- Paperback: 308 pages
- Publisher: Little Brown & Co; 1st edition (1970)
- Language: English
- ASIN: B000K0AZGO
- Product Dimensions: 8.2 x 5.4 x 2.5 inches
- Shipping Weight: 10.4 ounces
- Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
- Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,044,917 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
Getting the download link through email is temporarily not available. Please check back later.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
The Unheavenly City: The Nature and the Future of Our Urban Crisis Paperback – 1970
See the Best Books of the Month
Want to know our Editors' picks for the best books of the month? Browse Best Books of the Month, featuring our favorite new books in more than a dozen categories.
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
Top Customer Reviews
While Banfield had many brilliant observations on race, crime, and other hot topics in his book, it was his innovative redefinition of the concept of social class that is most memorable and which has drawn the most controversy.
Banfield carefully defined class membership, not in terms of income status, such as government statistical poverty levels, but in terms of orientation toward the future, or time preference.
The more pronounced one's "future orientation" was, the higher one's social class.
Multicultural critics of this idea now claim it is "cultural racism" to value or promote "future time orientation."
Known to economists and other social scientists as "low time-preference," this is what is called setting goals or encouraging purposeful "middle class values" such as punctuality, thrift, foresight, deferred self-gratification of needs or wants, and self-discipline as opposed to "underclass values" or "high time-preference" behaviors such as improvidence, hedonism, purposelessness, immediate self-gratification of needs or wants, and capricious spontaneity or irresponsibility.
The Unheavenly City continues to define the real class struggle in America.
Edward Banfield suggested we take poor people's children away from them, so they can be raised by people with "normal" culture. Australia did that to indigenous peoples and it was later declared to legally meet the definition of genocide.
He also suggests we should institutionalize problematic children before they can cause trouble. Not only does that usurp the rule of law, it goes against everything we know to be just.
Lastly, Banfield, one of the most popular conservative urban studies theorists of all time, argues for a natural hierarchy among men (a common racist trope). He also specifically writes that all men are not created equal, taking aim at the constitution (I thought conservatives liked the constitution). This book is clearly an example of social engineering and cultural eugenics masquerading as Americanism.