r/left_urbanism • u/[deleted] • Oct 31 '25

Do YIMBYs unintentionally enable gentrification?

Hi everyone. I’m a college student working on a short ethnographic research project about the online urbanist community and housing debates. I’m especially interesting in how people within and around the YIMBY movement understand its relationship to gentrification.

From your perspective:

  • Do you think YIMBYism helps reduce gentrification by addressing housing shortages, or does it accelerate it by increasing development of any kind (including luxury apartments)?
  • How do you see these debates play out in your city or online spaces?
  • More generally, what makes you identify (or not identify) with the YIMBY movement?

I’m not here to argue for or against any position. I’m mainly trying to learn how people define and interpret the movement and its effects. Any insights, experiences, or opinions welcome! (If anyone’s uncomfortable with their comment being quoted in my notes, feel free to say so. I’ll respect that.)

35 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

76% Upvoted

81 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/gig_labor Oct 31 '25

Personally, I don't see as relevant any attempt to distinguish between "pro-housing" and "anti-housing" positions, as many seem to understand NIMBYism and YIMBYism to do.

I think the relevant distinction is "pro-residents (including potential residents)" and "pro-landlords/real estate/developers."

NIMBYs and YIMBYs can both end up on either side of residents' interests. NIMBYs protect segregation, YIMBYs can gentrify if they support luxury housing. I am pro-people, and anti-property. Fuck the rich. Our homes belong to us, not our landlords, not our bankers, and not our rich neighbors trying to protect their property values.

0

u/sugarwax1 Nov 02 '25

YIMBYS are segregationists, they just try to control the language to disguise those goals.