The controversy over the construction of a Wal-Mart Supercenter in Inglewood has been brought to my attention once again. I am all for Wal-Mart for a number of reasons. Let me add more.
Wal-Mart, in my estimation, will inevitably drive other local businesses out of business. But I also am convinced that they will grow the amount of net business conducted in the area. But what of the downside, and specifically, what of black consumers and businesses? Is this mainstreaming not wanted?
It is still an open question as to what efficiencies black owned businesses provide operating in a black community. Lower marketing costs perhaps? Will these necessarily be passed on to the consumer? Or will it be that black consumers are willing to pay higher prices from black merchants?
We can take it for granted that Walmart's 'capital force projection' is sufficient to deliver low prices irrespective of their location. So even beyond the question of Ujamaa vs Black Capitalism vs Blackface Capitalism, we have the question of price. Assuming that Wal-Mart gets the green light in Inglewood, there will exist some overlap with regard to products and services available to the community. I for one, would love to see these premises tested head to head.
I made just such a request to someone I met at Earl Ofari Hutchinson's joint who said they represented the local Inglewood merchants, and said such data would be forthcoming. But he is just as likely to have lost my business card as I have his. Hopefully we'll hear him squawk again after the election.
My point again is that I don't believe there is sufficiently effective gravity in the current Democratic black politics to resist the material benefits of mainstream American life and those irrational arguments presented (e.g. contra Wal-Mart) which attempt to justify a racial exceptionalism are reactionary & theoretical, taking very little of blackfolks real lives into account. There is no reason to expect that African Americans themselves are any more or less resistant to the very idea of Wal-Mart than anyone else, yet since there is a preponderance of people who claim to represent blackfolks with anti-corporate and socialist labor philosophies, they assume that doing their work is 'black' work. The effect of blocking the expansion of Wal-mart into Inglewood is thus highly symbolic of what would be considered 'good' for blackfolks and if successful, can energize a lot of people. But while this could be considered a political victory for the left, it comes in direct contradiction to the broad calls for investment by mainstream corporations into heretofore neglected communities.
What is specifically ironic about this opposition to Wal-Mart's investment is that the most commonly used framework for arguing against capital infusions, gentrification, has not been employed. Wal-Mart is nothing if it is not downscale and of great benefit to those people with low incomes. I continue to shake my head.
Posted by mbowen at April 3, 2004 12:55 PM | TrackBack
You are 100% right on this. Imagine 1000 people going to walmart and instead of spending $150 on food each week for their family now only has to spend $110 a week. That $2000 a year in AFTER tax savings for each person. Or $2,000,000 saving for the 1000 members of the community. Which can be reinvested in service that the community member have a competitive advantage to provide.
Posted by: Scott at April 7, 2004 10:23 AMBlacks for Bush
Earning Respect by Becoming Swing Voters!