Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Between 2000 and 2010, DFW gained more new black residents than any other metro in the US except Atlanta. That has to count for something.
Metro Dallas' black population is about twice that of Charlotte, so I wouldn't debate anyone ranking it above Charlotte. However I don't know where you got your 2000 to 2010 numbers from, but for the record, between 2006 and 2010 Charlotte attracted more blacks than Dallas according to the Brookings Institute.
I think Atlanta has to be at the top or very near the top of American cities where blacks have influence. Atlanta hasn't had a non black mayor since 1973. It's also, of course, the birthplace of MLK Jr., and his family and church continue to have a very strong influence here. Atlanta has also had a large black middle class that goes back for several decades. Besides that, many of the emerging trends in black music come from Atlanta.
Other than Atlanta, I'd say Houston, New Orleans, Detroit, Chicago and Oakland are strong black cities.
Metro Dallas' black population is about twice that of Charlotte, so I wouldn't debate anyone ranking it above Charlotte. However I don't know where you got your 2000 to 2010 numbers from, but for the record, between 2006 and 2010 Charlotte attracted more blacks than Dallas according to the Brookings Institute.
I think Atlanta has to be at the top or very near the top of American cities where blacks have influence. Atlanta hasn't had a non black mayor since 1973. It's also, of course, the birthplace of MLK Jr., and his family and church continue to have a very strong influence here. Atlanta has also had a large black middle class that goes back for several decades. Besides that, many of the emerging trends in black music come from Atlanta.
Other than Atlanta, I'd say Houston, New Orleans, Detroit, Chicago and Oakland are strong black cities.
And DC. It's pretty much equal with Atlanta in terms of Black influence.
There is no hard and fast rule, but the AA majority cities in the south have a lower violent crime rate, and some of the cities in the north that seem to have better economic opportunities also have a lower violent crime rate.
Because black people were already established in those cities. Right as the Great Migration was happening, the jobs dried up in the North. Add onto that the fact that the Northeast has plenty of struggling "white" people and always has, and it creates problems. People were fighting over a piece of a shrinking/smaller pie, and because of the way black people migrated in droves to cities like Philly, they were seen as "invaders" when it came to talking about the problems in these cities and who was "to blame".
From what I understand.. the original black population in the Northeast is different, probably because they're established.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Milehigh
First Black mayor of Chicago wasn't until '83.
First Black mayor of Philadelphia wasn't until '84.
First Black mayor of Houston wasn't until '97.
* Meanwhile back at the ranch, other cities that are have low black populations (e.g. Denver and Seattle) had Black mayors in '91 and '89 respectively. Denver is currently on it's 2nd Black Mayor in the past 20 years.
**So when the question is posed, I look to places like these that demonstrate true presence when they actually have decision-making ability within the entire city and not just from a community organizing perspective. I've lived in Atlanta, Chicago, and New York, all of which have the numbers. However, when it comes down to brass tax decisions, I wouldn't say that neither of the three stand out to me.
Seattle is one of the most white-influenced places in the country. Isn't Denver, too?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nairobi
Black New Yorkers are really the only group that felt remarkably different, to me, being from Houston. Black folks in DC, Chicago, and even Philadelphia seemed to have a bit of a "down home" flair, despite the fact that they're not southern.
Yeah, I can definitely understand that. Especially when you get to places like Wilmington, DE and Chester, PA. In the summer in this metro, it feels pretty damn Southern at times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nairobi
True, but the Africans here in Houston and the Caribbean blacks I've met from Florida seem to adapt and even fit into southern black culture pretty well.
Because it's the dominant culture there, just like the East Coast culture is the dominant culture in places like New York, Philly, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod
Or even Seattle. Even Portland's Northeast side is where the Black community is concentrated. Jefferson High in Portland may be one of a handful of high schools out West that are predominantly Black. Portland I believe has the oldest NAACP chapter out west. Denver is another Western city that has had Black folks in important positions.
In the Northeast, Hartford, Harrisburg, Buffalo and Rochester may be sleepers due having or had Black folks in important positions, as well as high percentages within city limits with select suburban areas with decent to high Black concentrations. There is a historical aspect to some degree as well(I.e.-Frederick Douglass living in Rochester for a while).
The Pacific Northwest is one of the least black places in the country.
And I've been to Harrisburg. It's definitely not. Don't get me wrong, there's black people there and they have communities, sure, but Central PA in general is very white-influenced, with the possible exception of Lancaster... maybe.
I'd say a more accurate choice would be Chester, PA or Wilmington, DE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlite
You have to look at a bunch of things to make a judgement on this, not just one indicator. For example, Los Angeles elected a black mayor in 1973, who remained mayor until 1993 (since then the mayors have been white and Latino). But the black proportion of LA's population was lower than a lot of Northeastern or Southern cities. The black share was higher then, mostly because the Latino population has grown so much since then. But Tom Bradley in particular, and black activists generally, were able to make an effective coalition with liberal whites, especially Jews, and get Bradley elected and re-elected.
Oakland has always had a higher proportion of black population in San Francisco. But black people were always a presence in the city's political and cultural life. Willie Brown was elected mayor in the 1980's, though many would argue he wasn't particularly oriented to black community interests. But San Francisco has gentrified so much, and the black population consequently declined so much, that the African-American public presence there has become weaker and weaker. Oakland is gentrifying too, and the last two mayors have been white and Asian respectively. But the process has gone more slowly in Oakland and the black public presence is still greater.
Out of the three, only Oakland seems all that "black", at any point. LA and SF may have had black communities but they never were the dominant influence or power in either city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77
And DC. It's pretty much equal with Atlanta in terms of Black influence.
How much influence do black people even have in DC? How much have they ever even had? I could ask the same question about Atlanta. They may be centers of black culture in a way, sure, and they may have had culture influence.... but aren't both cities mainly run by well-off white people?
Furthermore, do black people really have influence of any kind in those cities outside of their own communities (and maybe the immigrant ones, to an extent) ? It seems to me that it's more like they fit into a subset in many of these oft-cited "black" cities, whereas in a place like Detroit, Chicago, Oakland, Philly, even New York... they hold actual influence and power, as a community. I'd probably put Oakland in there too, and definitely cities like Memphis and New Orleans.
Why? Especially when DFW has ranked second for the past two decades?
Things change especially since Houston and DFW are ranked higher than Atlanta economically. Houston (from my recent visit) reminds me of Atlanta in its early 2000s period as far black growth and the massive construction. At my HBCU, more and more students that I know are moving to or are considering moving to Houston more than any other place. Of course, this is my opinion and I don't mean to offend anyone.
Because black people were already established in those cities. Right as the Great Migration was happening, the jobs dried up in the North.
Quote:
How much influence do black people even have in DC? How much have they ever even had? I could ask the same question about Atlanta. They may be centers of black culture in a way, sure, and they may have had culture influence.... but aren't both cities mainly run by well-off white people?
Furthermore, do black people really have influence of any kind in those cities outside of their own communities (and maybe the immigrant ones, to an extent) ? It seems to me that it's more like they fit into a subset in many of these oft-cited "black" cities, whereas in a place like Detroit, Chicago, Oakland, Philly, even New York... they hold actual influence and power, as a community. I'd probably put Oakland in there too, and definitely cities like Memphis and New Orleans.
Since the 70's and 80's, Blacks have occupied the highest offices in city government almost continuously in both Atlanta and DC.
Things change especially since Houston and DFW are ranked higher than Atlanta economically. Houston (from my recent visit) reminds me of Atlanta in its early 2000s period as far black growth and the massive construction. At my HBCU, more and more students that I know are moving to or are considering moving to Houston more than any other place. Of course, this is my opinion and I don't mean to offend anyone.
I'm guessing you're just not familiar with the numbers or are unfamiliar with DFW's story. Since DFW has ranked second in Black migration for the past two decades and is just as economically strong as Houston, I don't see what might cause it to jump ahead of DFW. Just seems a bit arbitrary is all.
I think it's pretty much a non-starter anyway. Atlanta's going through tough times right now, but not THAT tough. The gap between Atlanta and next couple cities is pretty big and I don't see Atlanta ceding that much ground, especially with all of its built-in Black cultural assets, institutions, and political structure.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
