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.
I stand by what I said before. I'm not going to defend or make excuses for these cities and the people who live in them when they keep voting for the politicians and policies that you admitted earlier have handicapped them.
I get how racial strifes in the past did a number on them, but at some point, they have to get beyond blaming their current problems on racism (it's 2020, not 1960) or being hostile to those who legitimately want to help them improve their cities and lives simply because they're so used to things being done a certain way.
You do understand this type of patronizing attitude won’t really win with folks down South, right? The whole “I’m a smart northerner here to help you dumb southerners” Schtick won’t win you any favors. It’s pretty antiquated and ignorant tbh...Being from Detroit, I’m sure you wouldn’t take to well to someone from Minneapolis or Chicago coming at you (“we’re here to help your city and tell you what you’re doing wrong!”) wouldn’t be received well neither. And I’ve met quite a few Detroiters who can be just as surly and scowling as the southerners you keep referring to, so I know they wouldn’t take to well to that.
What I don't understand is why don't the Progressives form their own party instead of usurping a fragmented and heterogenous (compared to the GOP) Democratic Party? The two-party system overall is a huge disservice to this country over the years, and I wish there were other organized, well-funded parties to counter this.
The Democrats had to pivot to the middle during this election against the hard right turn the GOP has taken over the years, and gains weren't really made in the House or Senate this time around neither. Unfortunately, America in general is not a progressive nation, and what sounds popular in NYC, California, or on Twitter doesn't necessarily appeal to a large swath of Middle America. What's progressive down South isn't the same thing on the coasts, and ideas implemented down there can't be the same as how they're done elsewhere. I'm a Democrat who embraces progressive ideas, but have had to learn to accept the sobering reality that some things just aren't going to happen by force or in the time that people expect. 45 didn't happen in a vacuum neither, he was the culmination of a lot of rumblings over the past 4 decades.
Also, don't be surprised if the GOP starts to reinvent and rebrand itself to appeal to working class Blacks and Hispanics within the next decade or so. Look at the increases in Black and Hispanic men who voted for 45 this last go-round. They could definitely make their mark known in these cities and states (MS, AL, LA, GA) if the Democrats and Progressives don't have a cogent message ready. The Progressives and Democrats overall better learn how to counter this movement if they want to remain a relevant party on down the road. Say what you will about the GOP, but they know how to stay on code and steamroll things while the Progressives and Democrats get bogged down in petty fights.
This is not a political thread, but the US is not a multi-party country so this wouldn't work. The Republican Party is just as fractured as the Dems and that's because our Democracy isn't set up to elect multiple parties of different viewpoints. That's why progressives are currently pushing for Ranked-Choice voting.
Source please because this is a pretty serious accusation that I see no evidence of. When has Bernie ever said anything negative about southern voters?
Let me rephrase that because it's not quite accurate. He wasn't patronizing (and for the record, I like the guy) but he was a bit dismissive of Black Southern voters. He also seems to have a bit of blind spot when it comes to issues of race by always going straight to economic issues. While there's no doubt there's a good bit of overlap there, swinging things back to Medicare for all or free college tuition doesn't work when we're talking about threats of violence from unhinged far rightwing neo-Nazi groups for instance.
Quote:
I don't see how you could interpret Florida voting for $15 an hour minimum wage as supporting your point. The fact that progressive policies like ending the war on drugs and raising minimum wage won in states that Biden lost is a sign that voters aren't seeing the Democratic Party as supporters of those issues.
That's a pretty interesting takeaway. I'd say in Florida, Democrats mostly lost due to charges of "socialism" that candidates couldn't shake. Just because the voters were in favor of a $15/hr minimum wage doesn't necessarily mean they were in favor of a wider progressive agenda as they perceived it as advocated by Democratic candidates.
Quote:
I genuinely support you as a poster, but I definitely disagree with these points. Thankfully progressives are building more and more of a base each year and we'll eventually take over the Democratic Party and increase the standard of living in a lot of places that current Dems have neglected.
We can agree to disagree here. But as an overall politically moderate country with a two-party system, only center-left and center-right parties will be able to have large enough bases of support to be viable IMO.
This is not a political thread, but the US is not a multi-party country so this wouldn't work. The Republican Party is just as fractured as the Dems and that's because our Democracy isn't set up to elect multiple parties of different viewpoints. That's why progressives are currently pushing for Ranked-Choice voting.
You do understand this type of patronizing attitude won’t really win with folks down South, right? The whole “I’m a smart northerner here to help you dumb southerners” Schtick won’t win you any favors. It’s pretty antiquated and ignorant tbh...Being from Detroit, I’m sure you wouldn’t take to well to someone from Minneapolis or Chicago coming at you (“we’re here to help your city and tell you what you’re doing wrong!”) wouldn’t be received well neither. And I’ve met quite a few Detroiters who can be just as surly and scowling as the southerners you keep referring to, so I know they wouldn’t take to well to that.
I acknowledge that my perspective is harsh & unforgiving, even though there's truth to it. But rest assured l I'm not trying to change anyone else's opinion.
What I really took issue with was someone accusing me of being elitist and not understanding racism because I have a different perspective. This is a big problem in the black community too.
As far as opinions about Detroit, I accept that many of them are valid criticisms. I'm heavily critical of Detroit myself, which is why I'm not there now. That said, I get not everyone has the same self-awareness that I do.
Do not confuse my defense of these cities with any sort of notion that all of their residents have accepted defeat and have not been working hard for change within the current structure (and I have provided sources to show that this is indeed happening) or that they have not experienced times of relative progress and prosperity in the not-too-distant past. Also, since you keep repeating this claim that these cities are so hostile to benevolent outsiders, would you care to provide some proof of this? I'm not arguing that it doesn't happen at times, but I find your insinuation that it is always motivated by nothing more than illogical resistance to progress to be a bit incredulous, especially since I've already provided sources that clearly demonstrate that most of these cities have been open to outside investment.
First, it's not just about being open to outside investment. It's also about being open to changes in our their government is run and how their leaders are held accountable. It's also about not about getting defensive when people offer constructive criticism about their issues. There's a reason they constantly get passed up for the outside investment they're open to, and if you were to ask those investors, the fact that these cities have a black plurality or are majority black have very little to do with their decision to pass them up.
As far as their progress and prosperity, all I'm saying is that whatever you claim they're doing to become better cities and get out of the victim mindset certainly isn't being reflected in the stats for these cities as a whole or translating into a QOL improvement.
First, it's not just about being open to outside investment. It's also about being open to changes in our their government is run and how their leaders are held accountable. It's also about not about getting defensive when people offer constructive criticism about their issues.
Well there's the "carpetbagger" issue which even the most progressive of cities are sensitive to, but outside of that, cities often hire consultants to objectively assess their strengths and weaknesses and offer recommendations to improve their situations. Sometimes they act upon those with varying outcomes and sometimes they don't for all sorts of reasons. In some cases, the lack or slow pace of progress is due to a few people with outsized power and influence protecting their interests at the expense of the city (e.g., the steel industry barons in Birmingham in years past). And in other cases, a deeply-rooted culture of political corruption prevents cities from moving forward. I am in no way arguing that these cities have done everything right on their own and that their leaders/citizenry don't have sins they need to atone for. But at the same time, there's no way I can totally neglect the larger political contexts in which missteps and misdeeds have occurred which often results in the consequences of those actions being amplified in a way that doesn't happen in other cities. In a nutshell, I find your criticisms to be extremely one-sided and lacking perspective. You obviously disagree so we can leave it at that.
Quote:
As far as their progress and prosperity, all I'm saying is that whatever you claim they're doing to become better cities and get out of the victim mindset certainly isn't being reflected in the stats for these cities as a whole or translating into a QOL improvement.
It's not what "I'm claiming," it's what these cities are actually doing. However it usually takes years for these efforts to pick up enough steam, bear fruit, and move the needle on typical QOL metrics considering how long they have had to deal with the problems they are wrestling with. Success isn't a neat linear phenomenon; many times it occurs in fits and starts in more limited areas before broadbased positive change becomes evident. As an example, look at a place like Pittsburgh which began transitioning its economy several years ago--successfully so using typical metrics by which this sort of thing is often measured--yet the metropolitan area continues to register annual population losses. I'm well aware of their aging population being the primary reason for that, which goes to my point that it can take a while for certain metrics to begin showing signs of increased health in the face of previous conditions that were especially challenging. On a statewide level, my home state of SC is a good example as its rapid population and economic growth since the turn of the century is certainly putting distance between it and other Southern states it tends to be grouped with like AL, LA, AR, MS, etc. even though that isn't yet reflected in a significant way in all of the usual metrics. And of course, who knows what lasting damage the pandemic will do seeing as though Black people are disproportionately affected. That is a prime example of how politics at the national and state levels have a huge impact locally.
It's not what "I'm claiming," it's what these cities are actually doing. However it usually takes years for these efforts to pick up enough steam, bear fruit, and move the needle on typical QOL metrics considering how long they have had to deal with the problems they are wrestling with...
They've had 50+ years now so far. How much more time do you think it should take?
Pittsburgh and South Carolina are not good comparisons. Pittsburgh is/was a much larger city up north while obviously SC is an entire state with millions of people.
That said, the city of Greenville *IN* South Carolina is definitely an example of a peer city that has pulled so far ahead from these cities that it's practically in a different tier now. It's obviously doing something right compared to the cities that are the topic of this thread which continue to flounder.
I would even point to Augusta as another example, which is now a burgeoning hub for cyber security. Huntsville is another example as well. And before you mention that they have large military facilities, I should point out that Macon also has one that's only 18 miles away. Shreveport has one as well.
They've had 50+ years now so far. How much more time do you think it should take?
Are you arguing that these cities haven't progressed whatsoever within the past half-century?
Quote:
Pittsburgh and South Carolina are not good comparisons. Pittsburgh is/was a much larger city up north while obviously SC is an entire state with millions of people.
I used Pittsburgh and SC to demonstrate a general principle which is applicable to all cities, no matter the size.
Quote:
That said, the city of Greenville *IN* South Carolina is definitely an example of a peer city that has pulled so far ahead from these cities that it's practically in a different tier now. It's obviously doing something right compared to the cities that are the topic of this thread which continue to flounder.
I don't think you could've chosen a better counter-example than Greenville. Not only has it never been anything close to being majority Black, but it is the largest city in the most conservative region of its fairly conservative state, a region where political power began amassing before the Civil War when it emerged as a hotbed of secession. Greenville County has the dubious distinction of being the last county in the entire nation to officially observe MLK Day in 2006, and the fundamentalist Bob Jones University, located in Greenville, was infamous for its policy banning interracial dating that was in place up until 2000. Certainly progress has been made in the years since, but such attitudes were absolutely NOT reflective of a place fighting with the state over issues such as racial equality. Also, Greenville's importance within the old textile economy (which goes back to the late 19th/early 20th centuries) granted it an extremely valued place in the state's economy; as a matter of fact, SC's entire post-industrial economic development strategy (which focuses on manufacturing and distribution that boosts state-based exports) was based on the infrastructure and technical workforce left behind in wake of the decline of textiles in SC. Combined with heavy regional political representation in the form of governors and U.S. senators like former Gov. Campbell, a Greenville native who steered the BMW plant to the Upstate (and was previoisly known for opposing school desegregation in Greenville in the early 70s), Greenville has no doubt been a BIG beneficiary of state politics, something that these other cities aren't seemingly able to also say. And on top of all of this, metro Greenville has long been bigger than all of these places. Here are the standard metropolitan area populations of Greenville and the cities that are the subject of this discussion in 1980 (pdf):
*Presently, Greenville and Anderson are part of the same MSA while Spartanburg has its own MSA.
For all Greenville's progress over the years, it has been anything BUT in the same situation as Jackson, Macon, Montgomery, and Shreveport.
Quote:
I would even point to Augusta as another example, which is now a burgeoning hub for cyber security. Huntsville is another example as well. And before you mention that they have large military facilities, I should point out that Macon also has one that's only 18 miles away. Shreveport has one as well.
Warner Robbins (actually its own MSA) and Bossier City have Air Force installations, but neither have been the beneficiary of federal investment the way Fort Gordon and Redstone Arsenal, which are Army installations, have been. Not to take away from those cities' actual accomplishments, but there's no denying that Huntsville and Augusta also got lucky. Plenty of cities have military installations but Huntsville in particular is about as anomalous as it gets for midsized cities. Augusta is still new to cyber and it appears promising, but it's still in the early stages. As it stands, it is in the same general tier as Jackson and within Georgia, it tends to get lumped in with Macon and the other secondary cities.
Are you arguing that these cities haven't progressed whatsoever within the past half-century?
I used Pittsburgh and SC to demonstrate a general principle which is applicable to all cities, no matter the size.
I don't think you could've chosen a better counter-example than Greenville. Not only has it never been anything close to being majority Black, but it is the largest city in the most conservative region of its fairly conservative state, a region where political power began amassing before the Civil War when it emerged as a hotbed of secession. Greenville County has the dubious distinction of being the last county in the entire nation to officially observe MLK Day in 2006, and the fundamentalist Bob Jones University, located in Greenville, was infamous for its policy banning interracial dating that was in place up until 2000. Certainly progress has been made in the years since, but such attitudes were absolutely NOT reflective of a place fighting with the state over issues such as racial equality. Also, Greenville's importance within the old textile economy (which goes back to the late 19th/early 20th centuries) granted it an extremely valued place in the state's economy; as a matter of fact, SC's entire post-industrial economic development strategy (which focuses on manufacturing and distribution that boosts state-based exports) was based on the infrastructure and technical workforce left behind in wake of the decline of textiles in SC. Combined with heavy regional political representation in the form of governors and U.S. senators like former Gov. Campbell, a Greenville native who steered the BMW plant to the Upstate (and was previoisly known for opposing school desegregation in Greenville in the early 70s), Greenville has no doubt been a BIG beneficiary of state politics, something that these other cities aren't seemingly able to also say. And on top of all of this, metro Greenville has long been bigger than all of these places. Here are the standard metropolitan area populations of Greenville and the cities that are the subject of this discussion in 1980 (pdf):
*Presently, Greenville and Anderson are part of the same MSA while Spartanburg has its own MSA.
For all Greenville's progress over the years, it has been anything BUT in the same situation as Jackson, Macon, Montgomery, and Shreveport.
Warner Robbins (actually its own MSA) and Bossier City have Air Force installations, but neither have been the beneficiary of federal investment the way Fort Gordon and Redstone Arsenal, which are Army installations, have been. Not to take away from those cities' actual accomplishments, but there's no denying that Huntsville and Augusta also got lucky. Plenty of cities have military installations but Huntsville in particular is about as anomalous as it gets for midsized cities. Augusta is still new to cyber and it appears promising, but it's still in the early stages. As it stands, it is in the same general tier as Jackson and within Georgia, it tends to get lumped in with Macon and the other secondary cities.
As it relates to key indicators such as education, crime, poverty and economic investment, no these cites have not progressed over the past 50+ years, If anything, they've regressed.
As far as Augusta and Huntsville, you're being too dismissive of the role local leaders played in fostering the tangible progress they made.
In Huntsville's case, after World War II, the Arsenal was an abandoned husk and the economic impact it generared had all but dried up by the end of the 1940s. But instead of just letting it rot, there was an extremely aggressive top-down effort to persuade the army to select the site for rocket research. Otherwise, Huntsville would have been passed up (it almost was) and in the samd boat as these othet cities.
In Augusta's case, both the NSA and the Army Command Center chose Fort Gordon in large part because of how cooperative local leaders has been with addressing their needs. The city and Augusta University didn't balk at forming public-private partnerships to estsblish the talent pipeline they desire, and local leaders have been more than accomodating to the private companies that want to establish a presence in the city to support the Cybersecurity needs of the NSA and the Army Command Center.
In any event, I think we've more than beaten the horse on this discussion. It's clear we're not changing each other opinions.
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.
