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’m way too young to have witnessed segregation or desegregation and while I have seen the end results of white flight in terms of entire areas that were once predominately white and now no longer I have also seen entire areas that were one predominantly black become prominently white which is odd considering the reversals.
Maybe someone reading this can explain to me a few things that I simply don’t understand about the entire white flight and no Negro’s because I really am trying to understand it all but having a difficult time.
Back in the 20’s (or whenever it was) J.C. Nichols started developing his glorious “American” neighborhoods around Kansas City which always had a strict HOA policy of “No Negro’s” (The term used during that time)
During this time along Troost Ave the entire neighborhood was predominately black and it was not only flourishing but it was (or seemed to be) “the go to” neighborhood for almost everything Black including dining, Jazz, and live entertainment and it even drew white patrons as it was so successful.
Looking back at images I have to ask why it seemed this black neighborhood was doing so well and it was predominately black. Meaning it didn’t seem there were many whites living in those areas (Then or now) so how did white flight hurt these predominately black neighborhoods? The second part of the question is that during those times the whites seemed to have neighborhoods all over the country that excluded blacks and those neighborhoods flourished on their own. An example of an all white neighborhood can be seen in the Preston Hollow neighborhood located in Dallas Texas,
[quote]In 1956, the neighborhood association's covenant stated that only white residents were allowed to live in Preston Hollow. This restriction, though apparently never enforced, and ruled unconstitutional by the US courts in the 1960s, was repealed in 2000. That restrictive language is included in thousands of association covenants.[quote]
So the second question is did these black communities back then also have either a spoken or unspoken rule or culture that either excluded or encouraged whites to live elsewhere?
Finally what happened along the Troost Ave corridor that spelled the demise of the once very populated and thriving successful black community? Sure it’s still a predominantly black area but instead of a thriving black enclave it’s a ghost shell of its former glory and almost ghetto in nature. Will the area ever truly recover and once again become a great pivotal black neighborhood that it once was or will it be gentrified into another nice hip “where to be seen” white neighborhood?
It sure seems to me it would have been really neat to spend time along Troost Ave. in its heyday.
There probably could've been an unwritten rule, but since whites held the power, they could've done anything they wanted. Though I can't speak exclusively about Troost Avenue, many formerly booming black areas, like Farish Street here in Jackson, MS, lost clout as blacks gained more freedom and began moving to and shopping in places where they couldn't before.
They say integration hurt Black owned businesses. It seems now many Blacks are spending money in the same neighborhoods Whites are. We want the same conveniences. Most middle and upper class Blacks want new houses and the same quality of life other groups want. Instead of staying in the same area we move up and out leaving poor Blacks to certain neighborhoods.
There probably could've been an unwritten rule, but since whites held the power, they could've done anything they wanted. Though I can't speak exclusively about Troost Avenue, many formerly booming black areas, like Farish Street here in Jackson, MS, lost clout as blacks gained more freedom and began moving to and shopping in places where they couldn't before.
Ok I can understand maybe wanting to shop at places they previously felt they couldn't but that still begs the question that such nice thriving black neighborhoods like along Troost where many jazz joints, theaters and other places were thriving then they just seemed to die off I don't think this can all be attributed to the blacks leaving to go shopping where the whites were. Are you suggesting black flight from their own neighborhood?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtinmemphis
They say integration hurt Black owned businesses. It seems now many Blacks are spending money in the same neighborhoods Whites are. We want the same conveniences. Most middle and upper class Blacks want new houses and the same quality of life other groups want. Instead of staying in the same area we move up and out leaving poor Blacks to certain neighborhoods.
I see the argument that black owned business took a huge hit but if you look back many small business in general have been lost to the larger corporations take over
What I find interesting is the lost culture in the black neighborhoods like all the neat jazz clubs and theaters. I wonder if they were still around today if they wouldn't be seeing reverse patronage meaning they would still be black owned and operated and have a majority black clientele but I bet many whites would also be customers and enjoy the culture and atmosphere and things would be a lot different. In a way I wish there was a way to bring such a neighborhood like the old Troost area entertainment row back to life the way it was before, I bet it would be a neat and huge draw in today's age and time.
regarding the "poor" neighborhoods and the upper class blacks leaving for nicer neighborhoods I can understand that too but thats not just a black issue, many upper class whites leave the white trash areas for nicer places but that still doesn't explain what happened to Troost because along Troost Ave it was really nice.
I'm still just trying to figure it all out and just hate to see how empty the entire Troost Ave area is compared to what it once was.
There was a lot of self segregation back in the 50s and 60s. Whites wanted to live only among whites and blacks wanted to live among blacks. There was more voluntary segregation than forced. I grew up in a southern Missouri town in the 50s and 60s, there was only 3 black people in a town of 8,000. But they were accepted. The adult worked at a very prominent business and was accepted.
There was a lot of self segregation back in the 50s and 60s. Whites wanted to live only among whites and blacks wanted to live among blacks. There was more voluntary segregation than forced. I grew up in a southern Missouri town in the 50s and 60s, there was only 3 black people in a town of 8,000. But they were accepted. The adult worked at a very prominent business and was accepted.
There is still a lot of self segregation and its a normal part all cultures and races but thats not really the point I was originally getting at. I often hear people claim the reason for many neighborhoods or areas going down hill is due to white flight where the "whites" left and took their tax dollars and money with them.
Yet along Troost Ave it was always predominately black so how can white flight be blamed for its decline? And how if even it was self segregated and a very vibrant and thriving black community then what were the causes for such a huge shift and decline because its clear it wasn't white flight and even when it was packed full of Negro's back in the day it was thriving. Oh another PC term that gets thrown around is "Change in demographics" and again this is a PC way to say "white Flight" or the other races moved in and took over.
Again I'm curious is all because I still cant figure it all out
White flight can't be blamed for Troost. Perhaps, when blacks were allowed to shop in white-owned stores, those stores were maybe nicer than stores in black areas. As blacks began moving away and into whiter areas, it was the death knell.
I completely agree because while there whites that did shop there the neighborhood was predominately black.
Quote:
Originally Posted by golden eagles fan
Perhaps, when blacks were allowed to shop in white-owned stores, those stores were maybe nicer than stores in black areas. As blacks began moving away and into whiter areas, it was the death knell.
In the context with your choice of word "Perhaps"; can it be taken to mean a "guess"?
When you say the stores were nicer I still find that a little hard to understand and here's why,
First the Black business catered to the black customers first and in many cases certain businesses carried products or services that were directly targeted specifically towards blacks. While the white stores might have been nicer in certain areas I see pictures of national brand stores and incredible businesses that were in once predominately black or lower income areas.
I can see maybe a move of the upper class blacks to nicer neighborhoods or areas away from the more urban crowded areas if for any other reason the newer opportunities they might find in both work and living. Again I'm just not sure I can put it all together and pinpoint the contributing factors.
What I also find interesting is how the Troost Ave corridor is in need of such a great revitalization and there have been study after study yet no private investors on a large scale have contributed much to new development or job creation in the area. Sure MAC has renovated 1,000 + apartments in the area and thats a huge step in the right direction but whats needed is jobs and businesses and not big box stores.
Big box stores are such a economic drain on any community and hurt the overall area.
First the Black business catered to the black customers first and in many cases certain businesses carried products or services that were directly targeted specifically towards blacks.
KC never was like Mississippi, for instance, but MO was a Jim Crow state up to the 1960's (KS was as well, but probably not as bad). Blacks created their own communities with their own stores because they were not welcome in many white establishments. The east side of town was quite different than it is today, because there were upper and middle-class blacks living in this part of town (that's the only place they were welcome).
Quote:
I can see maybe a move of the upper class blacks to nicer neighborhoods or areas away from the more urban crowded areas if for any other reason the newer opportunities they might find in both work and living. Again I'm just not sure I can put it all together and pinpoint the contributing factors.
Depending upon your definition of upper-class, it was not just upper-class blacks who left the east side community when they could, but also middle-class blacks, and any who could get out. The east side community really started to decline in the late 70's and 80's, when drugs and gangs started to be pervasive. Those who did not want to live or raise their children in the east side fled for safer suburban pastures.
This "black flight" as I have heard it called drained the east side of not only population, but it siphoned off many of the most educated and successful of the community. This left a huge void in the east side from which is has yet to recover 30+ years later.
KC never was like Mississippi, for instance, but MO was a Jim Crow state up to the 1960's (KS was as well, but probably not as bad). Blacks created their own communities with their own stores because they were not welcome in many white establishments. The east side of town was quite different than it is today, because there were upper and middle-class blacks living in this part of town (that's the only place they were welcome).
Depending upon your definition of upper-class, it was not just upper-class blacks who left the east side community when they could, but also middle-class blacks, and any who could get out. The east side community really started to decline in the late 70's and 80's, when drugs and gangs started to be pervasive. Those who did not want to live or raise their children in the east side fled for safer suburban pastures.
This "black flight" as I have heard it called drained the east side of not only population, but it siphoned off many of the most educated and successful of the community. This left a huge void in the east side from which is has yet to recover 30+ years later.
Hey thanks for the great replay as with all who have contributed to the thread so far,
I can see how Jim Crow laws forced blacks into their own areas or whites into their own areas but with the old adage of turning lemons into Lemonade anyone who was with the thought it was wrong or oppressive I'd say those neighborhoods then grew and thrived into their own meccas of culture as was along Troost Ave with the Jazz joints and theaters. So maybe something good did come if the segregation in those terms, but yea not so good that it was forced on any group of people.
I can see the black flight taking place where then all that was left were older blacks who were too old to move and the poor class of blacks.
I have no doubt that one day again the entire Troost Ave area will be revitalized but unfortunately I'm sure it will be majority of whites who will reside there. Not unfortunate that the people will be white but more of the fact a once great corridor of art, music and culture will have been replaced with more bland commercial developments that have no real soul.
Whats preventing the Blacks from stepping up and revitalizing their once great community along this historic Ave?
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.
