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.
While that map is nice, it certainly doesn't tell the entire story. For instance, are they serious by not having any connection with Tennessee or Mississippi to St. Louis? Dont believe that at all.
I specifically asked for a source to support your statement that "It's not like blacks in NC started to mysteriously outbreed blacks in SC after the Civil War." Now you say it's a possibility that "the fertility rates for blacks in NC far outpaced that of blacks in SC."
OK.
C'mon, fam. I know you're smarter that that.
If the black population was larger in South Carolina than it was in North Carolina in 1920 and then that completely flips in 1930, there can only be a few distinct possibilities that could explain that phenomenon (a phenomenon that coincidentally occurred around the time of the Great Migration!).
Possibility #1
Blacks in NC had higher fertility rates than blacks in SC. For whatever reason, they just started outf*cking blacks in SC beginning in 1930. It's a possibility, sure. But Derrick Rose dressing for Game 7 and leading the Bulls to victory is also a possibility. Not all possibilities have the same degree of probability. So I'll say that this possibility was improbable.
Possibility #2
Blacks in SC had a higher mortality rate. Whether the cause was tuberculosis, cholera, yellow fever, lynchings, famine, war, the rapture or whatever, blacks in SC just died off a faster rate than blacks in NC. I'd say this is also highly unlikely.
Possiblity #3
More blacks moved to NC than SC. This is a stronger possibility. But as you mentioned upthread, it's not like many blacks were moving from one southern state to another back then, and the Reverse Great Migration would not commence in earnest for another four decades.
Possibility #4
More blacks left SC than NC. And they left at such a high rate that there weren't enough blacks being born in the state to replace the ones who left. If I were a black man living in a state with the Klan, Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats, I'd probably get the hell out of Dodge, too. And I don't think many people would contest the notion that South Carolina has had a far worse reputation for race relations than North Carolina. The state was the first to secede from the Union!
So yeah, we can piece together an answer from the very data you posted. What do you think?
While that map is nice, it certainly doesn't tell the entire story. For instance, are they serious by not having any connection with Tennessee or Mississippi to St. Louis? Dont believe that at all.
Well, you might wanna take that up with Henry Louis Gates or something. I just posted the map from the Atlas of African American History and Politics.
If the black population was larger in South Carolina than it was in North Carolina in 1920 and then that completely flips in 1930, there can only be a few distinct possibilities that could explain that phenomenon (a phenomenon that coincidentally occurred around the time of the Great Migration!).
Possibility #1
Blacks in NC had higher fertility rates than blacks in SC. For whatever reason, they just started outf*cking blacks in SC beginning in 1930. It's a possibility, sure. But Derrick Rose dressing for Game 7 and leading the Bulls to victory is also a possibility. Not all possibilities have the same degree of probability. So I'll say that this possibility was improbable.
Possibility #2
Blacks in SC had a higher mortality rate. Whether the cause was tuberculosis, cholera, yellow fever, lynchings, famine, war, the rapture or whatever, blacks in SC just died off a faster rate than blacks in NC. I'd say this is also highly unlikely.
Possiblity #3
More blacks moved to NC than SC. This is a stronger possibility. But as you mentioned upthread, it's not like many blacks were moving from one southern state to another back then, and the Reverse Great Migration would not commence in earnest for another four decades.
Possibility #4
More blacks left SC than NC. And they left at such a high rate that there weren't enough blacks being born in the state to replace the ones who left. If I were a black man living in a state with the Klan, Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats, I'd probably get the hell out of Dodge, too. And I don't think many people would contest the notion that South Carolina has had a far worse reputation for race relations than North Carolina. The state was the first to secede from the Union!
So yeah, we can piece together an answer from the very data you posted. What do you think?
Thanks for being more sensible as this post progresses.
All I'm saying was that your earlier statement, "Second, NC has had a larger black population 'ever since' because it has a greater inflow of blacks than SC and a smaller outflow. It's not like blacks in NC started to mysteriously outbreed blacks in SC after the Civil War" was a bit off. Obviously NC had a smaller outflow of Blacks, but nothing suggests it had a greater inflow during the period of the Great Migration. However, because more Blacks stayed in NC, there was also more reproduction going on in raw numbers as well.
But going back to some earlier statements you made:
[i]"I don't think the 'but the majority of [SC'ers] went to NYC' argument has much merit because the same could be said for NC."[/quote]
"So I'm waiting for someone to tell me where all of the Black South Carolinians went? Harlem? Sure, many did, but the numbers of Georgians and North Carolinians that left for the NYC Tri-State area were probably just as large (if not larger).'
I think you're misconstruing some things. Just because I argue that more native Black DC residents have ties to NC than SC and that more Blacks from SC went to NYC than DC, that doesn't mean I'm arguing that Blacks from NC didn't go to NYC in large numbers either.
All I'm saying was that your earlier statement, "Second, NC has had a larger black population 'ever since' because it has a greater inflow of blacks than SC and a smaller outflow. It's not like blacks in NC started to mysteriously outbreed blacks in SC after the Civil War" was a bit off. Obviously NC had a smaller outflow of Blacks, but nothing suggests it had a greater inflow during the period of the Great Migration. However, because more Blacks stayed in NC, there was also more reproduction going on in raw numbers as well.
But was there anything in my post that suggested that blacks were moving into NC during the Great Migration? When I said that North Carolina has had a larger black population "ever since" (1930), I'm talking about (1) the large outflows of blacks from SC and (2) the larger inflows into NC period. Both are reasons why NC has had a larger black population "ever since" (which would extend up to the present day). My point was not that more blacks started flowing into NC after 1920. I only offered that as a possible explanation (an obviously unlikely explanation) for the sudden change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77
think you're misconstruing some things. Just because I argue that more native Black DC residents have ties to NC than SC and that more Blacks from SC went to NYC than DC, that doesn't mean I'm arguing that Blacks from NC didn't go to NYC in large numbers either.
I understand that. But that wasn't what I was getting at.
As our evidence shows, there was a larger black population in SC than NC in 1920. By 1930, the reverse was true. So I think we can pretty much agree that there were more people leaving SC during this period than NC, right?
That said, the claim that more blacks in DC have connections to NC than SC rests on a critical assumption. We must assume that a larger share of blacks from SC went to places that were not DC than blacks from NC. For whatever reason (that no one here can establish), a larger share of black people from SC just kept on going whereas a larger share of black people from NC decided to call DC home. That's possible, but I just don't think it's very likely. There's no evidence to substantiate that theory and it's certainly not consistent with my own observations.
I didn't say that. I said maybe you should take it up with him since he's, I guess, the pre-eminent AA scholar now that John Hope Franklin is gone. If there's anyone who could get that map changed for you, I'm sure it would be him.
But was there anything in my post that suggested that blacks were moving into NC during the Great Migration? When I said that North Carolina has had a larger black population "ever since" (1930), I'm talking about (1) the large outflows of blacks from SC and (2) the larger inflows into NC period. Both are reasons why NC has had a larger black population "ever since" (which would extend up to the present day). My point was not that more blacks started flowing into NC after 1920. I only offered that as a possible explanation (an obviously unlikely explanation) for the sudden change.
I thought it was obvious that "ever since" was primarily in the context of the period of the Great Migration, which would be up to 1970. It certainly seemed as though you were implying that there might have possibly been an influx of Blacks into NC starting in the 1920's or so.
Quote:
As our evidence shows, there was a larger black population in SC than NC in 1920. By 1930, the reverse was true. So I think we can pretty much agree that there were more people leaving SC during this period than NC, right?
During the earlier part of the Great Migration, I would agree.
Quote:
That said, the claim that more blacks in DC have connections to NC than SC rests on a critical assumption. We must assume that a larger share of blacks from SC went to places that were not DC than blacks from NC. For whatever reason (that no one here can establish), a larger share of black people from SC just kept on going whereas a larger share of black people from NC decided to call DC home. That's possible, but I just don't think it's very likely. There's no evidence to substantiate that theory and it's certainly not consistent with my own observations.
But again, you can mistake absence of evidence with evidence of absence. The data may be out there, but I haven't located it. I think it's an interesting trend, however, and worth looking into further. I may eventually try and locate some research about the role of Black South Carolinians specifically as it relates to the Great Migration.
I didn't say that. I said maybe you should take it up with him since he's, I guess, the pre-eminent AA scholar now that John Hope Franklin is gone. If there's anyone who could get that map changed for you, I'm sure it would be him.
Or Jay-Z.
Not really. I'd rather get answers from a dead pig than from Henry Louis gates regarding our people but that's another topic.
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.
