When did LA become racially diverse? (Los Angeles, Columbia: schools, moving, Persian)

[majoun]

Originally Posted by Astral_Weeks

I've been to Colombia multiple times including a few times with my ex-girlfriend who is Colombiana. So I well aware of the high degree of racial/ethnic variety in Colombia.

This is City-Data, a largely North American audience, and the data for this stuff in Colombia is admittedly limited but at least I linked a source. You just made this claim with no back up:



The study linked below was updated in 2010 and references the in country survey/census done in 2005. This is where the figures I noted come from.

Colombia does have a large black population but even in the coastal areas you'll see plenty of very white looking folks. Shakira is from Barranquilla after all.

And anyone that has been to Medellin or Bogota (the two largest cities) knows there are plenty of whites in Colombia. Granted the narrow confines of U.S. Census/race/ethnic classifications are probably to constricting in a country as mixed as Colombia.

https://books.google.com/books?id=NV...202005&f=false

Likewise someone who's been to Mexico City, Monterrey, or the state of Jalisco would know there are plenty of whites in Mexico, although this is not true in all regions of the country.Southern Mexico has almost no whites and most of the port cities have few whites.

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

Diversity grew from between 1870 and the early 1900's when the White people showed up.

[NyWriterdude]

Originally Posted by Astral_Weeks

I've been to Colombia multiple times including a few times with my ex-girlfriend who is Colombiana. So I well aware of the high degree of racial/ethnic variety in Colombia.

This is City-Data, a largely North American audience, and the data for this stuff in Colombia is admittedly limited but at least I linked a source. You just made this claim with no back up:



The study linked below was updated in 2010 and references the in country survey/census done in 2005. This is where the figures I noted come from.

Colombia does have a large black population but even in the coastal areas you'll see plenty of very white looking folks. Shakira is from Barranquilla after all.

And anyone that has been to Medellin or Bogota (the two largest cities) knows there are plenty of whites in Colombia. Granted the narrow confines of U.S. Census/race/ethnic classifications are probably to constricting in a country as mixed as Colombia.

https://books.google.com/books?id=NV...202005&f=false

I include no references because it is not my job to do research for anyone. Also this is the City Data forum on Los Angeles, so this topic is actually OFF topic. If anyone want more information on the topic, they are welcome to go to Colombia and see for themselves, or otherwise do independent research.

Bogota does not have many whites, and very few people in Colombia would be dealt with as white in any nation that actually has a large percentage of Europeans.

Ditto Mexico and the Dominican Republic. Few people could pass for white in the US, Europe, etc. And we all know what white really means worldwide. White means a 100% white person.

The majority of people in Colombia have at least some Native and/or Black and it SHOWS. And as one academic once said, to be biracial is to be racial. In short, Native, Black, or Asian traits are dominant over White traits, so any "mixed" people are always perceived as the other, not white.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

Nowadays in the US, it seems like almost everyone hates whites.

Agreed. Generally speaking I lean a little more to the left, but in more of a NPR sense.

My views vaguely mirror Bill Mahers' views that I am for progressive causes, but think political correctness does more harm than good.

Once the term "check your privilege" starting being thrown around casually in the era of social media, I didn't really want to be "white" anymore. In appropriate conversations, I inserted a little of my Polish-American experience with my Moms side of the family being displaced refugees from WWII, and coming to N. America, only to live in Mexico for a few years, as well as throwing out there, that I recall dumb ****** jokes being told to my face growing in the late 80s/early 90s, as well as the fact my Dad legally changed and simplified our last name in hopes that I will get a "pass" and not be presumed to be out of touch with minority experiences. Its important as being in higher education, where views are more liberal, and students are very diverse, it gives me more confidence that I understand diversity and don't need condescending diversity training, etc.

[NyWriterdude]

Originally Posted by MyPossesOnBroadway

They sure ain't black or amerindian, etc

Oh they very much are Native. Though you do have many Blacks.

What they aren't is WHITE, at least not the majority of them.

For countries in South America that are mostly white you'd need to go to Uruguay or Argentina.

[West of Encino]

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

Diversity grew from between 1870 and the early 1900's when the White people showed up.

1900 was when whites peaked proportionately for the first time since the 1850 Census, at 95.7%.

[NyWriterdude]

Originally Posted by MyPossesOnBroadway

Lol really? So they're totally native??

I did not say they were totally Native.

However refer to my earlier post. I said to be biracial is to be racial. So a Native/white mixed would LOOK pretty NATIVE and isn't CONSIDERED white by any stretch of the world. White features are RECESSIVE, so when WHITES marry non white the kids considerably look like the other race.

After all, people barely remember OBAMA as a WHITE mother! That's an example of it. In this case the non white was Black, but it's the same with an Asian or a Native parent.

[Etrernal333]

Originally Posted by nmnita

I doubt many of us go back to before 1950 that much, or can remember. Of course there has always been some diversity, Hispanics and Asians have been in the L.A. area for years, but lived pretty much in certain parts of the city, not as spread out as today. Asians lived near China town or certainly in the inner city for the most part, then started moving into to southbay. Torrance and Gardena had a relatively high number. There were very few in the San Gabriel Valley until the 70s. As for Hispanics, they lived in east Los Angeles, El Monte and parts of San Gabriel Valley. Blacks were pretty living in So Central Los Angeles, of course Compton but even that was later and the west part of Pasadena. Of course there were exception. The Jewish population lived in the Boyle Heights area for years, they relocated to the west part of the city and eventually mostly to San Fernando Valley. The Italian community, once pretty much centralized in Boyle Heights moved to all parts of the city, starting after WW2.

Here is an example: I graduated from Eagle Rock High School in 1955: We had no blacks in our school, one Asian family, and probably a dozen Mexican families in the entire school. I did know 2 Jewish kids, both in our class. Franklin High, not far from Eagle Rock had a few more Mexicans but no blacks. After graduation I took a job with the city for the summer before leaving for college. It was a cultural shock for me. I always said, it was like working for the United Nations. We did all pal around together, eat lunch together, but when the day ended we all went our separate ways to the segregated part of town where we lived. Until the mid 60there were still parts of the city where no blacks would be seen after dark and some cities like Glendale and Inglewood had laws saying they could not be on the streets after dark. In fact they could not live in Glendale.

The changes started in the very late 50s or early 60s People became a little more accepting of others and minorities started moving to areas once considered white. Of course there were still no Armenians, few from India and never did we see a Muslim. That came much later.

Blacks are the founders of Los Angeles, they have been being pushed out every since the "settlers" arrived. A High number of blacks moved here from the South in the early 1900's during the war, and a higher number moved from the south during the civil rights era. However that doesn't change the fact that Blacks were the founders of Los Angeles. Google it before you start to wave your finger.

[NyWriterdude]

Originally Posted by MyPossesOnBroadway

?
You can like tell a biracial mixed person ain't real native or real black etc

Could you tell Obama's daughters are biracial? He's got a white mother, and his wife Michelle Obama had white ancestors further back in her family. But his daughters look pretty Black, and nobody would consider them anything BUT.

So you can't necessarily tell the difference, and you have plenty of people with strong Black or Native features who have SOME white ancestry.

So yes, white racial traits are recessive or else the Obama girls would look VERY DIFFERENT.

[NyWriterdude]

Originally Posted by MyPossesOnBroadway

Huh? His kids ain't like him.

and they ain't like biracial...

But you PROVED my point, actually by saying these girls are Black.

Most people in Colombia do not have a white parent, but they do have some distant white ancestors. The biggest group in Colombia are the Natives. After that you have many Blacks.

According to you having white ancestors on both sides of your family doesn't make you biracial. I agree that how people perceive things, which is why I said to be biracial is to be racial. Someone with a lot of another race in them isn't viewed as white, they are viewed as something else. Truthfully Obama is spoken of as the first BLACK (not MIXED President) so he is almost never called biracial despite being raised by his White MOTHER.