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.
The towns in Colorado are all "possible" rather than yes, and some of them are laughable. Colorado Springs? It's a military town with lots of diversity, not as anti-outsider as many CO towns.
If Llewellyn Park was the first "gated community" as the site claims, were the gates intended to keep particular people out?
They were intended to keep out anyone who didn't live there. It was and remains an exclusive community for the wealthy. I do not know if it had racial covenants; it was built somewhat before they became popular, and I've read articles suggesting it did not.
The towns in Colorado are all "possible" rather than yes, and some of them are laughable. Colorado Springs? It's a military town with lots of diversity, not as anti-outsider as many CO towns.
I think it's referring to conditions a long time ago not now. The author was rather broad including any place that excluded minority residents in some way.
They were intended to keep out anyone who didn't live there. It was and remains an exclusive community for the wealthy. I do not know if it had racial covenants; it was built somewhat before they became popular, and I've read articles suggesting it did not.
Not in the 1850s--but it was a safe assumption that a nonwhite customer would have been sternly refused. Racial covenants didn't really come into use until the 1920s, when people concerned about racial purity started getting alarmed about the possibility of people selling to nonwhite customers in their new housing developments.
I think it's referring to conditions a long time ago not now. The author was rather broad including any place that excluded minority residents in some way.
This.....Many of those places listed are suspected to possibly have been restrictive or a Sundown Town, but some are pretty vague in terms of fitting the criteria or not.
At least NYC has decent schools to choose from. I'm amused to the author's naive assumption:
I waited my whole life to move to New York so that I could raise my child in the most diverse city in the country -- or so it had appeared to me in magazines and The New York Times, and during the few brief visits I'd made as a teenager.
But the New York I encountered as a mother visiting public and independent schools was a far different place than the city I had imagined from afar. Though students in the city's public schools overall are 30 percent African American and 40 percent Hispanic, many of the schools I visited seemed at first glance to be identical to what I encountered in rural New England. They were largely full of white kids.
While these numbers do not differ drastically from last year, the numbers of minority students accepted did drop in specific schools.
Somehow asians don't count as minorities. Asians are a near majority in NYC magnet schools. Most come from working-class immigrant families, they're not exactly privileged.
Not in the 1850s--but it was a safe assumption that a nonwhite customer would have been sternly refused. Racial covenants didn't really come into use until the 1920s, when people concerned about racial purity started getting alarmed about the possibility of people selling to nonwhite customers in their new housing developments.
Actually, in the 1850s, slavery was still being practiced.
Racial restrictions are older than than the 1920s. 1920s?1948: Racially Restrictive Covenants
**Racially restrictive covenants became common after 1926 after the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Corrigan v. Buckley, which validated their use. . . . The practice of private, racially restrictive covenants evolved as a reaction to the Great Migration of Southern blacks and in response to the 1917 Court ruling (see Buchanan v. Warley) which declared municipally mandated racial zoning unconstitutional. Buchanan dealt only with legal statutes, thus leaving the door open for private agreements, such as restrictive covenants, to continue to perpetuate residential segregation.**
It sounds like you're agreeing each other — you're quote says become common after 1926
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.
