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.
Well considering that you find Austin demographics comparable to west coast cities proves everyone’s point that Austin is a white town.
Seriously? I compared it to Sacramento and San Diego. Neither of those cities are white. San Diego is a border town... Seattle and especially Portland are pretty white, much more so than Austin. Same with pretty much any city in the Midwest (Pittsburgh, Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Minneapolis etc) or Mountain West (Denver, SLC, Boise). Austin not so much.
Atlanta demo is similar to LA in the respect that blacks are over represented in Fulton county, the same way Hispanics are over represented in LA county
Austin is a white city in a particular way. Its time in the national cognizant and it’s growth and culture in the new millennium has been 100% defined by massive growth in white population-particularly white millennials. They are driving the cultural expansion of Austin and shaping it in the 21st century more so than a typical metro or city. Also the lack of a large black population in the core or traditional high density minority ‘ghettoes’ makes it seem as if it’s a city defined by modern white urbanism.
I tend to take the middle road between the arguments being made about Austin:
-On one hand comparing Austin to Portland or Denver on a demographic level is unfair. Austin is a lot more diverse than either of those. Its pretty comparable to Charlotte to me. An overall white city but with healthy numbers of minorities (Hispanics in Austin and African Americans in Charlotte). It is certainly more diverse than other cities that cater to that demographic on a statistical level and I agree it is more diverse than it gets credit for.
-However, in my opinion, Austin's culture is no where near as diverse as its demographic statistics. The city and the culture of the city is overwhelmingly white. Austin just feels much whiter than it is. The target audience for Austin is white liberals. The people who fawn over Austin are almost universally white liberals. Where this seems to be an issue for the minority communities comes in the form of gentrification. Austin could write a book on that topic and while its not all bad, it does have the habit of pushing poorer minorities out of their neighborhoods and white hipsters and yupies tend to be the beneficiaries. As such, Austin is viewed as racially regressive to the extent that its politically progressive.
At the end of the day though, Im a statistical person so I somewhat default to my first point. I only comment on Austin because I know it so well.
Chicago is 1/3+ White then Latino 1/3 that wish said to have passed the African American 1/3 in 2016. By far Mexican yes. But even Wikipedia adds a White total at 45% Since many Hispanics are seen as White to. But when European White is split. The city is more broke down in these 1/3's
According to census data, the racial makeup of Houston was: White: 50.5% (25.6% non-Hispanic) Black or African American: 23.7% American Indian: 0.7% Asian: 6% Pacific Islander: 0.1% Other race: 15.2% (0.2% non-Hispanic) Two or more races: 3.3% Hispanic of any race: 43.8%
Chicago's none Hispanic White is 1/3 in Houston its 1/4. Hispanics are 1/3 in Chicago and 44% in Houston. But as with Chicago and most cities. Many are seen as White too. So the 50% White is adding Hispanics as White too.
Afro-Hispanic is not greatly used. I don't think the US census does? But again. Many Hispanic are listed as White to. Only reason Houston hits 50% White depending on how you count. It is still higher Hispanic then Chicago.
True Chicago Hispanics are highest as Mexican. That isn't changing.
Chicago's Hispanic community is just skewing heavy towards Mexicans much more so than in the past. Its actually becoming less diverse. Its not a big deal, its just the way the city is going.
Between 2013 and 2018, Chicagoland gained 85,842 new Hispanic residents. Of those, 68,012 are Mexican. Thats 79% of its entire Hispanic growth. That's skewed more heavily towards one group than almost any other major metro area.
Ill run numbers for all the major Hispanic metro areas in the morning when I have more time.
I tend to take the middle road between the arguments being made about Austin:
-On one hand comparing Austin to Portland or Denver on a demographic level is unfair. Austin is a lot more diverse than either of those. Its pretty comparable to Charlotte to me. An overall white city but with healthy numbers of minorities (Hispanics in Austin and African Americans in Charlotte). It is certainly more diverse than other cities that cater to that demographic on a statistical level and I agree it is more diverse than it gets credit for.
-However, in my opinion, Austin's culture is no where near as diverse as its demographic statistics. The city and the culture of the city is overwhelmingly white. Austin just feels much whiter than it is. The target audience for Austin is white liberals. The people who fawn over Austin are almost universally white liberals. Where this seems to be an issue for the minority communities comes in the form of gentrification. Austin could write a book on that topic and while its not all bad, it does have the habit of pushing poorer minorities out of their neighborhoods and white hipsters and yupies tend to be the beneficiaries. As such, Austin is viewed as racially regressive to the extent that its politically progressive.
At the end of the day though, Im a statistical person so I somewhat default to my first point. I only comment on Austin because I know it so well.
I understand the second point regarding the black community. Austin's African American community is historically confined to a relatively small section of the city. Austin has always been a very white collar city--the primary industries are government, education, and technology--and it never gained as large of a black population as DFW, Houston, or cities in the deep south did. As the city has grown, that population has remained stagnant, and in many cases has been displaced to suburbs. That is all true.
The Hispanic community on the other hand is very large and extremely influential on the culture of the city. I mean the primary regional cuisine Tex-Mex! Austin's "whiteness" is kind of like another discussion on this forum about Sacramento's weather: Austin is right next to San Antonio and South Texas, which are extremely Hispanic. Relative to that, Austin is white. Relative to the USA as a whole Austin has a very large Hispanic population, much like Sacramento actually has pretty nice weather (if not quite the Bay Area or LA).
Austin has some racist politics deep in its history (what US city doesn't again?), but I think the racial aspects of modern day gentrification is WAY overplayed. The reason why white people started moving in droves to the east side is because they got priced out of the west side. It's really that simple. Austin has had a lot of new money come into the city and displace poorer existing residents, regardless of their skin color. You are allowed to not like this element of Austin, but that doesn't make it a "white city", that's just nonsensical.
Austin is a white city in a particular way. Its time in the national cognizant and it’s growth and culture in the new millennium has been 100% defined by massive growth in white population-particularly white millennials. They are driving the cultural expansion of Austin and shaping it in the 21st century more so than a typical metro or city. Also the lack of a large black population in the core or traditional high density minority ‘ghettoes’ makes it seem as if it’s a city defined by modern white urbanism.
Isn't most of that true with most cities?
And Austin is still twice as Hispanic as the national average, and only a few percentage points black behind the national average.
East Austin right across I35 at one time was black Austin before they were priced out there communities due to gentrification. Liberal Austin for years knew it had a image problem amongst black Americans and they did absolutely nothing to try to mitigate the problem by making Austin more hospitable for people of color, which in-turn would have helped the city retain it black numbers. Instead they followed in the same steps as cities out in California not giving a damn about the state of their respective black communities. I’m personally not a big fan of the liberal ideology because history continues to show black people regress in cities dominated by liberals.
Last edited by Exult.Q36; 12-01-2019 at 11:53 PM..
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.
