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.
As far as great points: back at you on the ones you made here. I was unaware of the home ownership you mentioned on the South Side and what you said made a lot of sense. I think there are other factors at play. The North and South sides have always had a feel of being different cities. I don’t think a lot of North Siders would consider moving to the South Side because it seems like a different world. Always has..long before race was an issue.
I think another thing of note not considered is that when black people bought homes back then, it was cheap. In my part of Beverly, homes sold for $20k back in the day. So for those who were able to keep up with their mortgages, those homes are paid for. I just think the people who stay in these areas are just not as transient. Like I said. They stay put.
The south side--the far south side anyway--has a slightly more suburan feel to it, so far many north-siders, yeah, it's a different world.
Just a couple of footnotes to add to the "it's complicated" narrative:
--Some of you may recall that Martin Luther King came to Chicago in the last year of his life, as his civil rights campaign was beginning to broaden into an activist movement on behalf of the poor and dispossessed across the board. I've read reports saying that he was taken aback by the virulence of the white protesters in the neighborhoods he visited on the city's northwest side.
And, of course, recall the campaign the guy who challenged Harold Washington ran: "Upton. Before it's too late." (Not to mention the reaction of the white members of the Board of Aldermen - all Democrats like Washington, with maybe a few exceptions - after he won.)
--I can conjure up some similar tales from Philadelphia, whose neighborhoods aren't as segregated in the broad sense as Chicago's are (IOW, it isn't like an entire section of the city is white and another is black) but rather have a patchwork-quilt quality to them (this South Philly neighborhood is white, that one's Asian, that one over there's black, and that one on the other side is gentrifying). Both of them involve the same mayor to boot: the larger-than-life Frank Rizzo.
He did play to racial fears in his unsuccessful campaign to amend the City Charter so that he could seek a third term in office, urging people to "vote white." Yet I have also heard about an incident in which white residents of a section of Kensington were harassing a black family that moved into it, and Rizzo came up to the neighborhood and told them to cut it out - "we don't tolerate that sort of thing here." (The word never got to Fishtown, which changed in that regard only when it gentrified.)
So, I guess, saying both cities are segregated both is true and hides as much as it reveals.
I think another thing of note not considered is that when black people bought homes back then, it was cheap. In my part of Beverly, homes sold for $20k back in the day. So for those who were able to keep up with their mortgages, those homes are paid for. I just think the people who stay in these areas are just not as transient. Like I said. They stay put.
The south side--the far south side anyway--has a slightly more suburan feel to it, so far many north-siders, yeah, it's a different world.
that has to be really far south. I was born in South Shore and it is totally urban.
that has to be really far south. I was born in South Shore and it is totally urban.
When I say suburban, I don't necessarily mean cookie-cutter, strip-mall-y suburban, but rather just more quiet, residental, family-oriented and you don't feel the congestion like the north side, Hyde Park or South Shore (plus there is parking lol). It still has access to CTA and Metra and the houses are mostly very unique on many streets.
For example, on the far south side it is mostly single-family homes. It doesn't have the large courtyard apartment buildings all over the place like the north side, Hype Park, South Shore or even Evanston, though South Shore has a good mix of single-family homes. The housing stock is also very different from what you'll see in South Shore. Mostly colonials, two-story wood frames, split-levels, ranches and raised ranches. There are some brick bungalows, but not nearly as many as what you'd see in South Shore or other neighorboods. Sure there are two and three-flat buildings, and there are a few bigger buildings but that's about it. I notice there are more apartment buildings in the western part of Beverly closer to Evergreen Park or going southwest into the 100's than the part of Beverly that borders Washington Heights where I grew up.
You also aren't going to find a restaurant and bar scene or nightlife in the black part of Beverly, which is mostly blue-collar. It's mostly take-out places. I don't think blue-collar African-Americans put as much of an emphasis on living close to restaurants and nightlife as white Americans or even white-collar professional blacks. And not it's because they can't afford to go to restaurants and such. The blue-collar blacks in these areas I am describing actually make really good money and live in nice (and often huge) homes. I just don't think they care about that as much. This is a personal observation, anyway. But then, the white part is historically blue-collar (police and fireman) also. You start getting more of the sit-down restaurants further west in the white part of Beverly or going into Morgan Park, then the suburbs of Evergreen Park and Oaklawn. At least South Shore has a couple of House music spots.
For a point of reference, the black part of Beverly is east and the white part is west.
Last edited by Atlanta_BD; 06-25-2018 at 08:28 AM..
Chicago, sadly! Just ride one of the north-south CTA lines and you'll notice the demographics will change as you continue along the line (applies to both northbound, and southbound)...
While Chicago should absolutely win this poll, anyone arguing a city is all integrated and dandy are living in glass houses.
Almost all US cities with a population over a few hundred thousand or so have a bad side and lets not kid ourselves, that is always the black/hispanic side.
Its awful that it is like this. I am in the middle politically and see both sides, but when people mention NYC I laugh. NYC is more integrated than Chicago, but I have many African American friends who could not afford Brooklyn, then moved to Hamilton Heights, now burbs of NYC due to.......Gentrification.
So yes, the entire south side and west side, minus a few areas of Chicago are all African american and hispanic. Only mixed your gonna find in Chicago is Rogers Park/Edgewater/Uptown and Logan Square, but LS has been gentrifying as well.
I wish their was a solution to the poverty issue in America, but every large city has it and both parties have failed.
How did San Diego even get consideration here? It's one of the most diverse and least segregated cities in the country.
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.
