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, harlem was a gem. African americans didn't take pride in the neighborhood. I work at mount sinai hospital and when i take the train and get off at central park 110 st they have a beautiful pond there. When i wait for the bus, the people that hang around there. Crackheads, city cause they have a homeless shelter across the street my gosh they just infest the place. Hanging out on the benches, doing hair, pulling out hair, loud as ever. These are the kind of behavior that mess up a neigborhood. For years, when harlem was running down the neigborhood. Where was the community then? No one couldn't get together as "one" and do something about.
Well, harlem was a gem. African americans didn't take pride in the neighborhood. I work at mount sinai hospital and when i take the train and get off at central park 110 st they have a beautiful pond there. When i wait for the bus, the people that hang around there. Crackheads, city cause they have a homeless shelter across the street my gosh they just infest the place. Hanging out on the benches, doing hair, pulling out hair, loud as ever. These are the kind of behavior that mess up a neigborhood. For years, when harlem was running down the neigborhood. Where was the community then? No one couldn't get together as "one" and do something about.
That has everything to do with someone's class not their race. People seem to mix that up around here. I'm sure a relatively poor White neighborhood isn't going to get together and do something either. There are a lot of Black professionals (they do exist in large numbers in NYC) are moving from NJ and back to Harlem.
Changes in Harlem reflect broader changes in the city. The city is changing as well too and the term minority is going to have to re-evaluated or done away with considering "minorities" make up most of the city now. The Census results are going to be interesting to say the least...
"Minority" is a state of mind. It really pains me to hear people labeling themselves that. Additionally, the term really rings hollow when it's closely analyzed. First, I'd like to say that government agencies rarely seem to employ the term; regular people and the media are at fault for using it. If you want to see "minority" and all other divisive and un-productive like terms stop being used, stop using them yourself (not exactly referring to you as a person, NooYowkur) and challenge people when they say them. I very often ask people "what do you mean by 'minority?'" when they use the term; I find that people tend to use the term just because "other people do" or "I heard it on TV." That brings me to my next point.
Second, you are very right that the terms need to be evaluated. Who is the "minority" and who is the "majority"? I once got into an argument where someone insisted that a Russian cleaning lady making minimum wage living in Brighton Beach who can't speak English is not a "minority" while a wealthy Argentinian banker living on Sutton Place is a "minority"? Huh? So I guess the whole minority/majority thing isn't based on being white. But how about Anglo-Saxon heritage? One could argue that white Americans of Anglo-Saxon ancestry are the "majority" but once you exclude all of the whites who aren't Anglo-Saxon (Italians, Polish, Russian, Armenian, Lebanese, Euro-Latin, etc.) you no longer have a "majority" at all.
Sorry if this makes anyone's head spin, but I just wish people would think about the terms they use and what they mean before using them.
i think this article is interesting because thats one of the first times i saw black people broken down into the categories of african/carribean/african american. if you look at it in this context and use that formula then there is probably no neighborhood where african americans are a solid majority. Most "black" neighborhoods in brooklyn like crown heights, flatbush, bed stuy, the north bronx and jamaica queens have a high population of west indians and africans too. However does that make them not "black" neighborhoods?
I just read the article in its entirety and the author does not make clear whether s/he means that blacks have lost their majority in Harlem, or if non-Hispanic blacks have lost their majority in Harlem. The author does talk about the diversity of the blacks and I am glad to see that pointed out, but I am confused by what the new racial demographics of the area are. The author does talk about the increase in the "Latino" population and implies that this correlates with the decrese in the black population, but it puzzles me that no mention was made of black Latins when it seems they have a substantial presence in the neighborhood. My friend recently moved out of northwest Harlem (a.k.a. "Hamilton Heights") and when I used to visit him I used to see a lot of blacks, but it seemed half of them were speaking Spanish - I imagine most of them were Dominican.
Does anyone who lives in Harlem or who has a lot of experience with it know what I mean? Harlem seems to be getting diverse and I could understand if it were under 50% African-American, but less than 50% black seems pretty unlikely, even in 2010. But, then again, this is just based on my limited experience with the neighborhood and what I have heard from people living there. A lot could have changed in recent years.
"Minority" is a state of mind. It really pains me to hear people labeling themselves that. Additionally, the term really rings hollow when it's closely analyzed. First, I'd like to say that government agencies rarely seem to employ the term; regular people and the media are at fault for using it. If you want to see "minority" and all other divisive and un-productive like terms stop being used, stop using them yourself (not exactly referring to you as a person, NooYowkur) and challenge people when they say them. I very often ask people "what do you mean by 'minority?'" when they use the term; I find that people tend to use the term just because "other people do" or "I heard it on TV." That brings me to my next point.
Second, you are very right that the terms need to be evaluated. Who is the "minority" and who is the "majority"? I once got into an argument where someone insisted that a Russian cleaning lady making minimum wage living in Brighton Beach who can't speak English is not a "minority" while a wealthy Argentinian banker living on Sutton Place is a "minority"? Huh? So I guess the whole minority/majority thing isn't based on being white. But how about Anglo-Saxon heritage? One could argue that white Americans of Anglo-Saxon ancestry are the "majority" but once you exclude all of the whites who aren't Anglo-Saxon (Italians, Polish, Russian, Armenian, Lebanese, Euro-Latin, etc.) you no longer have a "majority" at all.
Sorry if this makes anyone's head spin, but I just wish people would think about the terms they use and what they mean before using them.
Crisp I've never liked the term. It has many negative connotations...
Welcome back Crispy. I don't like the term "minority" at all..it is demeaning and simply wrong. How exactly are people of color "minorities" when in fact they are the majority in NYC, and the majority in the world? They are simply a "minority" of the USA, nothing more. Why are we using a USA-centric description of ourselves that has now become pervasive globally. You will hear the term now in Europe and other "white" countries. I find it strange.
I do agree with Crispy however, the term has been hijacked by so many groups/interests that it is completely pointless today. It may have been a unifying force in the 60s and 70s during the civil rights movement and subsequent policies to "level the playing field." However, today it is, to me, an antiquated, abused/misused, derogatory term that is simply useless.
Does anyone who lives in Harlem or who has a lot of experience with it know what I mean? Harlem seems to be getting diverse and I could understand if it were under 50% African-American, but less than 50% black seems pretty unlikely, even in 2010. But, then again, this is just based on my limited experience with the neighborhood and what I have heard from people living there. A lot could have changed in recent years.
There have been members of my family living in both East Harlem and West Harlem since 1929, and they have lived through many changes. I thought personally that the article was written to sell the new condos going up, especially below 125th. Thinking that some buyers would need to see the new demographics, in order to make their decisions.
The most interesting part of the article to me, were the comments. People of all different backgrounds posted comments, telling of their own family history in Harlem. This was very interesting and enlightning.
Would it not be true that the "whitening" of Harlem has little to do with race or lack of race as an issue and everything to do with less wealthy middle and aspirational class people - most of whom are white - latching onto an area which is relatively cheap and proximate to midtown.
Would it not be true that the "whitening" of Harlem has little to do with race or lack of race as an issue and everything to do with less wealthy middle and aspirational class people - most of whom are white - latching onto an area which is relatively cheap and proximate to midtown.
I would absolutely agree with this sentiment, people just look at it like, "is it relatively safe?" "is the commute decent?" " is it not too expensive?" and if the location fits that criteria they will move. This is what primarily motivates that, now since the people moving to Harlem are not necessarily rich, but still a little more well off than the locals financially; it sets off a chain of events as landlords see an opportunity try to attract more of them knowing that they'll pay more in rent. Then the chain stores follow which hurt alot of local businesses. But you probably know all this already. I see the people who first initiate the process as just a group of folks who find an opportunity and jump on it like anyone else would and there happens to be both positive and negative affects. The lord giveth and the lord taketh as they say.
Last edited by twist07; 01-22-2010 at 08:22 PM..
Reason: spelling
There isn't a single neighborhood in the city whose demographics haven't changed. I, for example, was born in Brownsville...which didn't look the same way 50 years ago as it does now (I plead guilty to understatement!) And as regards Harlem, apparently there are quite a few people who don't seem to realize that it was a white neighborhood long before it was a black one (the original clue is right there in the name: it was named by the Dutch--who founded this town--after the city of Haarlem). So things are changing uptown--no big deal. Come back in another hundred years and see how different things will be then!
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.
