Detroit sees rise in white residents after 60 years (Schoolcraft, Atlanta: transplants, violent crime)

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by reconmark

Oh so "a vast majority" of us black people are looting, raping, and pillaging??!!

Sorry but only "a vast majority" of ignorant people will believe such nonsense, I moved out of Detroit primarily because of it's school system no other area has the quality, history, or workmanship of the housing stock of Detroit.

I've known many blacks, I happen to be one myself, please send me a memo in my racial responsibilities; seems I haven't raped, robbed, or looted in 47 years.
What a traitor I am to my race!!

Even further, putting out those lies isn't helpful to African-Americans such as ourselves. Most African-Americans do not committ crimes. In fact if the term "majority" is used, then that would mean at least 30 million crimes were committed, which is false.

Another question I have frequently asked, but never get an answer to is this: How does any of this help Black people? Chances are, alot of Black people are likely to be judged and stereotyped, even if the stereotype isn't valid for people like us and others who don't do such things. I know that many African-Americans in Detroit have left Detroit because they are sick of what is going on. I understand that.

I have found it to be a big paradox. Many Africans-Americans want safe neighborhoods, good schools, and nice homes. Many of them will seek that. On that same note, there is also a grave awareness that there are more predominantly Black areas that aren't safe than not. Added to that, another awareness that one might not be fully welcomed into the community they are moving to. Example: Myself and my family were living in an inner-ring suburb outside of Atlanta. My father didn't know much about Atlanta or the suburbs. He had just taken a new job and took residence 20 minutes away from where he worked. As time progressed. He noticed that the area wasn't that safe. At 10 years old, I didn't get a particular perception that it was dangerous. I didn't go to sleep with bullets being shot off. I never saw drugs being dealt. Someone did get murdered on my street(I didn't know about this until years later). My father decided to move his family 45 minutes away,to a rural, predominantly White area, seeking an area he felt would be safer, and looking for a cheap house. He didn't know anything about the area he was moving to. I also experienced culture shock. I was used to living in an area that was ethnically and culturally diverse. The first day of sixth grade I was the only Black kid in my homeroom. I also didn't feel completely welcomed there either. A little while after, my my father started to feel like it wasn't the place for him. He still lives there because the housing market is not selling that well. I moved away. He was a man who was looking for what would be best for his children. At the same time, there were still other issues to deal with.

[Retroit]

I think you guys are putting words in BurstBees's mouth. His "vast majority" included such innocuous actions as "teenagers...yelling instead of talking while walking down the streets" or blacks not being "truly...fed up with the blight and crime from Detroit".

I think that anyone, even an honest black person, will admit that the vast majority of neighborhoods in Detroit are overrun with blight and crime, and therefore it is a logical conclusion that a vast majority of people that live there must not "want things better" (at least not enough to affect change).

I see both sides of the argument. Many blacks (although less than the vast majority) must fit the stereotypes otherwise Detroit wouldn't be the way it is. And Many blacks (although more than the first 11% that move into a white neighborhood) must be good, decent, law-abiding people otherwise every area that blacks have moved into would be as bad as the bad areas of Detroit.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by Retroit

I think you guys are putting words in BurstBees's mouth. His "vast majority" included such innocuous actions as "teenagers...yelling instead of talking while walking down the streets" or blacks not being "truly...fed up with the blight and crime from Detroit".

I think that anyone, even an honest black person, will admit that the vast majority of neighborhoods in Detroit are overrun with blight and crime, and therefore it is a logical conclusion that a vast majority of people that live there must not "want things better" (at least not enough to affect change).

I see both sides of the argument. Many blacks (although less than the vast majority) must fit the stereotypes otherwise Detroit wouldn't be the way it is. And Many blacks (although more than the first 11% that move into a white neighborhood) must be good, decent, law-abiding people otherwise every area that blacks have moved into would be as bad as the bad areas of Detroit.

Well, he didn't make that quite clear.

[reconmark]

Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte

Well, he didn't make that quite clear.

Which would have been a relatively easy thing to do...had that been his intention.

[7Millionaire7]

Originally Posted by Retroit

Oh, I've had a few racist neighbors as well, I am ashamed to admit. But they were a very small percentage and have left long ago. I think most white people are pretty accepting of black people. It's not like the 1950s.

I feel like this kind of upends all the work you've been doing in this thread of convincing people that White's didn't leave the city for at least some racist reasons. When I say "leave the city," I'm specifically referring to the 1950s and 60s, a time period where I'd just take a gander that a lot of things were still somewhat racially motivated.

It's just seems like a slight kink in your overall argument.

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by 7Millionaire7

I feel like this kind of upends all the work you've been doing in this thread of convincing people that White's didn't leave the city for at least some racist reasons. When I say "leave the city," I'm specifically referring to the 1950s and 60s, a time period where I'd just take a gander that a lot of things were still somewhat racially motivated.

It's just seems like a slight kink in your overall argument.

That's a good point. Racism played a part, no doubt. If I said otherwise, I was wrong. I just think that back then, white people were more easily able to assume that blacks moving in would cause blight or crime to increase. That's not the case today. Back then, a white person could somewhat justifiably say that they didn't want their neighborhood to become another Black Bottom. Nowadays, you can point to any number of well kept black neighborhoods, so the argument no longer holds water. A white person today who thinks that blacks automatically bring crime and blight is more obviously a racist.

[BurtsBees]

Originally Posted by Retroit

That's a good point. Racism played a part, no doubt. If I said otherwise, I was wrong. I just think that back then, white people were more easily able to assume that blacks moving in would cause blight or crime to increase. That's not the case today. Back then, a white person could somewhat justifiably say that they didn't want their neighborhood to become another Black Bottom. Nowadays, you can point to any number of well kept black neighborhoods, so the argument no longer holds water. A white person today who thinks that blacks automatically bring crime and blight is more obviously a racist.

Can you point them out in the metro Detroit area?

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by BurtsBees

Can you point them out in the metro Detroit area?

Ossian Sweet. And by the way, this isn't the only example of racism in Detroit's past. While the deep South was in the midst of the Civil War, Detroit had a race riot in 1863. Another race riot occurred during WWII. I did a report on the history of Detroit. Detroit is a city whose history has been checkered with racial tensions.

[Ed Guitar]

Originally Posted by Tone509

Pardon me for "busting" in this thread but I found it interesting.

It looks like Detroit (downtown, at least) is in the early stages typical of urban gentrification. Usually the young "starving artists" are first; maybe this is already true although it hasn't been mentioned in this thread. Then the trendy hipsters arrive. Some of those hipsters may turn into married younger professionals. When said younger married couples reach a critical mass that prefer to invest energy in their neighborhood schools - rather than head out to the suburbs - that's when empty-nesters may start to feel comfortable in coming.

Depending on the neighborhood and the city in general, it can take some time to turn things around. I've seen it happen in both Philly and DC. It may take Detroit a longer time to get to that point but I am hopeful and optimistic that it will happen.

Very good point! Something similar happened in NYC during the 1980's. A section in downtown Manhattan (Alphabet City) was the land of drug dealing, prostitutes, and squatters. Mostly, blacks and Puerto Ricans lived in that section of the city. Then in the late 80's and early 90's a lot of musicians and painters moved in and occupied a great area of the lower East Side. Students moved later and yuppies follwed suit. During the late 90's Columbia University and NYU bought a lot of properties in that section of the city. NYC has changed so much that I can barely recognize the building and streets. Needless to say, hardly anyone can afford to rent a 1 bedroom apartment in what used to be a war zone.

[rdub1968]

25 most dangerous neighborhoods 2010

I think this link backs up a lot of what is being discussed here. Click the "More on this neighborhood", then lifestyle tab.
A high majority of neighborhoods at the top of this list (except one in Las Vegas) are black neighborhoods.