This article is the second part of a two-part series regarding the role of the aristocracy in modern American life.

In my last article, I gave a definition of the American gentry and examples of their presence in the United States. This article makes a simple case to overcome the American gentry.

Given the other ills in modern American life, I will admit I do not blame anyone for not campaigning against the American gentry. We continue to live through a deadly pandemic and that fact looms over everyone’s thoughts and actions. 

The University of California, Berkeley, one of the most outstanding public research universities in the world, is facing an Alameda County Superior Court decision that restricts their upcoming first-year class by more than 3,000 seats, or one-third of a standard class. This decision was made not by the word of nature or the word of God, but by the word of men – precisely, the words of the Alameda County Judge Brad Seligman and Phil Bokovoy, the president of the plaintiff, Save Berkeley’s Neighborhoods. These two men, with the various powers vested in them, somehow hold the fate of thousands of UC Berkeley students in their hands.

Why would these people deny those thousands of accepted students into an elite university? Seligman wraps his argument in fine legalese, stating in summary that the University of California system did not fill out the proper paperwork when advocating for new housing and teaching developments, so they must either fill out the busywork or accept fewer students. In addition, Seligman says UC Berkeley should have run studies on the effects of increasing the student population from 2005 to 2020. Bokovoy, in contrast, speaks in more plain English that “it’s irresponsible for Berkeley to add 3,000 new students in the midst of a terrible housing crisis” and that UC Berkeley could alleviate this dilemma by reducing the admission of out-of-state students. 

I believe two cruxes are holding up this story: the California Environmental Quality Act, and the gentry who abuse it. CEQA is an environmental law signed by then-Governor Ronald Reagan in 1970 to help curb ecological disasters. On paper, this law mandates that any public-sector project must consider how it changes the natural environment and must seek to prevent unwanted harm. In practice, according to the urban planner Nolan Gray, nearly all housing developments since the 1970s count as public projects, and almost any lawyer or busybody can file a lawsuit under CEQA.

In this example, two men — with a horde of gentry-like groups behind them — blocking the college dream of thousands of students starkly shows the dangers of the American gentry. As I touched on in my previous article, the gentry often have an outsized interest in wherever they live and seek to maximize their land and assets. I believe Phil Bokovoy and the battalion of shady neighborhood groups backing him up in the CEQA lawsuit against UC Berkeley want to protect their home investments and for fewer people to live in Berkeley so their houses’ values will keep rising. 

Berkeley homeowners, on average, have seen an 8% rise in home value year in 2021 due to the increased demand to live in the San Francisco Bay Area and the lack of housing growth in Berkeley’s recent history. The status quo is good to Berkeley homeowners, and I believe that any change to that status quo — like an influx of new UC Berkeley students — may disrupt the gentry’s profits. Bokovoy has appeared on the record both supporting police calls against college residences in Berkeley and opposing new housing on spurious claims. At the very least, this man is acting in bad faith and may jeopardize a university’s mission with him. 

Sadly, these kinds of people, who benefit so much from land ownership yet abuse their gifts, exist all over the United States and the world. In Evanston, mere steps from the Northwestern campus, residents have used their local status to fight against progress and better lives for NU students. In this article, residents mixed a valid concern about temporary business displacement with the arrogant claim that a new high-rise apartment would disrupt neighborhood character. In another case, the gentry used their clout to stall a project containing 51 affordable units. Similar to the UC Berkeley example, these people abuse public accountability to trap Evanston in amber, which I believe leads to a worse life for both permanent residents and students.

The idea that the American gentry can use their clout to impede a better world, especially a better world for new residents, appalls me. Existing residents always have an advantage in the court of public opinion because they have tangible wealth and they can vote. Politicians and businesses have to listen to the gentry because of this power, especially in non-metropolitan cities. As a result, everyone, especially students and other readers of this newspaper, has a responsibility to fight for the renters and landless and oppose the American gentry when they abuse their power. Like all political actions, protest is a muscle that gets more robust and toned the more we use it. The best time to start is today.

Sterling Ortiz is a SESP fourth-year. You can contact him at [email protected]. If you would like to respond publicly to this op-ed, send a Letter to the Editor to [email protected]. The views expressed in this piece do not necessarily reflect the views of all staff members of The Daily Northwestern.