Dilemma of the New Urbanists

Can success spoil a good movement? "Hybrid" new-urbanist developments are stealing the look and ignoring the principles of neo-traditional development. In the process buyers, planners and public officials are being misled. <a name="more"></a><br />
&nbsp;<br />
It's understandable for reformers in any generation, whatever their target might be, to pick a name that suggests freshness and stigmatizes the existing establishment as tired and stale and out of touch with reality. That's how we got the New Deal, the New Frontier, the New Politics, the New Left, the New Right, the New Democrats, and roughly two-thirds of all the intellectual fads in American public life in the 20th century. Calling something "New" is the least expensive way to create an aura of significance and persuade magazines and columnists to pay attention. On the other hand, I've never heard of a "New" anything that didn't create problems for itself sooner or later by making novelty part of its name.