. It's not that simple. Some people believe in fundamentalism per se. But, poverty and despair make it a lot easier to coax recruits into an extremist ideology that targets an other as the source of that recruit's problems.

Of course, this is just a small bit of the problem. There are also the follies of our leaders, the dictatorial regimes in too many countries of the world (that we have and have not supported), our own fundamentalisms that offer a point to be countered, and other things I can't think of right now.

But, the bottom line is that violence is not the answer. It won't stop us and it won't stop them. I just hope that this will not derail the momentum to offer more aid to African nations. Because, that is part of the solution. It would be sad to see the terroists win this battle.

ADDENDUM: This dispatch from London over at Slate is worth a read.

Here's some good news! The National Fair Housing Alliance and its member organizations led a campaign to get ABC to pull a reality show called "Welcome to the Neighborhood" from its schedule. The story is here.

The show created a rule that allowed three white Christian families in an Austin neighborhood to decide who would be their neighbor among half a dozen families. The deciding families made discriminatory statements during episodes of the show and the criteria they used to select their neighbors were in violation of the federal Fair Housing Act and the Texas equivalent.

Specifically, we contend that the show violates the Fair Housing Act by "otherwise making unavailable". The Act does not require a monetary transaction in order for a violation to occur. Any entity that "otherwise makes housing unavailable" because of a person's protected status (race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, disability) is subject to the Act. The contestant families fell into almost all of these categories.

ABC pulled the show after opposition from NFHA, GLAAD, the National Association of REALTORS and others (including my organization and our regional fair housing alliance.

To me, there are still questions. This show won't air but the contest already happened. Who got the house? Who at ABC allowed this show to be produced? Who gave it the okay to air? Will ABC do anything else to remedy the situation? Maybe they could talk about fair housing in an episode of "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition".

Anyway, the good guys got a victory this week.

Not sure if the youngsters out there know how big the first Live Aid was. (They re-united The Who and Zeppelin!!! You can't imagine how big that was in 1985.) I remember being glued to the TV and having a huge pit in my stomach because I wasn't there. It was a huge huge event -- so many big names and such hype. I taped as much of it as I could and played it back a bunch of times. It just made me feel so good to hear all these great bands and know that it was for a good cause. I even liked the cheesey video David Bowie and Mick Jagger made of "Dancing in the Streets".

Sometime this decade, I read an interview of Bono talking about how little help it really was. The money they raised -- while very substantial -- just didn't go very far. And, the logistics of getting the food to starving people was extremely complicated.

Sir Bob Geldof is doing it all over again. This time, it's even bigger and hopefully the idea behind it is even more powerful. It's called Live 8 (as in the G8) and is meant to emphasize justice over charity. You can read a brief summary and a list of the line-ups so far at Radio 1. It's going to be in five cities with London as the main venue. The BBC will be broadcasting the whole thing for those of you in the UK or with broadband or Satellite Radio.

Parks are more than just pretty places. They are public space that becomes a place for relationships, organization, and leisure. And, they tend to bond neighbors and people who normally wouldn't get to know each other.

The Gathering of Nations is this weekend in Albuquerque. It's the largest Pow Wow in North America. I've been once. It's an awe-inspiring event. And, just knowing it's happening makes me miss Albuquerque. Oh, for quicker, cheaper transportation.

In my hometown of Toledo, OH, a great independent bookstore -- Thackeray's -- is on it's last day. Local columnist, Roberta deBoer, sums up the prevailing feelings about the loss. The shopping center she mentions has also lost Toledo's best independent record store and will probably soon lose other treasures of the Glass Capital as it continues to slowly die while a giant mall grows and grows a mile away.

It's disheartening to think about the homogenization of our culture and landscapes. With a few exceptions, cities in America look and feel pretty much the same wherever you go nowadays. And, I think it affects hometown pride and tends to make people feel less rooted. I'm sure that someone could correlate the rise of chains and an increase in intranational migration to show a positive relationship.

And, I can feel that as well. The loss of Thackeray's is the loss of one more thing that was part of my Toledo.

I wish there was an alternative to the chainization of America. It leads me to believe that Americans value uniformity or individuality more than our rhetoric might suggest. Maybe Applebee's might just be the quintessential American place. Each Applebee's is more or less the same with a few local touches added. Unless you're interested in them, you'd never even know they're there though.

Or, maybe chains are like a new religion in that they offer a stable known entity in an ever changing world.

Whatever, it's depressing to think about the blahness that America has become.

I wonder... Did previous empires go through similar patterns of homogenization in their declines? Seems like this could be similar to something I vaguely remember form the decline of the Roman Empire.

Well, I guess this is an SOC posting.

Everyday, I go to work to fulfill the mission of our organization. That mission in a nutshell is to eliminate housing discrimination and segregation in the six-county Chicago region. As you might expect, this is not always an easy sell.

One of the common retorts sent my way is that people in protected classes -- especially minorities -- tend to self-segregate. In other words, people tend to "stick with their own kind." And, there is evidence that self-segregation does happen in places throughout the region. But, the term is a little misleading. While it might seem as though people are "self-segregating" in reality they are making choices based on perceptions of where they are and are not welcome.

In truth, self-segregation is an effect not a cause. The causes of self-segregation are primarily discriminatory techniques and attitudes and perpetuated perceptions of openness. Self-segregation is the effect.

Of course, people then say things like, "Latinos just seem more comfortable living in neighborhoods where the signs are in Spanish." or "We don't really get many African Americans looking for housing here." To which I ask, "Why? Why aren't there any signs in Spanish in your community? Why do you think African Americans tend to stay away from your town?" The problem isn't the homeseekers. To which I add, "You basically just stated a plan for how to attract more minorities to your community. If you were to provide services in Spanish and promote your community as tolerant and welcoming then you'd probably see more diversity."

The problem is that governments don't do enough to promote their communities as open and inclusive. The housing industry doesn't work hard enough to provide housing for minorities in white areas and vice versa. Nor, does the housing industry do enough to educate consumers on non-traditional choices. Community groups could also better promote their activities to minorities. In Chicago, this is situation is severe. Chicago is the fourth most segregated MSA in the country. Of course, it used to be #1 so there has been a little progress. (Or, others have gotten worse.) But, there are examples of diverse, welcoming, open, and inclusive communities. The shining example being Oak Park.

So to me, the argument that segregation is partially caused by self-segregating minorities is just plain wrong. And, those who use it are either ignorant or dishonest.

Amardeep has an quick post on the term "South Asia" that I wanted to comment on but the comments won't come up on his blog. I'm sure Blogger's poor service is to blame. But, hey, you get what you pay for and I'm not willing to pay anything.

Ashis Nandy wrote a column in the Times of India that seems to see the term "South Asia" as problematic. It's not a great argument to me for a few reasons. The first is that he starts the article off by making a statement that is in error. That statement is

"South Asia is the only region in the world where most states define themselves not by what they are, but by what they are not."

Has he ever heard of Canada or New Zealand which both do a lot of identifying with what they are not (The US and Australia respectively). That puts me off right away.

Secondly, he argues that "South Asia" has been largely unsuccessful as a term. I disagree. It is the preferred geographical notation for the region that was once called the "Indian Subcontinent." Nandy doesn't seem to like the coldness of this physically derived name. But, geographers love these types of names as they have the best chance of remaining politically neutral. Although, eventually every name gains political significance as Nandy demonstrates here. Still, there is unyielding hope that a name will remain neutral.

Thirdly, Nandy claims that "South Asia" has allowed India to "hijack the right to Indic civilisation." I've always known the term "South Asia" to be an attempt to reduce the influence of India. There are primarily two reasons in the US that people say "South Asian."

1. It reduces confusion as to which population one is referring -- Native Americans or Asians.

2. It has been used instead of Indians so that people from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal (and to a lesser extent Bhutan and Myanmar and rarely Afghanistan, Singapore, and Malaysia) are included without being identified with a national name that is not their own.

So, the second reason (the more globally transferable reason) intends to be inclusive of all the nations in the region. Sure, India is far and away the largest of these countries by both size and population. Consequently, it will likely be more influential in the region. Would anyone expect to find Denmark more influential than France or Uruguay more influential than Brazil? I think one could make an argument that when the term "North America" is used it has more of a slant toward one country than the term "South Asia" does.

These arguments will always go on because place names are somewhat inconsistent with reality. Boundaries are fuzzy. And, place names are part of our everyday lives. Each day we encounter them and use them to understand our world. Naturally, we're going to question them.