Neuschwanstein: A fairy tale darling's dark Nazi past

This is a broad, catch-all category of works that fit best here and not elsewhere. If you haven't found it someplace else, you might want to look here.

Re: Neuschwanstein: A fairy tale darling's dark Nazi past

Postby admin » Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:59 am

Orville Hubbard -- the ghost who still haunts Dearborn
by David L. Good
The Detroit News
Copyright 1989 Wayne State University Press; reprinted with permission.



Dearborn Mayor Orville Hubbard stands defiantly in the center of Michigan Ave. outside the Dearborn City Hall.

For most of his 36 years as mayor of the Detroit suburb of Dearborn, the late Orville L. Hubbard (1903-82) was known as the most outspoken segregationist north of the Mason-Dixon line.

A few years after taking office in 1942, Hubbard started attracting national publicity as a controversial administrator with a strange sense of humor. Eventually he gained a reputation as a political boss who worked to keep his town predominantly white.

The following chapter on Hubbard's peculiar brand of racism was excerpted from the 1989 biography Orvie: The Dictator of Dearborn (Wayne State University Press) by David L. Good. Good, an editor in the features department of The Detroit News, lives in Dearborn and once covered city hall under Hubbard.


Through the half-drawn blinds in his mayoral suite at Dearborn City Hall, Orville Hubbard could see mainstream America. He could see the storefronts along historic Michigan Avenue, once the main Detroit-to-Chicago auto route, known during Indian days as the Sauk Trail. He could see the housewives at the neighborhood shops, the businessmen at the lunch spots, the auto workers at the bank, the retirees on the benches and the youngsters on the municipal playground equipment. He could see it all. And he could see that it was white.

In a sense, Orville Hubbard's view was no different from that in any of a dozen or more other segregated suburbs that ringed the city of Detroit -- or in hundreds of other such communities scattered across the country. But Orville Hubbard saw the cityscape and knew it was more than just a view. He knew it was a level for self-perpetuation. And while the racism of Orville Hubbard was not the racism of the Ku Klux Klan, of the cross burners and the lynch mobs, it was just as insidious in its way, representing as it did the stranglehold of the white power structure on the political machinery of the suburbs of northern America.

In Dearborn the political machinery was housed in a three-story, brick, colonial-style city hall built in 1922 and distinguished chiefly by a cupola inspired by the one at Philadelphia's Independence Hall. Inside, lettered above the front entryway, was an immediate reminder of the influence of Henry Ford: his inspirational saying, "People get ahead during the time that others waste." To the right, down the hall from a spiral stairway, lay the mayor's office. Past a paneled wooden door stenciled with an invitation to "Walk In," a pair of industrious-looking secretaries awaited to intercept visitors.

The dingy green walls of the office were decorated with a mix of clippings and slogans, including the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution and a quotation on human kindness. There was also a map of Southeast Asia for quick reference on the Vietnam War, a Marine insignia arrangement and a large color photo of three young woman waterskiing in 1950's-style tank suits. For good measure, there was a time clock with a card exhorting, "You asked for work. You have a job. Dig in or dig out. -- Mayor Hubbard." And, as insurance against confusion on busy days, there was a "Please Take a Number" standard and a "Now Serving" numerical display. Beyond a swinging gateway, past the long table in the conference room, was the mayor's inner sanctum.

The door to Hubbard's city hall office.

There, behind a neatly ordered desk near the windows that looked out on the erstwhile Indian trail, next to a pair of large wall mirrors and a couple of old maps of the United States and Florida, sat Orville L. Hubbard, one-time high school athlete, ex-Marine, nonpracticing attorney, self-acknowledged expert on matters from the milking of cows to the history of the American Revolution, and personal symbol of suburban America's resistance to racial integration. This sunny fall morning in 1972 was no different from most. The mayor had a visitor, and, as always, he was ready to impart his peculiar wisdom to whoever was within earshot.

Most of Hubbard's conversations soon turned into rambling, disjointed discourses, often profane or scatalogical, but nearly always compelling. Although his voice was flat and adenoidal, he was a master storyteller, even when he mumbled or skipped words, as he sometimes did in his declining years. He was witty, apt of phrase, insightful in his analysis of human nature, unequivocal in his opinions. His musings were invariably an intriguing melange of folksy epigrams, barnyard humor, historical references and character assassination.

When Hubbard talked, he didn't just talk. He regularly worked himself into a desk-pounding fury, spewing out a machine-gun barrage of cuss words as he recalled past transgressions, real or imagined, by opponents or subordinates. Then he would regain his composure and meander off into childhood reminiscences, anecdotes about historical figures or general philosophizing, often pausing along the way to check a date or a spelling with an aide. An interview with Orville Hubbard wasn't so much a question-and-answer session as it was an occasional effort to nudge a monologue back toward a topic that may have seemed all but abandoned hours before.

The mayor checks his weight on scales in the hallway outside his office.

In one-on-one conversations, Hubbard often appeared obsessed with the race issue. At least that was how he struck me during a two-year series of interviews we set up to talk about his life, and this morning was typical. As usual, he had found something that set him off. This time it was a story about Detroit Mayor Roman S. Gribbs declaring the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. a city holiday. With a touch of incredulity in his voice, Hubbard began reading aloud Gribb's description of the slain civil rights leader: " 'A man of our times. ... A man for all times. He advocated and lived nonviolence.' "

Hubbard's squinty, gray-blue eyes peered out from behind his reading glasses, his swivel chair squeaking loudly as he shifted around to face me directly. "That son of a bitch," he said in measured tones. "Truman said that Martin Luther King was just a troublemaker. He certainly stirred up violence everywhere." Then he read more of Gribbs' commentary: " 'He struggled for and he gained equality. He resisted and he overcame hatred. ' " Again, Hubbard looked up. "He did like hell," he snapped. Finally, adding his own practical reflection on the folly of Gribbs' gesture: "That's a lot of holidays. And they're broke? I wouldn't vote to give 'em the time of day. That ... mess in Detroit can never be straightened out. Never, never, never, never. "

Orville Hubbard was rolling now. Spotting a story about 65 Haitian refugees being blown ashore on the coast of Florida, he immediately clicked back to his own days as a Marine in the Caribbean. He had served a year and a half in the Virgin Islands, "where it's 99 and 44/100ths percent black," and where he recalled with some chagrin having to step deferentially off the street to make way for the locals to pass. He also drew some lasting impressions from a couple of days stationed on duty in Haiti, which he still mispronounced as "Hay-tie."

Hubbard had few contacts with blacks growing up in rural Union City, Mich., but by the time he got into politics, his feelings on the subject had been hardened by a streak of shameless opportunism.

"Boy, that's some country," he said enthusiastically as he launched into an impromptu history lesson about "Hay-tie." "It was settled by the French, you know, and then the n-----s all overthrew 'em one night -- masscred 'em. For years they lived down there by themselves. They started eating each other. Cannibalism. The Marines went down there in 1914, and they ate a few Marines. There was a General Russell that was in charge 'em at that time. Gave the order to go through those hills and shoot every ---damn thing that moved. That brought 'em under complete control then, settled 'em down."

A few minutes later, the mayor came to a story about a 26-year-old Detroit woman who was awarded $740,000 after a bungled operation turned her into a mental patient. "Jesus Chris Almighty," he thundered. "Society can't stay in business. Because the n-----s are revolting, we just give it away." This was vintage Orville Hubbard, all right. If he was trying to cement his reputation as the nation's most outspoken segregationist outside the Deep South, he certainly was succeeding. It was exactly the kind of performance you might expect of a man who supposedly once had examined the bullet-riddled body of a black man and called it an open-and-shut case of suicide. Or a man who, during the Detroit race rioting of 1967, had ordered Dearborn police to "shoot looters on sight." Or a man who, the stories go, sometimes used to discourage blacks who had just moved into Dearborn by providing police and fire protection that was a little too good -- wake-up visits every hour or so through the night in response to trouble calls.

Sculptor Janice Trimpe works on a bust of Mayor Hubbard

Despite his record, Hubbard, intriguingly, saw himself as almost a moderate on the race issue, even while giving in to racist invective of the worst sort. "I'm not a racist," he once protested to his assembled department heads, "but I just hate those black bastards." Once, in an apparent effort to show a group of appoinees and a reporter how broadminded he was, he approached a black parking attendant at one of his favorite luncheon spots and, with a flourish, kissed the man on both cheeks. "See," the mayor told his entourage, "I don't hate n-----s."

In his later years, Hubbard seemed to take genuine umbrage at the label with which he was inevitably tagged. When Roy Wilkins pinned the "meanest man in race relations" tag on him in 1969, Hubbard declined public comment. But when I asked him about it later, he was palpably irked. "He's full of s---," he said, adding somewhat extravagantly, "I'm probably the kindest human being that ever dealt with people anywhere in the world." And while Hubbard never did become completely reconciled to the civil rights movement, he was willing to make accommodations to it in his later years. If he looked at Dr. King as an agitator, he also once extended a cordial greeting to the Reverend Ralph D. Abernathy, Dr. King's successor as head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

Hubbard could relate well with individual blacks. Although he dismissed Dr. Martin Luther King, right, as an agitator, he once told Dr. Ralph Abernathy, left, "We'd like to have you living here."

When Abernathy arrived one afternoon in 1969 to speak at the Dearborn Inn, Hubbard told him, "We'd like to have you living here." Hypocritical, perhaps, but it also was another indication that the ogre of Dearborn could ---and often did ---- relate well with individual blacks. Hubbard had few contacts with blacks when he was growing up. One of his most vivid childhood recollections in the rural Michigan community of Union City, he told me, was a huge sign depicting "a n----r kid eating a watermelon." But by the time he got into politics, his feeling on the subject had been hardened by a streak of shameless opportunism. Although he took no public position on the racial issue until he'd been in office for a few years, he soon became willing to seize on it as one more political advantage in a homogeneous community where many voters undoubtedly felt threatened by the presence of thousands of black auto workers at the Ford Rouge plant.

While the anti-Semitic sentiments of old Henry Ford all but evaporated from the public mind after Dearborn's most famous citizen made a brief and unsuccessful foray as a U.S. Senate candidate, the white-only rhetoric of Orville Hubbard tinged the mayor's entire career. Even his first successful run for the mayor's job in 1941 was marred by rumors --- unfounded, he always said --- that he was a member of the Klan and the even more notorious vigilante group the Black Legion. Shortly after that, he began using a campaign slogan originally intended to refer to illegal activities in town before the Ferguson grand juries came in. "Our first slogan said, 'Keep Dearborn Clean from Vice, Graft and Corruption,'" Hubbard explained to me. "That's exactly what it means." But a few years later, the slogan had evolved -- in its familiar short form, "Keep Dearborn Clean" -- into something that most observers took to mean "Keep Dearborn White." Probably the most charitable interpretation of that evolution is that the mayor never worked very hard at dispelling the impression.

Hubbard and his Public Works Director Frank Swapka liked to keep the city neat, but the slogan "Keep Dearborn Clean" came to be a catchphrase for "Keep the city white."

Hubbard's years in office were marred by a long list of racist pronouncements. In what was arguably the low point, he opposed construction of a low-income housing development in 1948 on the grounds that it was a "racial gamble" that could turn into a black slum. He went so far as to have his aides pass out leaflets urging citizens to "keep the Negroes out of Dearborn" by voting against a referendum on the project. One of his favorite stories, in fact, concerned a former council member who, he said, worked at a polling place while wearing a hat with the same exhortation on it. But there were no other politicos in town who could even think of outbigoting Orville Hubbard.

Hubbard became a national figure of sorts on the race issue in 1956, when he told an Alabama newspaperman that he was "for complete segregation, one million percent." In 1965, the federal government tried him -- unsuccessfully -- on charges of conspiring to violate the civil rights of a Dearborn man whose house was vandalized during a mob scene stirred up by rumors that he had sold to blacks. A bit later, Hubbard became the first target of the fledgling Michigan Civil Rights Commission after he refused to remove race-related news clippings he had posted on city bulletin boards.

Despite all that, however, Dearborn's history of outright discrimination or harassment against blacks --- by either Hubbard, his underlings or his constituents --- fell well short of the city's national image as a bastion of northern racism. A much-repeated story throughout Hubbard's tenure in office dealt with routine mistreatment of blacks traveling in Dearborn or trying to live or shop in the city. In fact, however, the public record contained little to back up the story.

Hubbard shows his contempt for his critics by stomping on a subpeona at a city council meeting in 1959.

The mayor had a way of explaining his position on the basis of justice and equity without realizing his words were loaded with irony. "God------," he once was quoted in the NewYork Times. "I don't hate n-----s. Christ, I don't even dislike them. But if whites don't want to live with n-----s, they sure as hell don't have to. D------t, this is a free country. This is America."

Usually, though, when quoted for print, Hubbard spoke temperately, if patronizingly, on the subject. "I just don't believe in integration," he told The Detroit News in 1967. "When that happens, along comes socializing with the whites, intermarriage and then mongrelization." But, he added, "the Negroes who work here are well treated. The're welcome in our restaurants and motels. One Negro told me that he never recieved more polite treatment that when he was stopped by one of our policemen. And go talk to the Negro family who was slipped into the city by some civil rights group. We treat them well."

In spite of his frequent segregationist declarations, Hubbard was not, strictly speaking, a white supremacist. He never said blacks were inferior -- just that they should be kept apart from whites. As for assessing his role in keeping Dearborn white, he occasionally claimed "credit" for the feat in his earlier years as mayor. But he became more modest about the "accomplishment" later in life.

"I don't keep the n-----s out of Dearborn," he told me. "I don't keep anybody out of Dearborn. I haven't done anything to encourage 'em. I don't do anything to discourage 'em."

"I would think eventually they'll overrun the place -- in another 20 years, I wouldn't be surprised. We're surrounded now. Christ, we're just a little postage-stamp community here. I would say the attitude of Dearborn is no different than that of any other community. This town has probably got the greatest diversity of nationalities in the country -- 45, according to the 1970 census report. That's as many as the United Nations.

"I believe in freedom of choice. Most people want to be accepted, and the only way to be accepted is to fit the pattern. I'm not against any human being in the world. I've never taken a stand against a person because he was red, white or yellow, whatever his color is. I've taken this stand; I've never changed it: I don't believe in one group of people forcing themselves upon another. The average fellow with good sense doesn't go where he's not welcome and not wanted. I don't care who he is, where he lives, you or me. People upon this world have lived among their own people. That's the pattern. That's the whole history of the world.

Hubbard gets a warm welcome at a rally protesting HUD housing. Hubbard was not, strictly speaking, a white supremacist. He never said blacks were inferior -- just that they should be kept apart from whites.

"What the hell's a racist? You're a racist because you don't believe in forced segregation? If you are, I guess I'd be a racist. Do I think the black man is inferior? No, I don't. I think any normal-born human being that has an equal opportunity would develop as much as anybody else regardless of who they are. I think environment's the whole story in life. Human beings -- I don't care what color they are , but they must be accepted on their own merits. If you're going to be a bum, be a bum. If you're going to try to do something, you're recognized for doing something. Be proud of who you are and how you live, and people will be proud of you."

That's the kind of stuff many of the folks in Dearborn loved to hear _ the blue-collar conservative groups in the heavily ethnic east-side precints as well as at least a share of the WASP-ish white-collar and professional types on the west side. It was a formula for racial separation without all the guilt feelings engendered by outright vituperation. And it well may have helped pull Hubbard through an election or two in the early years of his career.

Hubbard visits precinct workers in 1977.

To those who knew Orvill Hubbard well, the irony of this strong ethnic support was inescapable. Of several long-standing secrets he kept from his constituents, the best kept was that he harbored a wide-ranging personal contempt that extended far beyond the black race. He looked down on a variety of ethnic and religious groups, including many that turned out heavily for him at the polls. If he had not remained on the guard to mask his considerable prejudices about all kinds of white groups, he would never have seemed so easy to pigeonhole as a white bigot.

Indeed, during our interviews, Hubbard frequently let slip asides of anecdotes that revealed his deep-seated dislike of many non-WASP groups. Sometimes he caught himself, and sometimes he did not.

"They say the Jews own this country, the Irish run it and the n-----s have all the fun," he once observed. Then he added, "There's more truth to that. And if there's ever any corruption -- it's not a good thing to say, make a lot of people mad, but it's true -- the Irish are all involved. I've noticed that over the years. In the police department, they seem to be more corrupt even than the Dagos." He also built up an active dislike for the city's burgeoning Arab enclave in the east end, allowing once that "some people, the Syrians, are even worse than the n-----s."

Hubbard was confined to a wheelchair in his later years following a stroke. He spent his last years in this home owned by Maureen Keane on Wellesley in Dearborn.

Observed Judy Cord, an office secretary for Hubbard from 1959 to 1970: "I don't think he liked anybody. I mean you were either a Polack or a Dago or a Jew or a potato digger, or you were cheap or you were a son of a bitch. Whatever you were, that was the excuse. So I don't think you could say specifically he disliked blacks, because he expanded to everybody."

As an aside, however, let it not be said that Orville Hubbard remained totally blind to the evils of prejudice. At one point, he remarked with totally unitentional irony, "Those Irish Catholics are the worst of them all. They're so damn prejudiced. They talk about the Irish Mafia, about what's going on in Ireland. They never settle that stuff because of the narrowmindedness."

But a question remains: Was Hubbard's own racial stand really just calculated for political effect? There can be no doubt that he believed what he was saying publicly , and yet, in light of his privately expressed revulsion toward other ethnic groups, there's equally little question but that he would have been saying it differently had circumstances been different.

One clue comes from the mayor's own musing about his dealing with blacks on a personal and political level. "Christ," he sputtered, "when I ran for office back in the early days (as a township justice of the peace in 1936), the Negroes all voted for me. I knew 'em all. I get along with everybody. I say if Negroes lived here, they'd be all voting for Hubbard."

Blacks voting for Hubbard?

Perhaps. In another town, under different circumstances, why not? But left unanswered is the question of what sort of community would elect such a man on such a racist platform as Orville Hubbard implicitly ran on -- and keep on electing him.
Site Admin
Posts: 32368
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Neuschwanstein: A fairy tale darling's dark Nazi past

Postby admin » Wed Oct 02, 2019 7:25 am

America First Committee
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 10/2/19



America First Committee
Abbreviation AFC
Formation September 4, 1940
Founder Robert D. Stuart Jr.
Founded at Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.
Extinction December 10, 1941
Type Non-partisan pressure group
Purpose Non-interventionism
Headquarters Chicago, Illinois, U.S.
Membership (1941)
Robert E. Wood
Charles Lindbergh
Key people
William H. RegneryRobert E. WoodCharles A. LindberghLillian GishRobert R. McCormickSargent ShriverPotter StewartRuth Sarles Benedict
Subsidiaries 450 chapters
Revenue (1940)

The America First Committee (AFC) was the foremost United States non-interventionist pressure group against the American entry into World War II. Started on September 4, 1940, it put out mixed messaging with antisemitic and pro-fascist rhetoric from leading members,[1][2][3] and it was dissolved on December 10, 1941, three days after the attack on Pearl Harbor had brought the war to the United States. Membership peaked at 800,000 paying members in 450 chapters. It was one of the largest anti-war organizations in the history of the United States.[4][5]


Students at the University of California (Berkeley) participate in a one-day peace strike opposing U.S. entrance into World War II, April 19, 1940

The AFC was established on September 4, 1940, by Yale Law School student R. Douglas Stuart, Jr. (son of R. Douglas Stuart, co-founder of Quaker Oats), along with other students, including future President Gerald Ford, future Peace Corps director Sargent Shriver, and future U.S. Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart.[6] At its peak, America First claimed 800,000 dues-paying members in 450 chapters, located mostly in a 300-mile radius of Chicago.[4]

It claimed 135,000 members in 60 chapters in Illinois, its strongest state.[7] Fundraising drives produced about $370,000 from some 25,000 contributors. Nearly half came from a few millionaires such as William H. Regnery, H. Smith Richardson of the Vick Chemical Company, General Robert E. Wood of Sears-Roebuck, publisher Joseph M. Patterson (New York Daily News) and his cousin, publisher Robert R. McCormick (Chicago Tribune).[8]

The AFC was never able to get funding for its own public opinion poll. The New York chapter received slightly more than $190,000, most of it from its 47,000 contributors. Since it never had a national membership form or national dues, and local chapters were quite autonomous, historians point out that the organization's leaders had no idea how many "members" it had.[9]

Serious organizing of the America First Committee took place in Chicago not long after the September 1940 establishment. Chicago was to remain the national headquarters of the committee. To preside over their committee, America First chose General Robert E. Wood, the 61-year-old chairman of Sears, Roebuck and Co. Wood remained at the head of the committee until it was disbanded in the days after the attack on Pearl Harbor.[citation needed]

The America First Committee had its share of prominent businessmen as well as the sympathies of political figures including Democratic Senators Burton K. Wheeler of Montana and David I. Walsh of Massachusetts, Republican Senator Gerald P. Nye of North Dakota, with its most prominent spokesman being aviator Charles A. Lindbergh. Other celebrities supporting America First were actress Lillian Gish and architect Frank Lloyd Wright.[10]

Two men who would later become presidents, John F. Kennedy and Gerald Ford, supported and contributed to the organization. When he donated $100 to the AFC, Kennedy attached a note which read simply: "What you are doing is vital."[11] Ford was one of the first members of the AFC when a chapter formed at Yale University.[12] Additionally, Potter Stewart, a future Supreme Court justice, served on the original committee of the AFC.[13]


Flyer for an America First Committee rally in St. Louis, Missouri in April 1941

When the war began in September 1939, most Americans, including politicians, demanded neutrality regarding Europe.[14] Although most Americans supported strong measures against Japan, Europe was the focus of the America First Committee. The public mood was changing, however, especially after the fall of France in the spring of 1940.[15]

The America First Committee launched a petition aimed at enforcing the 1939 Neutrality Act and forcing President Franklin D. Roosevelt to keep his pledge to keep America out of the war. They profoundly distrusted Roosevelt and argued that he was lying to the American people.

On the day after Roosevelt's lend-lease bill was submitted to the United States Congress, Wood promised AFC opposition "with all the vigor it can exert". America First staunchly opposed the convoying of ships, the Atlantic Charter, and the placing of economic pressure on Japan. In order to achieve the defeat of lend-lease and the perpetuation of American neutrality, the AFC advocated four basic principles:

• The United States must build an impregnable defense for America.
• No foreign power, nor group of powers, can successfully attack a prepared America.
• American democracy can be preserved only by keeping out of the European war.
• "Aid short of war" weakens national defense at home and threatens to involve America in war abroad.

Charles Lindbergh was admired in Germany and allowed to see the buildup of the German air force, the Luftwaffe, in 1937. He was impressed by its strength and secretly reported his findings to the General Staff of the United States Army, warning them that the U.S. had fallen behind and that it must urgently build up its aviation.[16] He had feuded with the Roosevelt administration for years. His first radio speech was broadcast on September 15, 1939, on all three of the major radio networks. He urged listeners to look beyond the speeches and propaganda that they were being fed and instead look at who was writing the speeches and reports, who owned the papers and who influenced the speakers.

On June 20, 1941, Lindbergh spoke to 30,000 people in Los Angeles and billed it as a "Peace and Preparedness Mass Meeting", Lindbergh criticized those movements which he perceived were leading America into the war. He proclaimed that the United States was in a position that made it virtually impregnable. He claimed that the interventionists and the British who called for "the defense of England" really meant "the defeat of Germany".[17][18]

Charles Lindbergh speaking at an America First Committee rally in Fort Wayne, Indiana in early October 1941

Nothing did more to escalate the tensions than the speech which Lindbergh delivered to a rally in Des Moines, Iowa on September 11, 1941. In that speech, he identified the forces pulling America into the war as the British, the Roosevelt administration, and American Jews. While he expressed sympathy for the plight of the Jews in Germany, he argued that America's entry into the war would serve them little better. He said, in part, the following:

It is not difficult to understand why Jewish people desire the overthrow of Nazi Germany. The persecution they suffered in Germany would be sufficient to make bitter enemies of any race. No person with a sense of the dignity of mankind can condone the persecution the Jewish race suffered in Germany. But no person of honesty and vision can look on their pro-war policy here today without seeing the dangers involved in such a policy, both for us and for them.

Instead of agitating for war the Jewish groups in this country should be opposing it in every possible way, for they will be among the first to feel its consequences. Tolerance is a virtue that depends upon peace and strength. History shows that it cannot survive war and devastation. A few farsighted Jewish people realize this and stand opposed to intervention. But the majority still do not. Their greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government.[19]

A Dr. Seuss editorial cartoon from early October 1941 criticizing America First

Communists were antiwar until June 1941, and they tried to infiltrate or take over America First.[20] After Hitler attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941, they reversed positions and denounced the AFC as a Nazi front (a group infiltrated by German agents).[21] Nazis also tried to use the committee: at the trial of the aviator and orator Laura Ingalls,[22] the prosecution revealed that her handler, Ulrich Freiherr von Gienanth, a German diplomat, had encouraged her to participate in committee activities.

After Pearl Harbor

After the attack on Pearl Harbor, AFC canceled a rally with Lindbergh at Boston Garden "in view of recent critical developments,"[23] and the organization's leaders announced their support of the war effort. Lindbergh gave the rationale:[24]

We have been stepping closer to war for many months. Now it has come and we must meet it as united Americans regardless of our attitude in the past toward the policy our government has followed.

Whether or not that policy has been wise, our country has been attacked by force of arms and by force of arms we must retaliate. Our own defenses and our own military position have already been neglected too long. We must now turn every effort to building the greatest and most efficient Army, Navy and Air Force in the world. When American soldiers go to war it must be with the best equipment that modern skill can design and that modern industry can build.

With the formal declaration of war against Japan, the organization chose to disband. On December 11, the committee leaders met and voted for dissolution. In the statement which they released to the press was the following:

Our principles were right. Had they been followed, war could have been avoided. No good purpose can now be served by considering what might have been, had our objectives been attained.

We are at war. Today, though there may be many important subsidiary considerations, the primary objective is not difficult to state. It can be completely defined in one word: Victory.[25]

Conservative commentator Pat Buchanan has praised America First and used its name as a slogan. "The achievements of that organization are monumental," writes Buchanan. "By keeping America out of World War II until Hitler attacked Stalin in June 1941, Soviet Russia, not America, bore the brunt of the fighting, bleeding and dying to defeat Nazi Germany."[26]

See also

• America First (policy)
• America First Party (1943)
• Committee to Defend America by Aiding the Allies



1. Bennett, Brian. "'America First,' a phrase with a loaded anti-Semitic and isolationist history". Retrieved 2018-11-23.
2. Calamur, Krishnadev (2017-01-21). "A Short History of 'America First'". The Atlantic. Retrieved 2018-11-23.
3. Dunn, Susan (201
3-06-04). 1940: FDR, Willkie, Lindbergh, Hitler-the Election amid the Storm. Yale University Press. p. 66. ISBN 0300195133.
4. Wayne S. Cole, America First: The Battle against Intervention, 1940-41 (1953)
5. Bill Kauffman, Ain't My America: The Long, Noble History of Antiwar Conservatism and Middle-American Anti-Imperialism (2008)
6. Kauffman, Bill; Sarles, Ruth (2003). A story of America First: the men and women who opposed U. S. intervention in World War II. New York: Praeger. p. xvii. ISBN 0-275-97512-6.
7. Schneider p 198
8. Cole, Wayne S. (1953). America First: The Battle Against Intervention. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. p. 15.
9. Cole 1953, 25-33; Schneider 201-2
10. Kevin Starr (2003). Embattled Dreams: California in War and Peace, 1940-1950. Oxford UP. p. 6. ISBN 9780195168976.
11. "Still America First".
12. "In defense of America First". 2 May 2016.
13. Letters (5 March 2017). "America First was not a pro-Nazi organisation - Letters". the Guardian.
14. Leroy N. Rieselbach (1966). The Roots of Isolationism: congressional voting and presidential leadership in foreign policy. Bobbs-Merrill. p. 13.
15. James Gilbert Ryan; Leonard C. Schlup (2006). Historical Dictionary of the 1940s. M.E. Sharpe. p. 415. ISBN 9780765621078.
16. James Duffy (2010). Lindbergh vs. Roosevelt: The Rivalry That Divided America. Regnery. pp. 76–77. ISBN 9781596981676.
17. Louis Pizzitola (2002). Hearst Over Hollywood: Power, Passion, and Propaganda in the Movies. Columbia UP. p. 401. ISBN 9780231116466.
18. Wayne S. Cole (1974). Charles A. Lindbergh and the Battle Against American Intervention in World War II. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. p. 9. ISBN 9780151181681.
19. Cole 1953, p. 144
20. Selig Adler (1957). The isolationist impulse: its twentieth-century reaction. pp. 269–70, 274. ISBN 9780837178226.
21. Kahn, A. E., and M. Sayers. The Great Conspiracy: The Secret War Against Soviet Russia Archived 2009-04-12 at the Wayback Machine. 1st ed. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1946, chap. XXIII (American Anti-Comintern), part 5: Lone Eagle, pp. 365-378. Kahn, A.E., and M. Sayers. The Plot against the Peace: A Warning to the Nation!. 1st ed. New York: Dial Press, 1945, chap. X (In the Name of Peace), pp. 187-209.
22. New York Times, December 18, 1941, "Laura Ingalls Held as Reich Agent: Flier Says She Was Anti-Nazi Spy".
23. "No America First Rally". The New York Times. Associated Press. 1941-12-09. p. 40.
24. "Isolationist Groups Back Roosevelt". The New York Times. 1941-12-09. p. 44.
25. "America First Group to Quit". The Telegraph-Herald. Dubuque, Iowa. United Press International. 1941-12-12. p. 13. Retrieved November 16, 2011.
26. Pat Buchanan (October 13, 2004). "The Resurrection of 'America First!'". The American Cause. Retrieved 2008-02-03


• Berg, A. Scott (1999) Lindbergh pp .84–432
• Cole, Wayne S. (1974) Charles A. Lindbergh and the Battle against American Intervention in World War II
• Cole, Wayne S. (1953) America First: The Battle against Intervention, 1940-41
• Doenecke, Justus D. ed. (1990) In Danger Undaunted: The Anti-Interventionist Movement of 1940-1941 as revealed in the Papers of the America First Committee
• Doenecke, Justus D. (2000) Storm on the Horizon: The Challenge to American Intervention, 1939-1941
• Doenecke, Justus D. (Summer/Fall 1982) "American Isolationism, 1939-1941" Journal of Libertarian Studies 6(3), pp.201–216
• Doenecke, Justus D. (Summer 1987) "Anti-Interventionism of Herbert Hoover" Journal of Libertarian Studies 8(2), pp.311–340.
• Gleason, S. Everett and Langer, William L. (1953) The Undeclared War, 1940-1941
o semi-official government history
• Goodman, David (2007) "Loving and Hating Britain: Rereading the Isolationist Debate in the USA" in Darian-Smith, Kate; Grimshaw, Patricia; and Macintyre, Stuart eds. Britishness Abroad: Transnational Movements and Imperial Cultures, Carlton: Melbourne University Press. pp187–204. ISBN 978-0-522-85392-6
• Gordon, David (2003) America First: the Anti-War Movement, Charles Lindbergh and the Second World War, 1940-1941
o presentation to the New York Military Affairs Symposium
• Jonas, Manfred (1966) Isolationism in America, 1935-1941
• Kauffman, Bill (1995) America First!: Its History, Culture, and Politics ISBN 0-87975-956-9
• Parmet, Herbert S. and Hechy, Marie B. (1968) Never Again: A President Runs for a Third Term
• Schneider, James C. (1989) Should America Go to War? The Debate over Foreign Policy in Chicago, 1939-1941

Primary sources

• America First Committee (1990). In Danger Undaunted: The Anti-Interventionist Movement of 1940-1941 As Revealed in the Papers of the America First Committee. Hoover Press. ISBN 9780817988418.
• Doenecke, Justus D. (1997) The Battle Against Intervention, 1939-1941
o includes short narrative and primary documents


• Doenecke, Justus D. (Spring 1983) "Literature of Isolationism, 1972–1983: A Bibliographic Guide" Journal of Libertarian Studies 7(1), pp.157–184
• Doenecke, Justus D. (Winter 1986) "Explaining the Antiwar Movement, 1939–1941: The Next Assignment" Journal of Libertarian Studies 8(1), pp.139–162.
• Hogan, Michael J., ed. (2000). Paths to Power: The Historiography of American Foreign Relations to 1941. Cambridge University Press. p. 258. ISBN 9780521664134.

External links

• America First Committee Records, 1940-1942 at the Hoover Institution Archives
Site Admin
Posts: 32368
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Neuschwanstein: A fairy tale darling's dark Nazi past

Postby admin » Wed Oct 02, 2019 7:56 am

Fuhrerprinzip [Fuhrer-Fuehrer Principle]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 10/2/19



The Führerprinzip [ˈfyːʀɐpʀɪnˌtsiːp] (About this soundlisten) (German for "leader principle") prescribed the fundamental basis of political authority in the governmental structures of the Third Reich. This principle can be most succinctly understood to mean that "the Führer's word is above all written law" and that governmental policies, decisions, and offices ought to work toward the realization of this end.[1] In actual political usage, it refers mainly to the practice of dictatorship within the ranks of a political party itself, and as such, it has become an earmark of political fascism.


The Führerprinzip was not invented by the Nazis. Hermann von Keyserling, an ethnically German philosopher from Estonia, was the first to use the term. One of Keyserling's central claims was that certain "gifted individuals" were "born to rule" on the basis of Social Darwinism.

The ideology of the Führerprinzip sees each organization as a hierarchy of leaders, where every leader (Führer, in German) has absolute responsibility in his own area, demands absolute obedience from those below him and answers only to his superiors.[2] This required obedience and loyalty even over concerns of right and wrong.[2] The supreme leader, Adolf Hitler, answered to God and the German people. Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben has argued[citation needed] that Hitler saw himself as an incarnation of auctoritas, and as the living law or highest law itself, effectively combining in his persona executive power, judicial power and legislative power. After the campaign against the alleged Röhm Putsch, Hitler declared: "in this hour, I was responsible for the fate of the German nation and was therefore the supreme judge of the German people!"[3]

The Führerprinzip paralleled the functionality of military organizations, which continue to use a similar authority structure today, although in democratic countries members are supposed to be restrained by codes of conduct. The Freikorps – German paramilitary organizations made up of men who had fought in World War I and been mustered out after Germany's defeat, but who found it impossible to return to civilian life – were run on the Führer principle. Many of the same men had, earlier in life, been part of various German youth groups in the period from 1904-1913.[4] These groups had also accepted the idea of blind obedience to a leader.[5] The justification for the civil use of the Führerprinzip was that unquestioning obedience to superiors supposedly produced order and prosperity in which those deemed 'worthy' would share.

In the case of the Nazis, the Führerprinzip became integral to the Nazi Party in July 1921, when Adolf Hitler forced a showdown with the original leaders of the party after he learned that they were attempting to merge it with the somewhat larger German Socialist Party. Learning of this, and knowing that any merger would dilute his influence over the group, Hitler quit the Nazis. Realizing that the party would be completely ineffective without Hitler as their front man, the founder of the party, Anton Drexler, opened negotiations with Hitler, who delivered an ultimatum: he must be recognized as the sole leader (Führer) of the party, with dictatorial powers. The executive committee gave in to his demands, and Hitler rejoined the party a few days later to become its permanent ruler, with Drexler kicked upstairs to be honorary chairman for life.[6]

In time, as the party expanded, it fragmented somewhat, with the northern faction led by the Strasser brothers, Otto and Gregor, and including Joseph Goebbels, holding more socialist views then the southern faction controlled by Hitler in Munich. They differed in other ways as well, including on the party's acceptance of the Fuehrer Principle. In another confrontation engineered by Hitler, a party conference was called on February 14, 1926 in Bamberg. At this conference, Hitler won over the leaders of the northern faction with his oratorical skills, and the question of whether the NSDAP would follow the Führerprinzip was put to rest for good.[7]

When Hitler finally came to absolute power, after being appointed Chancellor and assuming the powers of the President when Paul von Hindenburg died, he changed his title to "Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor", and the Führerprinzip became an integral part of German society. Appointed mayors replaced elected local governments. Schools lost elected parents' councils and faculty advisory boards, with all authority being put in the headmaster's hands.[8] The Nazis suppressed associations and unions with elected leaders, putting in their place mandatory associations with appointed leaders. The authorities allowed private corporations to keep their internal organization, but with a simple renaming from hierarchy to Führerprinzip. Conflicting associations, e.g. sports associations responsible for the same sport, were coordinated into a single one under the leadership of a single Führer, who appointed the Führer of a regional association, who appointed the sports club Führer, often appointing the person whom the club had previously elected.[9] Shop stewards had their authority carefully circumscribed to prevent their infringing on that of the plant leader.[10] Eventually, virtually no activity or organization in Germany could exist that was completely independent of party and/or state leadership.

Hermann Göring told Nevile Henderson that "When a decision has to be taken, none of us counts more than the stones on which we are standing. It is the Führer alone who decides".[11] In practice, the selection of unsuitable candidates often led to micromanagement and commonly to an inability to formulate coherent policy. Albert Speer noted that many Nazi officials dreaded making decisions in Hitler's absence. Rules tended to become oral rather than written; leaders with initiative who flouted regulations and carved out their own spheres of influence might receive praise and promotion rather than censure.

The architects of the Night of the Long Knives: Hitler, Göring, Goebbels, and Hess. Only Himmler and Heydrich are missing.


Many propaganda films developed the importance of the Führerprinzip. Flüchtlinge depicted Volga German refugees saved from Communist persecution by a leader demanding unquestioning obedience.[12] Der Herrscher altered its source material to depict its hero, Clausen, as the unwavering leader of his munitions firm, who, faced with his children's machinations, disowns them and bestows the firm on the state, confident that a worker will arise capable of continuing his work and, as a true leader, needing no instruction.[13] Carl Peters shows the title character in firm, decisive action to hold and win African colonies, but brought down by a parliament that does not realize the necessity of Führerprinzip.[14]

In the schools, adolescent boys were presented with Nordic sagas as the illustration of Führerprinzip, which was developed with such heroes as Frederick the Great and Otto von Bismarck.[15]

This combined with the glorification of the one, central Führer. During the Night of Long Knives, it was claimed that his decisive action saved Germany,[16] though it meant (in Goebbels's description) suffering "tragic loneliness" from being a Siegfried forced to shed blood to preserve Germany.[17] In one speech Robert Ley explicitly proclaimed "The Führer is always right."[18] Booklets given out for the Winter Relief donations included The Führer Makes History,[19][20] a collection of Hitler photographs,[21] and The Führer’s Battle in the East[22] Films such as Der Marsch zum Führer and Triumph of the Will glorified him.

Carl Schmitt – drawn to the Nazi party by his admiration for a decisive leader[23] praised him in his pamphlet State, Volk and Movement because only the ruthless will of such a leader could save Germany and its people from the "asphalt culture" of modernity, to bring about unity and authenticity.[24]

Adolf Eichmann on trial in 1961


During the post-war Nuremberg Trials, Nazi war criminals—and, later, Adolf Eichmann during the trial in Israel—used the Führerprinzip concept to argue that they were not guilty of war crimes by claiming that they were only following orders. Eichmann may have declared his conscience was inconvenienced by war events in order to "do his job" as best he could.

In Eichmann in Jerusalem, Hannah Arendt concluded that, aside from a desire for improving his career, Eichmann showed no trace of anti-Semitism or psychological abnormalities whatsoever. She called him the embodiment of the "banality of evil", as he appeared at his trial to have an ordinary and common personality, displaying neither guilt nor hatred, denying any form of responsibility. Eichmann argued he was simply "doing his job" and maintained he had always tried to act in accordance with Kant's categorical imperative. Arendt suggested that these statements most strikingly discredit the idea that Nazi criminals were manifestly psychopathic and different from common people, that even the most ordinary of people can commit horrendous crimes if placed in the catalyzing situation, and given the correct incentives. However, Arendt disagreed with this interpretation, as Eichmann justified himself with the Führerprinzip. Arendt argued that children obey, whereas adults adhere to an ideology.

See also

• Adolf Hitler
• Autocracy
• Charisma
• Cult of personality
• Führer
• Functionalism versus intentionalism
• Gleichschaltung
• Meine Ehre heißt Treue
• Milgram experiment
• Nuremberg Defense
• State of exception
• Superior orders
• Unrechtsstaat



1. "Nazi Conspiracy & Aggression Volume I Chapter VII: Means Used by the Nazi Conspiractors in Gaining Control of the German State" A Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust
2. "Befehlsnotstand & the Führerprinzip" Shoah Education
3. Sager, Alexander & Winkler, Heinrich August (2007). Germany: The Long Road West. 1933-1990. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-926598-4.|page=37
4. Savage, Jon (2007) Teenage: The Creation of Youth Culture New York: Viking. pp.101-12. ISBN 978-0-670-03837-4
5. Mitcham (1996), p.21
6. Mitcham (1996), pp.78-79
7. Mitcham (1996), pp.120-121
8. Nicholas (2006), p.74
9. Kurger, Arns (1985) "'Heute gehört uns Deutschland und morgen …?' Das Ringen um den Sinn der Gleichschaltung im Sport in der ersten Jahreshälfte 1933." in Buss, Wolfgang and Krüger, Arnd (eds.) (1985) Sportgeschichte: Traditionspflege und Wertewandel. Festschrift zum 75. Geburtstag von Prof. Dr. Wilhelm Henze Duderstad: Mecke. pp.175–196.
10. Grunberger, Richard (1971) The 12-Year Reich New York: Henry Holt. p 193, ISBN 0-03-076435-1
11. Gunther, John (1940). Inside Europe. New York: Harper & Brothers. p. 19.
12. Leiser (1975), pp.29-30
13. Leiser (1975), p.49
14. Leiser (1975), pp.104-5
15. Nicholas (2006), p.78
16. Koonz (2003), p.96
17. Rhodes, Anthony (1976) Propaganda: The art of persuasion: World War II New York: Chelsea House. p.16 ISBN 0877540292
18. Ley, Robert ((3 November 1937) "Fate - I Believe!" German Propaganda Archive Calvin College website
19. "Winterhilfswerk Booklet for 1933" German Propaganda Archive Calvin College website
20. ""Winterhilfswerk Booklet for 1938" German Propaganda Archive Calvin College website
21. "Hitler in the Mountains" German Propaganda Archive Calvin College website
22. "Hitler in the East" German Propaganda Archive Calvin College website
23. Koonz (2003), p.56
24. Koonz (2003), p.59


• Koonz, Claudia (2003) The Nazi Conscience Belknap. ISBN 0-674-01172-4
• Leiser, Erwin (1975) Nazi Cinema New York: Macmillan. ISBN 0-02-570230-0
• Mitcham, Samuel W. (1996) Why Hitler? The Genesis of the Nazi Reich Westport, Connecticut: Praeger. ISBN 0-275-95485-4
• Nicholas, Lynn H. (2006) Cruel World: The Children of Europe in the Nazi Web New York: Vintage. ISBN 0-679-77663-X

External links

• BBC historical article
• Bearers of a Common Fate?
• The Political System of the Third Reich
Site Admin
Posts: 32368
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Neuschwanstein: A fairy tale darling's dark Nazi past

Postby admin » Thu Nov 21, 2019 7:33 am

Garden city movement
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 11/21/19

Fritsch's 1896 book The City of the Future became a blueprint of the German garden city movement which was adopted by Völkisch circles.

-- Theodor Fritsch, by Wikipedia

Ebenezer Howard's 3 magnets diagram which addressed the question 'Where will the people go?', with the choices 'Town', 'Country' or 'Town-Country'


The garden city movement is a method of urban planning in which self-contained communities are surrounded by "greenbelts", containing proportionate areas of residences, industry, and agriculture. The idea was initiated in 1898 by Ebenezer Howard in the United Kingdom and aims to capture the primary benefits of a countryside environment and a city environment while avoiding the disadvantages presented by both. Howard was knighted in 1927. During his lifetime Letchworth and Welwyn Garden City were built near London according Howard’s concept and many other garden cities inspired by his model have since been build all over the world.[1]




Inspired by the utopian novel Looking Backward and Henry George's work Progress and Poverty, Howard published the book To-morrow: a Peaceful Path to Real Reform in 1898 (which was reissued in 1902 as Garden Cities of To-morrow). His idealised garden city would house 32,000 people on a site of 6,000 acres (2,400 ha), planned on a concentric pattern with open spaces, public parks and six radial boulevards, 120 ft (37 m) wide, extending from the centre. The garden city would be self-sufficient and when it reached full population, another garden city would be developed nearby. Howard envisaged a cluster of several garden cities as satellites of a central city of 58,000 people, linked by road and rail.[2]

Howard's To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform sold enough copies to result in a second edition, Garden Cities of To-morrow. This success provided him the support necessary to pursue the chance to bring his vision into reality. Howard believed that all people agreed the overcrowding and deterioration of cities was one of the troubling issues of their time. He quotes a number of respected thinkers and their disdain of cities. Howard's garden city concept combined the town and country in order to provide the working class an alternative to working on farms or in ‘crowded, unhealthy cities’.[3]

First developments

To build a garden city, Howard needed money to buy land. He decided to get funding from "gentlemen of responsible position and undoubted probity and honour".[4] He founded the Garden City Association (later known as the Town and Country Planning Association or TCPA), which created First Garden City, Ltd. in 1899 to create the garden city of Letchworth.[5] However, these donors would collect interest on their investment if the garden city generated profits through rents or, as Fishman calls the process, ‘philanthropic land speculation’.[6] Howard tried to include working class cooperative organisations, which included over two million members, but could not win their financial support.[7] Because he had to rely only on the wealthy investors of First Garden City, Howard had to make concessions to his plan, such as eliminating the cooperative ownership scheme with no landlords, short-term rent increases, and hiring architects who did not agree with his rigid design plans.[8]

In 1904, Raymond Unwin, a noted architect and town planner, and his partner Barry Parker, won the competition run by First Garden City Ltd. to plan Letchworth, an area 34 miles outside London.[9] Unwin and Parker planned the town in the centre of the Letchworth estate with Howard's large agricultural greenbelt surrounding the town, and they shared Howard's notion that the working class deserved better and more affordable housing. However, the architects ignored Howard's symmetric design, instead replacing it with a more ‘organic’ design.[10]

Letchworth slowly attracted more residents because it brought in manufacturers through low taxes, low rents and more space.[11] Despite Howard's best efforts, the home prices in this garden city could not remain affordable for blue-collar workers to live in. The populations comprised mostly skilled middle class workers. After a decade, the First Garden City became profitable and started paying dividends to its investors.[12] Although many viewed Letchworth as a success, it did not immediately inspire government investment into the next line of garden cities.

In reference to the lack of government support for garden cities, Frederic James Osborn, a colleague of Howard and his eventual successor at the Garden City Association, recalled him saying, "The only way to get anything done is to do it yourself."[13] Likely in frustration, Howard bought land at Welwyn to house the second garden city in 1919.[14] The purchase was at auction, with money Howard desperately and successfully borrowed from friends. The Welwyn Garden City Corporation was formed to oversee the construction. But Welwyn did not become self-sustaining because it was only 20 miles from London.[15]

Even until the end of the 1930s, Letchworth and Welwyn remained as the only existing garden cities in the United Kingdom. However, the movement did succeed in emphasizing the need for urban planning policies that eventually led to the New Town movement.[16]

Garden cities

An attempt at a garden city: Zlín in Czech Republic (architect: František Lydie Gahura)

Howard organised the Garden City Association in 1899. Two garden cities were built using Howard's ideas: Letchworth Garden City and Welwyn Garden City, both in the county of Hertfordshire, England, United Kingdom. Howard's successor as chairman of the Garden City Association was Sir Frederic Osborn, who extended the movement to regional planning.[17]

The concept was adopted again in the UK after World War II, when the New Towns Act spurred the development of many new communities based on Howard's egalitarian ideas.

The idea of the garden city was influential in other countries, including the United States. Examples include Residence Park in New Rochelle, New York; Woodbourne in Boston; Newport News, Virginia's Hilton Village; Pittsburgh's Chatham Village; Garden City, New York (parenthetically, the name "Garden City," as it applied to the Stewart-designed city on Long Island, incorporated in 1869, pre-dates that of the garden city movement, which was established some years later near the end of the nineteenth century); Sunnyside, Queens; Jackson Heights, Queens; Forest Hills Gardens, also in the borough of Queens, New York; Radburn, New Jersey; Greenbelt, Maryland; Buckingham in Arlington County, Virginia; the Lake Vista neighborhood in New Orleans; Norris, Tennessee; Baldwin Hills Village in Los Angeles; and the Cleveland suburbs of Parma[18] and Shaker Heights.

Greendale, Wisconsin is one of three "greenbelt" towns planned beginning in 1935 under the direction of Rexford Guy Tugwell, head of the United States Resettlement Administration, under authority of the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act. The two other greenbelt towns are Greenbelt, Maryland (near Washington, D.C.) and Greenhills, Ohio (near Cincinnati). The greenbelt towns not only provided work and affordable housing, but also served as a laboratory for experiments in innovative urban planning. Greendale's plan was designed between 1936 and 1937 by a staff headed by Joseph Crane, Elbert Peets, Harry Bentley, and Walter C. Thomas for a site that had formerly consisted of 3,400 acres (14 km2) of farmland.

In Canada, the Ontario towns of Don Mills (now incorporated into the City of Toronto) and Walkerville are, in part, garden cities, as well as the Montreal suburb of Mount Royal. The historic Townsite of Powell River, British Columbia[19] and the Hydrostone district of Halifax, Nova Scotia are recognized as National Historic Sites of Canada[20] built upon the Garden City Movement. In Montreal, la Cité-jardin du Tricentenaire is a classic form of Garden City located near the Olympic Stadium. All streets are cul-de-sacs and are linked via pedestrian paths to the community park.

Svit in Slovakia - originally in 1934 planned as a combination of an industrial and garden city.

In Peru, there is a long tradition in urban design[a] that has been reintroduced in its architecture more recently. In 1966, the 'Residencial San Felipe' in Lima's district of Jesus Maria was built using the Garden City concept.[21]

In São Paulo, Brazil, several neighbourhoods were planned as Garden Cities, such as Jardim América, Jardim Europa, Alto da Lapa, Alto de Pinheiros, Jardim da Saúde and Cidade Jardim (Garden City in Portuguese). Goiânia, capital of Goiás state, and Maringá are also examples of Garden Cities.

In Argentina, an example is Ciudad Jardín Lomas del Palomar, declared by the influential Argentinian professor of engineering, Carlos María della Paolera, founder of "Día Mundial del Urbanismo" (World Urbanism Day), as the first Garden City in South America.

In Australia, the suburb of Colonel Light Gardens in Adelaide, South Australia, was designed according to Garden City principles.[22] So too the town of Sunshine which is now a suburb of Melbourne in Victoria and the suburb of Lalor, also in Melbourne. The Peter Lalor Estate in Lalor takes its name from a leader of the Eureka Stockade and remains today in its original form. However it is under threat from developers and Whittlesea Council.[23][24] Lalor:Peter Lalor Home Building Cooperative 1946-2012 Scollay, Moira. Pre-dating these was the garden suburb of Haberfield in 1901 by Richard Stanton, organised on a vertical integrated model from land subdivision, mortgage financing, house and interior designs and site landscaping.[25]

Garden city ideals were employed in the original town planning of Christchurch, New Zealand. Prior to the earthquakes of 2010 and 2011, the city infrastructure and homes were well integrated into green spaces. The rebuild blueprint rethought the garden city concept and how it would best suit the city. Greenbelts and urban greenspaces have been redesigned to incorporate more living spaces.

Garden City principles greatly influenced the design of colonial and post-colonial capitals during the early part of the 20th century. This is the case for New Delhi (designed as the new capital of British India after World War I), of Canberra (capital of Australia established in 1913) and of Quezon City (established in 1939, capital of the Philippines from 1948–76). The garden city model was also applied to many colonial hill stations, such as Da Lat in Vietnam (est. 1907) and Ifrane in Morocco (est. 1929).

In Bhutan's capital city Thimphu the new plan, following the Principles of Intelligent Urbanism, is an organic response to the fragile ecology. Using sustainable concepts, it is a contemporary response to the garden city concept.

The Garden City movement also influenced the Scottish urbanist Sir Patrick Geddes in the planning of Tel Aviv, Israel, in the 1920s, during the British Mandate for Palestine. Geddes started his Tel Aviv plan in 1925 and submitted the final version in 1927, so all growth of this garden city during the 1930s was merely "based" on the Geddes Plan. Changes were inevitable.[26]

The Garden City movement was even able to take root in South Africa, with the development of the suburbs of Pinelands and Edgemead in Cape Town.

In Italy, the INA-Casa plan - a national public housing plan from the 1950s and '60s - designed several suburbs according to Garden City principles: examples are found in many cities and towns of the country, such as the Isolotto suburb in Florence, Falchera in Turin, Harar in Milan, Cesate Villaggio in Cesate (part of the Metropolitan City of Milan), etc.

In Belgium the Garden City movement took roots in the 1920s. After the First World War, there was a huge need for new housing. Social housing associations were created, often linked to political movements. In Brussels, Antwerp and Ghent new extensions of the city were build. These houses are still very popular among residents and classified as historical heritage. In the former Czechoslovakia, all industrial cities founded or reconstructed by the Bata Shoes company (Zlín, Svit, Partizánske) were at least influenced by the conception of the Garden City.

The Epcot Center in Bay Lake, Florida took some influence from Howard's Garden City concept while the park was still under construction.[27]

Singapore, a tropical city has over time incorporated various facets of the Garden City concept in its town plans to try and make the country a unique City in a Garden.[28] In the 1970s, the country started including concepts in its town plans to ensure that building codes and land use plans made adequate provisions for greenery and nature to become part of community development, thereby providing a great living environment. In 1996, the National Parks Board was given the mandate to spearhead the development and maintenance of greenery and bring the island's green spaces and parks to the community.[29]

List of garden cities

The localities in following lists have been developed directly as Garden Cities or their development has been heavily influenced by the Garden City movement.

United Kingdom and Ireland

• Letchworth Garden City, England, United Kingdom
• Welwyn Garden City, England, United Kingdom
• Bedford Park, London, United Kingdom
• Hampstead Garden Suburb, London, United Kingdom
• Penkhull Garden Village, Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom
• St Helier, London, United Kingdom
• Milton Keynes, England, United Kingdom
• Telford, United Kingdom
• Bournville Village, Birmingham UK
• Moor Pool, Birmingham, United Kingdom
• The Garden Village, Kingston upon Hull, United Kingdom
• Glenrothes, Scotland, United Kingdom
• Marino, Dublin, Ireland
• Rosyth, Scotland, United Kingdom
• Tadpole Garden Village, Swindon UK

North America

• The Public Works Administration of the New Deal created three Greenbelt communities based on the ideas of Ebenezer Howard which are now the municipalities of Greenbelt, Maryland, Greenhills, Ohio, and Greendale, Wisconsin.
• Mariemont, Ohio is one of the first cities in the US to be pre-planned as a garden community
• Park Circle (ca. 1912), North Charleston, South Carolina, United States
• Cité-jardin du Tricentenaire (Tricentennial Garden-City) (1940–1947), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
• Gardenvale neighbourhood, Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec, Canada (ca. 1918)
• Town of Mount-Royal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
• Village Homes, Davis, California, United States
• Jackson Heights, Queens, New York City, United States
• Reston, Virginia, United States
• Sunnyside Gardens Historic District, Queens, New York, United States
• Epcot, Bay Lake, Florida
• Forest Hills, Boston
• Wyvernwood Garden Apartments, Los Angeles, California
• Fairview, Camden, New Jersey, United States
• Chatham Village, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
• Kapuskasing, Ontario, Canada
• Radburn, New Jersey


• Garden City, Suresne, Suresne, designed by Alexandre Maistrasse, Julien Quoniam and Félix Dumail
• Garden City, Stains, Stains, designed by Eugène Gonnot and Georges Albenque
• Garden City, Pré-Saint-Gervais, Pré-Saint-Gervais, designed by Félix Dumail

South America

• Ciudad Jardín Lomas del Palomar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
• Viña del Mar, Chile
• Maringá, Brazil

Australia and New Zealand

• Colonel Light Gardens, Adelaide, Australia
• Garden City, Victoria, in inner bayside Melbourne
• Peter Lalor Housing Estate, Lalor, Victoria, Australia
• The Sunshine Estate, Sunshine, Victoria, Australia
• Canberra, Australia
• Christchurch, New Zealand
• Wundowie, Western Australia


• Covaresa, Valladolid, Spain
• Frohnau, Berlin, Germany
• Garbatella, Rome, Italy
• Gartenstadt [de], Mannheim, Germany
• Giszowiec, Katowice, Poland
• Hellerau, Dresden, Germany
• Konstancin-Jeziorna, Poland
• Mežaparks, Riga, Latvia
• Milanówek, Poland
• Svit, Slovakia
• Podkowa Leśna, Poland
• Tapiola, Finland
• Ullevål Hageby, Norway
• Velenje, Slovenia
• Wekerle estate, Budapest, Hungary
• Zelenograd, Moscow, Russia
• Zlín, Czech Republic


• Den-en-chōfu, Ōta, Tokyo, Japan
• Kowloon Tong, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China
• Menteng, Jakarta, Indonesia
• Polonia, Medan, Indonesia
• Sha Tin, New Territories, Hong Kong, China
• Tel Aviv, Israel


• Edgemead, Cape Town, South Africa[30]
• Pinelands, Cape Town, South Africa


While garden cities were praised for being an alternative to overcrowded and industrial cities, along with greater sustainability, garden cities were often criticized for damaging the economy, being destructive of the beauty of nature, and being inconvenient. According to A. Trystan Edwards, garden cities lead to desecration of the country side by trying to recreate country side houses that could spread themselves; however, this was not a possible feat due to the limited space they had.[31]

More recently the environmental movement's embrace of urban density has offered an "implicit critique" of the garden city movement.[32] In this way the critique of the concept resembles critiques of other suburbanization models, though author Stephen Ward has argued that critics often do not adequately distinguish between true garden cities and more mundane dormitory city plans.[32]

It is often referred to as an urban design experiment which is typified by failure due to the laneways used as common entries and exits to the houses helping ghettoise communities and encourage crime; it has ultimately lead to efforts to 'de-Radburn' or partially demolish American Radburn designed public housing areas.[33]

When interviewed in 1998, the architect responsible for introducing the design to public housing in New South Wales, Philip Cox, was reported to have admitted with regards to an American Radburn designed estate in the suburb of Villawood, "everything that could go wrong in a society went wrong," and "it became the centre of drugs, it became the centre of violence and, eventually, the police refused to go into it. It was hell."[33]


Contemporary town-planning charters like New Urbanism and Principles of Intelligent Urbanism originated with this movement. Today there are many garden cities in the world, but most of them have devolved to dormitory suburbs, which completely differ from what Howard aimed to create.[citation needed]

In 2007, the Town and Country Planning Association marked its 108th anniversary by calling for Garden City and Garden Suburb principles to be applied to the present New Towns and Eco-towns in the United Kingdom.[34] The campaign continued in 2013 with the publication in March of that year of "Creating Garden Cities and Suburbs Today - a guide for councils".[35] Also in 2013, Lord Simon Wolfson announced that he would award the Wolfson Economics Prize for the best ideas on how to create a new garden city.[citation needed]

In 2014 The Letchworth Declaration[36] was published which called for a body to accredit future garden cities in the UK. The declaration has a strong focus on the visible (architecture and layout) and the invisible (social, ownership and governance) architecture of a settlement. One result was the creation of the New Garden Cities Alliance as a community interest company. Its aim is to be complementary to groups like the Town and Country Planning Association and it has adopted TCPA garden city principles as well as those from other groups, including those from Cabannes and Ross's booklet 21st Century Garden Cities of To-morrow.[37]

New garden cities and towns

British Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne announced plans for a new garden city to be built at Ebbsfleet Valley, Kent, in early 2014, with a second also planned as an expansion of Bicester, Oxfordshire.[38][39] The United Kingdom government announced further plans for garden towns in 2015, supporting both the development of new communities in North Essex and support for sustainable and environmentally-friendly town development in Didcot, Oxfordshire.[40] A "Black Country Garden City" was announced in 2016 with plans to build 45,000 new homes in the West Midlands on brownfield sites.[41]

On 2 January 2017, plans for new garden villages, each with between 1,500 and 10,000 homes, and garden towns each with more than 10,000 houses were announced by the government.[42] These smaller projects have been proposed due to opposition of "urban sprawl" in the garden city projects, as well as such quick expansion to small communities. The first wave of villages to be approved by ministers are to be located in:

• Long Marston, Warwickshire
• Oxfordshire Cotswold, Oxfordshire
• Deenethorpe
• Culm, Devon
• Welborne, Hampshire
• West Carclaze, Cornwall
• Dunton Hills, Essex
• Spitalgate Heath, Lincolnshire
• Halsnead, Merseyside
• Longcross, Surrey
• Bailrigg, Lancashire
• Infinity Garden Village, Derbyshire
• St Cuthberts, Cumbria
• North Cheshire, Cheshire

The approved garden towns are to be located in:

• Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire
• Taunton, Somerset
• Harlow & Gilston, Essex-Hertfordshire


Diagrams from the 1898 edition

Ebenezer Howard, To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform.

Diagram No.1: The Three Magnets (Ebenezer Howard, To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform.)

Diagram No.2 (Ebenezer Howard, To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform.)

Diagram No.3 (Ebenezer Howard, To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform.)

Diagram No.4 (Ebenezer Howard, To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform.)

Diagram No.5 (Ebenezer Howard, To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform.)

Diagram No.6 (Ebenezer Howard, To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform.)

Diagram No.7 (Ebenezer Howard, To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform.)

Diagrams from the 1922 edition

Ebenezer Howard, Garden Cities of To-morrow.

Ebenezer Howard, Garden Cities of To-morrow.

Ebenezer Howard, Garden Cities of To-morrow.

Diagram No.1 (Ebenezer Howard, Garden Cities of To-morrow.)

Diagram No.2 (Ebenezer Howard, Garden Cities of To-morrow.)

Diagram No.3 (Ebenezer Howard, Garden Cities of To-morrow.)

Diagram No.4 (Ebenezer Howard, Garden Cities of To-morrow.)

"Den-en Toshi (Garden City)" Tokyo: Hakubunkan, 1907

"Den-en Toshi (Garden City)" Tokyo: Hakubunkan, 1907.

"Den-en Toshi (Garden City)" Tokyo: Hakubunkan, 1907.

Diagram No.1 ("Den-en Toshi (Garden City)" Tokyo: Hakubunkan, 1907.)

Diagram No.2 ("Den-en Toshi (Garden City)" Tokyo: Hakubunkan, 1907.)

"Den-en Toshi (Garden City)" Tokyo: Hakubunkan, 1907.

Garden suburbs

The concept of garden cities is to produce relatively economically independent cities with short commute times and the preservation of the countryside. Garden suburbs arguably do the opposite. Garden suburbs are built on the outskirts of large cities with no sections of industry. They are therefore dependent on reliable transport allowing workers to commute into the city.[43] Lewis Mumford, one of Howard’s disciples, explained the difference as "The Garden City, as Howard defined it, is not a suburb but the antithesis of a suburb: not a rural retreat, but a more integrated foundation for an effective urban life."[44]

The planned garden suburb emerged in the late 19th century as a by-product of new types of transportation were embraced by a newly prosperous merchant class. The first garden villages were built by English estate owners, who wanted to relocate or rebuild villages on their lands. It was in these cases that architects first began designing small houses. Early examples include Harewood and Milton Abbas. Major innovations that defined early garden suburbs and subsequent suburban town planning include linking villa-like homes with landscaped public spaces and roads.[45]

Despite the emergence of the garden suburb in England, the typology flowered in the second half of the 19th century in United States. There were generally two garden suburb typologies, the garden village and the garden enclave. The garden villages are spatially independent of the city but remain connected to the city by railroads, streetcars, and later automobiles. The villages often included shops and civic buildings. In contrast, garden enclaves are typically strictly residential and emphasize natural and private space, instead of public and community space. The urban form of the enclaves was often coordinated through the use of early land use controls typical of modern zoning, including controlled setbacks, landscaping, and materials.[46]

Garden suburbs were not part of Howard’s plan[47] and were actually a hindrance to garden city planning—they were in fact almost the antithesis of Howard’s plan, what he tried to prevent. The suburbanisation of London was an increasing problem which Howard attempted to solve with his garden city model, which attempted to end urban sprawl by the sheer inhibition of land speculation due to the land being held in trust, and the inclusion of agricultural areas on the city outskirts.[48]

Raymond Unwin, one of Howard’s early collaborators on the Letchworth Garden City project in 1907, became very influential in formalizing the garden city principles in the design of suburbs through his work Town Planning in Practice: An Introduction to the Art of Designing Cities and Suburbs (1909). [49] The book strongly influenced the Housing and Town Planning Act of 1909, which provided municipalities the power to develop urban plans for new suburban communities.[50]

Smaller developments were also inspired by the garden city philosophy and were modified to allow for residential “garden suburbs” without the commercial and industrial components of the garden city.[51] They were built on the outskirts of cities, in rural settings. Some notable examples being, in London, Hampstead Garden Suburb, the Sutton Garden Suburb in Benhilton, Sutton, Pinner's Pinnerwood conversation area and the 'Exhibition Estate' in Gidea Park and, in Liverpool, Wavertree Garden Suburb. The Gidea Park estate in particular was built during two main periods of activity, 1911 and 1934. Both resulted in some good examples of domestic architecture, by such architects as Wells Coates and Berthold Lubetkin. Thanks to such strongly conservative local residents’ associations as the Civic Society, both Hampstead and Gidea Park retain much of their original character.

However it is important to note Bournville Village Trust in SW Birmingham UK. This important residential development was associated with the growth of ‘Cadbury’s Factory in a Garden’. Here garden city principles are a fundamental part of the Trust’s activity. There are very tight restrictions applying to the properties here, no stonewall cladding, uPVC windows, and so on.

Park median in Avenida Ámsterdam, the "grand avenue" of the Mexico City subdivision Colonia Hipódromo de la Condesa, designed in 1926 and inspired in part by Ebenezer Howard's Garden City

Howard's influence reached as far as Mexico City, where architect José Luis Cuevas was influenced by the garden city concept in the design of two of the most iconic inner-city subdivisions, Colonia Hipódromo de la Condesa (1926) and Lomas de Chapultepec (1928-9):[52]

• In 1926, Colonia Hipódromo[53] (a.k.a. Hipódromo de la Condesa), in what is now known as the Condesa area, including its iconic parks Parque México and Parque España
• In 1928-29, Lomas de Chapultepec

The subdivisions were based on the principles of the garden city as promoted by Ebenezer Howard, including ample parks and other open spaces, park islands in the middle of “grand avenues”, such as Avenida Amsterdam in colonia Hipódromo.[52] One unique example of a garden suburb is the Humberstone Garden Suburb in the United Kingdom by the Humberstone Anchor Tenants’ Association in Leicestershire, and it is the only garden suburb ever to be built by the members of a workers’ co-operative; it remains intact to the present.[54] In 1887 the workers of the Anchor Shoe Company in Humberstone formed a workers' cooperative and built 97 houses.

American architects and partners, Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin[55] were proponents of the movement and after their arrival in Australia to design the national capital Canberra, they produced a number of garden suburb estates, most notably at Eaglemont with the Glenard and Mount Eagle Estates and the Ranelagh and Milleara Estates in Victoria.

See also

• Gardening portal
• Charles Reade
• City Beautiful movement

Related urban design concepts

• Transition Towns
• European Urban Renaissance
• Transit Oriented Development
• Urban forest
• Principles of Intelligent Urbanism
• Subsistence Homesteads Division
• Soviet urban planning ideologies of the 1920s
• EPCOT (concept)


1. Examples being the ancient city of Chan Chan (20 km2 (7.7 sq mi), 850 AD) in Trujillo, north of Lima, and the 12th-century Inca city of Machu Picchu. Peru's modern capital, Lima, was designed in 1535 by Spanish Conquistadors to replace its ancient past as a religious sanctuary with 37 pyramids.



1. Caves, R. W. (2004). Encyclopedia of the City. Routledge. p. 281.
2. Goodall, B (1987), Dictionary of Human Geography, London: Penguin.
3. Howard, E (1902), Garden Cities of To-morrow (2nd ed.), London: S. Sonnenschein & Co, pp. 2–7.
4. Fainstein & Campbell 2003, p. 42.
5. Hardy 1999, p. 4.
6. Fainstein & Campbell 2003, p. 43.
7. Fainstein & Campbell 2003, p. 46.
8. Fainstein & Campbell 2003, p. 47.
9. Hall 2002, p. 68.
10. Fainstein & Campbell 2003, p. 48.
11. Fainstein & Campbell 2003, p. 50.
12. Hall 2002, p. 100.
13. Hall & Ward 1998, pp. 45–7.
14. Hardy 1999, p. 8.
15. Hall & Ward 1998, p. 46.
16. Hall & Ward 1998, pp. 52–3.
17. History 1899–1999 (PDF), TCPA, archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-27.
18. Horley, Robert (1998). The Best Kept Secrets of Parma, "The Garden City". Robert Horley. ISBN 0-9661721-0-8.
19. "{title}". Archived from the original on 2018-08-08. Retrieved 2018-10-25.
20. "{title}". Archived from the original on 2013-10-05. Retrieved 2013-02-03.
21. 37676518 (photogram), Panoramio, archived from the original on 2017-06-25, retrieved 2017-12-02.
22. "City of Mitcham - History Pages". Archived from the original on 2009-10-12. Retrieved 2009-09-08.
23. "HV McKay memorial gardens", Victorian Heritage Database, Vic, AU: The Government, archivedfrom the original on 2009-12-04, retrieved 2009-08-28.
24. "2000 Study Site N 068—Albion—HO Selwyn Park", Post-contact Cultural Heritage Study (PDF), Vic, AU: Brimbank City Council, archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-10-22.
25. Sue Jackson-Stepowski (2008). "Haberfield". Archived from the original on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2016-04-26.
26. Webberley, Helen (2008), Town-planning in a Brand New City, Brisbane: AAANZ Conference, archived from the original on 2010-01-12, retrieved 2009-01-25.
27. "{title}". Archived from the original on 2015-05-18. Retrieved 2015-05-14.
28. "City in a Garden" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-09-14. Retrieved 2017-02-19.
29. "National Parks Board". Archived from the original on 2017-02-26. Retrieved 2017-02-19.
30. "Over 90 years of community building". Archived from the original on 2014-09-24. Retrieved 2014-10-14.
31. A. Trystan Edwards (January 1914). "A Further Criticism of the Garden City Movement". The Town Planning Review. 4 (4): 312–318. JSTOR 40100071.
32. Stephen Ward (18 October 2005). The Garden City: Past, present and future. Routledge. pp. 205–. ISBN 978-1-135-82895-0.
33. Dylan Welch (2009-01-08). "Demolition ordered for Rosemeadow estate". The Sydney Morning Herald. Archived from the original on 2015-09-24. Retrieved 2015-09-17.
34. Garden Cities Archived 2013-08-12 at the Wayback Machine at Town and Country Planning Association
35. "Creating Garden Cities and Suburbs Today - a guide for councils" Archived 2013-07-06 at the Wayback Machine
36. Letchworth Declaration
37. Cabannes, Yves; Ross, Philip (2015-02-13). 21st Century Garden Cities of To-morrow: A manifesto. ISBN 978-1-291-47827-3.
38. "Ebbsfleet: Britain's first new garden city". The Telegraph. Archived from the original on 2016-09-20. Retrieved 1 July 2016.
39. "Bicester chosen as new garden city with 13,000 homes". BBC News. BBC. Archived from the original on 2016-07-17. Retrieved 1 July 2016.
40. "New garden towns to create thousands of new homes". United Kingdom Government. Archived from the original on 2016-09-17. Retrieved 1 July 2016.
41. "Black Country Garden City to get 45,000 new homes". BBC News. BBC. Archived from the original on 2016-10-01. Retrieved 1 July 2016.
42. "{title}". Archived from the original on 2018-01-16. Retrieved 2018-04-04.
43. Hall & Ward 1998, p. 41.
44. Stern, Robert A.M.; Fishman, David; Tilove, Jacob (2013). Paradise Planned: The Garden Suburb and the Modern City. The Monacelli Press. pp. 17–19. ISBN 1580933262.
45. Stern, Robert A.M.; Fishman, David; Tilove, Jacob (2013). Paradise Planned: The Garden Suburb and the Modern City. The Monacelli Press. ISBN 1580933262.
46. Stern, Robert A.M.; Fishman, David; Tilove, Jacob (2013). Paradise Planned: The Garden Suburb and the Modern City. The Monacelli Press. p. 48. ISBN 1580933262.
47. Hall, Peter (1996), "4", Cities of Tomorrow, Oxford: BlackWell.
48. Design on the Land.
49. Hall 2002, pp. 110–12.
50. Stern, Robert A.M.; Fishman, David; Tilove, Jacob (2013). Paradise Planned: The Garden Suburb and the Modern City. The Monacelli Press. p. 214. ISBN 1580933262.
51. Hollow, Matthew (2011). "Suburban Ideals on England's Interwar Council Estates". Archived from the original on 2013-08-11. Retrieved 2012-12-29.
52. Manuel Sánchez de Carmona; et al., El trazo de Las Lomas y de la Hipódromo Condesa (PDF)(in Spanish), archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-10-29
53. ""Histoira de la Arquitectura Mexicana", Gabriela Piña Olivares, Autonomous University of Hidalgo" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2013-10-29. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
54. "Humberstone Garden Suburb". UK: Utopia Britannica. Archived from the original on 2011-07-18. Retrieved 2011-03-28.
55. Goad, Philip (2012). The Encyclopedia of Australian Architecture. Cambridge University Press.


Works cited

• Fainstein, S; Campbell, S (2003), Readings in planning theory, Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell.
• Hall, P (2002), Cities of Tomorrow (3rd ed.), Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell.
• ———; Ward, C (1998), Sociable Cities: the Legacy of Ebenezer Howard, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
• Hardy, D (1999), 1899–1999, London, England: Town and Country Planning Association.
• Meacham, Standish. Regaining Paradise: Englishness and the Early Garden City Movement (1999).
• Ross, P; Cabannes, Y (2012), 21st Century Garden Cities of To-morrow - How to become a Garden City, Letchworth Garden City: New Garden City Movement.

External links

• Sir Ebenezer Howard and the Garden City Movement Norman Lucey 1973
• Patrick Barkham Britain’s housing crisis: are garden cities the answer? 2 October 2014
• L. Bigon and Y. Katz (eds 2014), Garden Cities and Colonial Planning: Transnationality and Urban Ideas in Africa and Palestine Manchester, New York: Manchester University Press.
• Nature Meets Culture: Poland’s Garden Cities
Site Admin
Posts: 32368
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Return to Articles & Essays

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests