Kind of describes how the "white" neighborhood where I live is around a third non-white, but the black neighborhood just a little to the east is 100% black.
1
I am a white parent of six adopted Black children. In 1999 I moved to Dayton, Ohio, the seventh most segregated city in America. I chose to live on the west side of Dayton, which is predominately Black, because it would reflect the race of the majority of my family. I recently went to the grocery store and encountered a significant number of white shoppers. When I mentioned this to one of my adult children their response was, "They're all moving here because they're hooked on narcotics and heroin, and can't afford to live in the white neighborhoods anymore. Remember when we were kids and we would come running in the house yelling, 'Mom! White people's parkin' on the street. Drug dealers comin!' Haven't you noticed they're not parking on the street anymore? It's because now they live here."
I absolutely don’t care about the race, color, religion or sexual identity of any of my neighbors. I care if they maintain their property, pick up after their dogs, control their children and keep the noise down.
2
Do predominantly neighborhoods of PoC say. hey you know what we need more of? Diverstity and White people. Just wondering.
4
Diversity works when the neighborhood has shared values and everyone worked hard to get there. I have no issue with anyone of any background who is able to afford and maintain a home on their own in my neighborhood.
10
@John
SJWs beg to differ. Sorry, wrong expression. They scream.
One of the reasons that urban homesteading now works for upper middle income families is the availability of charter schools. Today families are not necessarily tied to the local public school. Parents are free to choose a publicly funded charter school with good ratings as long as they are willing to transport the kids.This was not the case just a few years ago. Poor performing urban schools were a "no go" for many families - now that's not an issue.
6
@ Dave. Nice comment from the financially comfortable white guy. Dave, please consider the reason those schools were not performing at the same level as those with greater resources. Please consider the resources above the school district funding - those provided by individual parents that are financially able to donate time and money to their children and their children’s schools. Parents that have connections to politicians, CEOs and other persons influential with companies, corporations and non-profits that positively impact well-healed schools. These are resources unavailable in schools for those at poverty level.
Dave, Please help our country and your local school systems find innovative ways to remove that barrier that so inhibits those children in poverty attain equitable education.
8
This article is an important correction to an annoying trend in urban studies, which had existed since urban studies started- it is largely written by people who live in Chicago, New York, or LA. Add Boston and Seattle to that mix and stir. So, trends that are very, very important in those places (like gentrification!) are the ones that get the most attention. Meanwhile, the rest of the country isn’t experiencing the same shifts. The problems facing second tier cities are different, which are different than third tier cities, and different than suburbs and rural areas. It just seems like one is more important because the thought-makers live in certain areas above others.
9
@Megan In my small southern city, I've happily watched our neighborhoods become a lot more racially diverse over the past 20 years. The first black family to move into our white middle class neighborhood was met with some temporary hostility, but now we have several black home owners, one Hispanic neighbor and in the past we had a family or Iraqi immigrants who rented a home on our block. The neighborhoods that are poorer, are not only integrated, there are often a lot of mixed race couples in them. So, I doubt it's only in large urban areas where this change is happening.
On the other hand, my sister's small town in northern NJ, remains 100% white. Perhaps in time, the north will join the south is becoming more racially integrated. It's not perfect here, but I think we've come a long way.
2
While the direct outward appearance does affect perceptions, I feel focusing sole on them hides the bigger picture. Someone who descended from white Irish has a much of a different background from a white Croatians as black Nigerians are from black Madagascan. Or 6 generation black American mutt would be to a Ghana. Or 6th generation white American mutt to white Norwegian. The color of one's skin rarely tells the whole story. My oldest son looks like typical white American. He mom is Japanese, I am Brazilian American white mutt descended from German, English, Scottish, Portuguese, and North African. I hold 2 passports, our kids hold 3. We travel and speak multiple languages. That is hardly the same demographic as most of his white skinned peers in our neighborhood.
5
@Still Waiting for a NBA Title
it's human nature to simplify their worldview, such as skin colors
Migration patterns in the US will have profound influences on economic and social change. And it is far more complex and interesting than white vs non-white.
Seattle is actually becoming more white as minorities move to suburbs to the east, north and south. The resulting mixing of all ethnic groups has been generally helpful to all, in part because of the positive energy of more recent immigrants from Asia and Africa in communities across the economic spectrum.
First generation, well educated immigrants sometimes end up in lower skilled jobs because of language and discrimination but drive their children to succeed in school and work. Anyone who has spent time in area classrooms over time can see a shift from apathy to engagement.
All of this can be very very confusing to those committed to white superiority beliefs, who sometimes flee to small towns outside the metro area to avoid challenges to their social construct.
2
@Look Ahead, a lot of broad brush strokes being used.
7
Animals, including human animals, prefer to live in close quarters with other people who share our habits and values. This is the natural way of being. And visiting "ethnic" neighborhoods, such as Chinatown, is interesting. Whereas in America no law should prevent any American from living where we can afford to live, our freedom of association should not prevent us from living in neighborhoods more like us. Vive le difference.
16
There's quite a lot left unsaid in this analysis. I'll accept the general thesis: white neighborhoods are becoming more brown. This is different from the last thesis: brown neighborhoods are increasingly owned by whites; this even when the neighborhoods remain predominately brown.
However, I think we're missing much of the context. No mention of the urban flight following 9/11. No mention of the urban consolidation following millennials and the Great Recession. No discussion of the housing market more generally. Bergen County offers an interesting example.
Affluent areas of Bergen County were experiencing an influx of demand anyway because the housing market had already priced most New Jersey home buyers out of affluent areas in Essex County. Montclair, Glenridge, Clifton, Caldwells, West Orange.
Whether the buyers are brown or white doesn't really matter. It's really expensive to live in anywhere in NJ suburbia if you want to be near a good transportation line. The demand shifted to the relatively less expensive, at least for how much your getting, Bergen and Morris Counties.
Bergen County in particular saw a massive wave of speculation because everyone expected New Jersey to build a new mass transit rail system servicing Northern New Jersey, specifically Bergen County. Yep, that's the ARC Tunnel Chris Christie killed for no good reason.
Point being: I agree with the overall conclusion but we could benefit from a little more nuance in the analysis.
4
@Andy Urban flight after 9/11? What are you talking about? The population of NYC has increased by 600,000 since 2000.
The data shows that as a society we are becoming more homgenous. That is a good thing.
Problem though is peoples minds and openess to this shift in society is not keeping up with what is actually happening. Still too many racist bigots in society, and frankly data like this encourage them to be more racist, not more open minded.
1
I don't live in the fanciest section of the Upper Eastside, but it's one that is all "white" if you don't 'count' nannies and cleaning "ladies" and mani-pedi 'squads' and dry cleaning and laundry and convenience store clerks and operators -- and if you 'allow' for the "white man's pass" given the odd investment banker or foreign diplomat 'of color' … it's all "white."
But I definitely can't afford to move back to 751 President St. where I grew up (even though that Park Slope residence is 2 blocks from Prospect Park) -- and I very much doubt that I could 'even' afford to add some more "white" to the ongoing 'bleaching' of some block in Bed-Stuy.
4
@Thomas Murray
The Brooklyn parts I know became very Haitian, J'ouvet has become an almost borough wide event in the past 25 years, but African Americans have dwindled.
Many neighborhoods or sections of neighborhoods have become balkanized groups-
Sunsetpark area split into Hispanic, with a massive Arab influx that destroyed the neighborhood stores and bars, and also Chinatown rapidly expanding from Manhattan. Brighton became most of the area, but not as much Russian as Eastern European.
Just because you're a certain color doesn't mean you aren't a gentrifier or a neighborhood destroyer.
The projects I grew up by are now mainly Hispanic and Asian. I can walk past the dominos sugar factory that my grandfather worked in as a little boy in 1917. But I get treated as an 'outsider' in the city I was born. Things change.
I just wish I couldve grown up in a neighborhood where other people looked like me- social opportunities, hair products clothes, even cultural items like food, music, libraries, small social norms and conventions. So it matters a little, but dont assume just because someone 'belongs' or not because of their appearance.
3
@elle
I tease a Mississippi-born (and 'raised') buddy of mine about segregation 'stuff' (he, 'like' me, is a 'left-of-liberal' liberal in matters both racial and economic) -- even though, in my New York (Brooklyn, 1949-1973; Manhattan, 1973 'on'), I've never seen an un-'Balkanized' neighborhood.
Even the Irish and Italians in the "South Brooklyn" of my youth (that's the other designation for Park Slope … courtesy of its history as the southern part of Breukelen) were 'segregated' by 6th Ave. -- Irish 'above' it, the Italians in my SFX grammar school classes 'below' it!*
*We all -- as "Carroll Street Boys" forever ... and no matter where we live -- still play stickball once-a-year and together, preceded by a memorial mass in the SFX church's chapel, and followed by drinks and dinner in the SFX "Lyceum."
Sadly, and among others lost -- most 'to' Vietnam … the best one of us … and, sadly, the only full-time Carroll Street Boy 'of color' is 'departed.' Too much Irish influence, I guess. (He became an F.D.N.Y. firefighter and succumbed so very far too-soon ... having, in his time, "eaten too much smoke" as The Bravest say it. )
1
:) This is ultimately a nonsensical concern - all humans from all over the world are very similar - new cultural ideas can be learned fast - there is nothing that unique about any group. This obsession w/ race is a leftover artifact from colonialism and slavery. NYC, one of the most diverse places on the planet, is also one of the most desirable places on the planet - because all humans are pretty much the same and can work together well.
7
@Sujewa Ekanayake
Absolutely. NYC history makes the whole 'issue' look silly.
It would be interesting to see the breakdown when examined in context of the decile of median income for each neighborhood.
3
I understand the anti-gentrification backlash but I don’t think it is purely a racial issue. For instance, I used to live in Manhattan where both my wife and I held reasonably high paying professional jobs. Today, as a retired person, I can’t afford Manhattan- but I also don’t belong there as I don’t work there (or anywhere for that matter) and I wouldn’t patronize it’s clubs, restaurants or high fashion stores. Likewise, many poor residents of gentrifying areas close to Manhattan don’t work there (or don’t work at all). There is, and should be, a high price to live within commuting distance of the workplaces that fuel our economy. And there’s no “right” to occupy private real estate. Changes in neighborhoods dictated by economic reality are inevitable and healthy. White people have a right to move closer to Manhattan just as black people had a right to leave the South in the 1940’s-1960’s and move to Chicago and Detroit. Fighting economic reality based on some skin color entitlement is a losing battle.
16
@Richard Katz "White people have a right to move closer to Manhattan just as black people had a right to leave the South in the 1940’s-1960’s and move to Chicago and Detroit. " No sir. Nope. This is a false equivalency. May I kindly suggest you find a more precise and accurate example. Please read the personal narratives of African Americans of that era and literature written by scholars about our historical migrations to understand why this doesn't work. One book people really love is The Warmth of Other Suns. I will give you a hint though. It begins with R and ends with -ism and it infused almost every aspect of their lives no matter why and where they moved to build and live a better life for themselves and their families.
3
@Richard Katz Thank you for perfectly expressing the oblivious-to-my-white-privilege mindset.
1
@Richard Katz
I also think young people will start to put an end to certain parts of this issue because of the idea that home is where you are, not the street you live on. Priced out of your neighborhood? Sell your place for a mint and move somewhere else. Same as if you'd decided to move up. Out isn't down. Suburbs are connected to the real world more all the time.
People moving because they're scared of their new brown neighbors? Good. I hate living next to racists. I'm far more concerned with everyone having a relatively fair shot to make a living wage to be able to choose where they'd like to live.
2
Basic economics argues that when supply goes up, prices go down. Housing is not created "affordable"; housing becomes affordable when supply outstrips demand (absent subsidies). It DOESN'T MATTER if all builders build is "luxury apartments" because the movement of rich people into those apartments opens opportunities in the apartments/houses the move FROM (which are now less desirable). The housing then all rotates. All that matter is that supply went up.
The argument for forcing builders to build "affordable housing" is based on bad economics and nostalgia and reduces the supply of affordable housing rather than increasing it.
7
It is an unfortunate fact in this world that despite current memes about diversity's wonderfulness, diverse communities are not usually harmonious places and are prone to violence and war. This is just history and an unfortunate fact indeed. The diversity meme pushers are starry eyed idealists with no understanding of human nature.
19
@Joe, Multiculturalism doesn't work.
1
Harlem is a prime example where gentrification is pushing long time African American residents farther away. The same is happening now in Jersey City has the developers are adding luxury apartment rentals at a dizzying speed and pushing long time Black and Latino residents away. JC is just now beginning to consider affordable housing.
3
I don’t care about skin color, I do want to live around people with similar education, income and values though. The rich and poor are incompatible on many levels.
38
@There
Historically whites have impeded opportunity for blacks thus depriving them of equal “education, income and values.” The “incompatibility“ is by design.
7
@Ardyth-This isn’t a black vs. white issue at all. The vast majority of upper middle class and rich white individuals do not want to live side by side with impoverished fellow whites. Their cultural and community values often do not align one bit.
16
@ Alex. It is documented that US government entities in the 1940s and beyond unofficially sanctioned redlining (set boundaries for white and non- white neighborhoods) by their official procedures. This pattern continued for decades and is the basis for all “neighborhoods” that a not racially diverse today. So it has become “natural” to be segregated because that is all any of us have been accustomed to. Yes there are a few exceptions because of wealth but they are not the norm.
3
The trend shows that Americans can increasingly into the neighborhood they can afford, without worrying about their skin color. This is undeniable progress.
Civil rights is all about protection from discrimination for differences that people are born with - like race and ethnicity. There are no civil protections granted for being first in the neighborhood.
7
@SomebodyThinking
As someone who was always 'first in' due to economics, you are a horribly correct.
This is great progress, the more we break down barriers based on color, race, etc, the better off we are. People are people and we all should treat others with caring and respect. Education and mobility may be the two largest factors in creating a more diverse culture.
Of course as education grows, diverse groups become richer in relative terms and move into middle class and upper middle class housing where whites lived solely. The values of a good life for themselves and their children were now obtainable, and that value system is not different under the skin color as studies show. But who wants to preserve the value system of poverty? And while I understand how lank banks and mixed housing value neighborhoods supported by smart economic policies to help pay for ‘poor’ housing,myths aspirational goal of escaping poverty by education and moving out is what has fundamentally driven the diversification of middle and upper middle class neighborhoods to begin with.
2
So long as you obey the law, act civil, mind your own business, and contribute as much as you like or don't want to to community affairs you have a right to your views about people unlike you, just as you have a right to your views about people just like you, even your family members and relatives. Many people are not worth associating with: you pick whom you wish to associate with. There is not wrong morally, legally, philosophically or practically with that.
22
@me. Thank you for your thoughtful addition to the conversation. By the nature of your comment I would guess you do not want to be put in a category in which you are stereotyped.
I am like you and do not like to be stereotyped
nor do I want to stereotype others.
@me, What are called "liberals" in America are not so. Real liberals are very tolerant people.
1
The poster who stated that the only color that matters to Americans is green, is partially correct. But really, if we’re being honest here, skin color bias is America’s greatest original and ongoing sin. Slaves were black and classed as property, so they were and still are considered to be on the lowest rung of the social ladder. Hispanics are all lumped together and seen as Mexicans. America defeated them, took their land and now uses them for cheap labor, so they’re a bit higher up the ladder. We never “owned” Asians and they’re fairly light skinned, so they get a partial pass if they work hard and don’t rock the boat.
So actually, to me, what resonates is “birds of a feather flock together.” Always has been. Always will be.
9
@Anthony Taylor
Agreed, particularly because studies show that African-Americans of higher income would rather live amongst African-Americans, even if they earn significantly lower income.
And how can you blame them? Anecdotally, all one needs to do is look at the experience of Henry Louis Gates Jr. (a wealthy, well known public figure) to see what an African American person can experience living amongst white neighbors of similar (or even lower) economic means.
1
The concept of diversity, which liberals support vehemently is that people of all races should live together in a shared environment. This means neighborhoods should contain a mix of races. So we want whites and non-white living together. But when the neighborhood becomes more diverse because white people are moving into it, that's no good. Is anyone out there buying into this nonsense? Are we really saying diversification only works when non-whites are moving into white neighborhoods?
44
@me So, is there some sort of a "liberal" committee or something that makes these declarations, or are you just making statements based on ridiculous right wing talking points?
9
No, we're saying that integration is an extremely complex issue and that if we ever want to live in the diverse kind of country liberals imagine, we have to set aside our fantasy that segregation ended in the 60s and address this problem head on.
3
@me
Interesting viewpoint. Could you give me the sources where you learn what “the liberals” do and don’t believe. If you think about it, wouldn’t you think it unusual that any large group of people from such different parts of the country would all think exactly the same on any topic. I have for many years known people in New Mexico and Colorado who’s families have lived here since before the United States was a country. It is interesting to me that there is actually extreme variation in their opinions on the current immigration issues we are debating today. So once again let’s not put individuals in a “category” such as hispanic and assume they all have the same opinion.
1
It looks like white flight is reversing and our cities are returning to the global norm: wealthier people in the city center and poorer people in the outskirts. Historically income has been correlated with skin color, but it's slowly changing.
3
And yet we allowed the city of Detroit to go bankrupt. Think about it, a major American city! You could not hand a better argument to the detractors of the US that we are still a racist, black-hating country.
Actually, maybe we could. We have an arch racist in the WH who got there because he lied about the birth place of the black President.
11
Yep here in Chicago we are definitely more diverse. Safe Neighborhoods people who have worked hard to move into and saved their pennies to buy a house made for good neighbors and good schools. Now are inundated with section 8 or just low income and increasing crime.
39
@P L
You are culturally rich.
@P L
It is a landlord's choice whether to accept Section 8 tenants or not, so if you are "inundated," take it up with the homeowners or apartment building owners.
1
Diversity is a good thing. Urban and suburban neighborhoods benefit from diversity, in my opinion. I read this article thinking "why is the obvious being pointed out?" But my viewpoint of someone who lives in a very diverse major city, in a very diverse close-in neighborhood.
6
This article explains part of the 2018 midterm elections. Republicans assumed that racial segregation would keep neighborhoods in a static demographic state when in fact, people have been moving on and integrating (albeit haltingly) for quite some time now. As the overall make up of the nation changes, it is no surprise they were caught flatfooted with their reliance on catering to a certain type of white voter not realizing that those precincts were likely to change over the intervening time.
3
I'm a little leery of this article. 97% Non-Hispanic White (a term that's widely used in the Census and in social analyses) is a pretty high bar. Would the statistics look the same if the definition of a white neighborhood were one that's 90% or more white?
Hispanics or Latinos have had a quite different history from European origin whites in this country, and it makes sense to count the two separately. Counts that don't often muddle the analysis.
In California, it is wealthy Asians who have most moved into elite towns, like San Marino (outside Pasadena). So there's a certain degree of racial integration, which is positive. But there isn't class/income integration. And, as some commenters have pointed out, different groups of people can live side by side and seek to minimize their interaction.
To the extent that residential segregation is breaking down that's positive. But I wouldn't want to overstate it.
20
Most people won't admit it but I believe people want to live in a community of similar minded people, similar economically, culturally, and socially.
As newlyweds 1984, my wife and I moved into a virtually all black neighborhood in Brooklyn, NY. Apartment was spacious and much cheaper than Brooklyn Heights. Sadly we left after 9 months. People would hang out all night drinking beer and smoking weed. lots of talking and music well into the night.
My wife was mugged leaving the subway stop. our place was broken into. There was a murder on our block. It just did not work out for us. Honestly, we felt much safer and better with the Yuppies who were drinking expensive coffee.
96
@Charles
People insist that they be safe and that their KIDS are safe going to school, AT that school, and getting back home.
Thus, the entire white flight trend that still keeps social planners up at night (in tears.)
17
I think that had more to do with time than location. That stuff was happening in the UWS in the 70s and 80s. Crime in NYC is significantly lower nowadays.
Also, it depends on the neighborhood. I live in an area that is primarily Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, and some Russians. Most of the white people I meet In my neighborhood speak little to no English, but overall the area is very quiet and safe.
10
@Charles I don't know why this essential aspect of human behavior is often overlooked. My wife and I like to travel to other countries (and parts of this country) because we want to experience the different cultures and people. But ultimately, we're always glad to go "home" to those with whom we share common bonds.
29
More on the phenomena of gentrification . When it is widespread it can dramatically improve a lot of good things like sanitation , police protection , access to better goods and services , access to fresher and better food
.For those unaware at the same time the gentrification of parts of Bedford Stuyvesant in Brooklyn improved those things terrible supermarkets serving the poor and working class in other parts of Brooklyn like Brownsville were still serving meat ready to spoil at higher prices .
So, it appears that for working class and poor residents to get those improvements they need the political power and financial power of living in areas that are integrated not necessarily with Yuppies , but even older people with those advantages .
10
@VB I moved to an integrated neighborhood in 2003, one that was said to have promise but only now is gentrifying, due to the hot housing market. But for the first few years the local grocery store was horrible and even the mail service was wanting. That was the first thing I noticed, how bad almost all public (police) and private services (grocery and drug stores) were and yes, all the thefts and burglaries. It has improved with gentrification, but I'm not sure that doesn't have its drawbacks. Now my neighbors and I get hammered almost daily by wanna be housing buyers who even manage to get our cell phone numbers. If I had it to do over again, I would look elsewhere.
12
@VB
I find it interesting that you mention these things. Without noting that the message is that white people (of a certain class) deserve these things while any and everyone else doesn't. This is specially true regarding police protection. To me the police are there to protect one class of people and that's generally it.
7
What kind of progress is Yuppies having no choice but to move to areas they can afford the rent when they remain in the area interacting only among themselves doing only the things they love to do ( drinking expensive coffee , drinking beer at watering holes , and dining out ) while avoiding opportunities to interact with residents of color like there is a sign outside that says " No White Folks Allowed " ?
As a Brooklynite I saw Bedford Stuyvesant ( perhaps the most populous Black Community in America ) change overnight with the flood of young Whites who could no longer afford Manhattan and didn't want to share space with 2 or 3 people . Overnight White People stopped getting off the A Train at Hoyt St or Borough Hall and could be seen exiting en mass during the next 3 stops into Brooklyn .
The good things of course was improved security . Improved access to fresh grocery , new restaurants , and cleanliness and rehabilitated housing . The bad was old residents not being able to afford the new housing , but let's not forget the old homeowners who cashed in by selling and moved back South to their roots no longer able to afford to stay.
My point is simply how can this new demographic be viewed as progress when White People still prefer to keep their schools , their churches , and their neighborhoods all White and don't interact even when they gentrify ?
11
@VB
I want to be clear I am not suggesting the Yuppies who have transformed parts of Bedford Stuyvesant closest to the Manhattan are intentionally avoiding residents of color as it appears simply natural behavior and not consciously racist .
As for the residents I don't think they are avoiding the coffee joints , new restaurants , or drinking spots to avoid the new residents either as it appears to be a question of affordability and cultural differences .
However , the White Flight and refusal of White People to integrate their schools , neighborhoods, and churches, that has been the norm for many decades is certainly intentional and racist .
3
@VB
The new sundown towns.
It’s all about class and money. It always has been.
56
@Ed
And there’s nothing wrong with that.
People shouldn’t be forced to love next to someone based on some flawed social engineering doctrine.
9
@Ed If America were only about class and money, why is Bill Cosby in prison while Harvey Weinstein's charges are slow walking away?
2
Isn’t it really about income and wealth? Since I thought most studies said neighborhoods are getting very not diverse on income and wealth, this change simply reflects growing wealth in non-white homeowners. I doubt even the most exclusive neighborhoods notice the Indian hedge fund partner or Hispanic cardiologist joining the neighborhood. For them, the most important color is green.
80
Yep. In the mind of the white lawyer or surgeon, a Malaysian-born, American-educated engineer whose kids attend the local private church-school and wear the school tartan is “in”. We were all immigrants and appreciate that others want what we
want—and have worked hard to get, and adopt the neighborhood traditions and rules. Race isn’t the issue.
But such diversity doesn’t guarantee votes for one political party or the other. Politics is far more complicated—and serious money doesn’t extend that far down.
The other problem is that the “white” people (and those admitted to its privileges and immunities), including those of lesser rank, are coming more and more to see themselves in the construct of “identity” politics—as a minority of its own. So far, Democrats have largely shielded the high-income, educated class and the businesses which produce their income and growing wealth. If Democrats levy higher taxes on such privileged class, or dictate national policies which erode the NIMBY power of such class, the members of the class will not be undyingly loyal to Democrats.
17
@Michael Blazin
Yes, this has very much to do with class, ver little to do with skin color per se.
9
"They could include protections for lower-income homeowners from the property taxes that rise when home prices do."
That's exactly what Prop 13 does in California. Doesn't look like it's been at all effective in preventing gentrification and displacement in the state.
13
Rent control protects the rich?
Well, you're from Montclair.
Rent control protects my 100-year-old friend who lives alone in the one-bedroom apartment she, her sister, and her mother moved into in the 1960s. Or the Pakistani family next door to her. And countless others.
Some people on the Upper West Side do continue to dwell in rent-stabilized apartments, but they are not rich. If they have country houses, they bought them decades ago, when they were young, for very little, and in both places they live modestly.
They tend to have a lot of books and for a treat occasionally buy seats at Carnegie Hall that only die-hard classical music fans have the strength to climb up to.
Or they go to Peoples' Symphony Concerts at Washington Irving High School for really cheap.
What do outsiders know about our city.
The rich, the rich, like an ignorant, derisive drumbeat.
They may admit an Asian or two, maybe an Indian doctor, but they're out there more than ever.
6
1980 in America - what percentage of people knew anyone from Mexico or Central America?
The big Mexican restaurants were Chi-Chis and El Torito.
And about 80% of the non-whites moving into all white hoods since 1980 are from?
For the reverse - whites moving into non white hoods - Look no further than East Austin.
5
I simply fail to understand why you would leave 20-30% of whites out of your statistical analysis. Just because someone boarded a boat in Europe and landed south of the Rio Grande River doesn't make them any less 'white' than someone that landed north of the Rio Grande River.
What's the difference between an Italian immigrant who settled in New York City versus one who settled in Buenos Aires?
18
@J lawrence The number of Argentinians or Chileans (the "Whitest" Latin American countries) moving to the US is irrelevant. People in South America usually move to Europe when there's economic trouble. Most Hispanics in the US come from Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador... countries with a great percentage of indigenous population.
14
Most South Americans of European descent either try to get EU citizenship through their grandparents or get jobs in Spain & Portugal because they speak the language.
12
@J lawrence
An Italian immigrant who landed in New York City was much more likely to get an education than one who landed in Buenos Aires. This fact explains one of the long time conodrums of lesser national development in Argentina as compared to the U.S. I don't have the cites at my fingertips but you can look it up.
5
In a time when the "leader" of the country semi-officially supports, and most certainly doesn't do much to discourage rampant, blatant and often violent racism, its good to know at least SOME things are changing in an encouraging direction!! All-European-ethnicity neighbourhoods (let's not say "white", since that would be playing into the hands of those who think that humanity is divided into a few large groups they call "races"- which is scientifically NOT the case at all) are in fact becoming much less common than they once were. Less segregation doesn't always lead to less discrimination but its definitely a start!!
12
@Joseph Ross Mayhew "those who think that humanity is divided into a few large groups they call "races"- which is scientifically NOT the case at all"
That is stunning denialism, not just ignorance. Every consumer DNA test can distinguish the races from each other, and confirm eyeball estimates.
10
@CarolT
Sorry, the comment isn't "denialism". What those tests use are common DNA sequences found in geographical areas. It doesn't break people down to "races". Race is a sociopolitical construct, not a scientific fact. That's what this article and the prior commenter is mostly talking about. The best you can say is that grouping genetic traits together makes a "race"; consequently Africa holds the greatest number of "races" given the genetic diversity of the population.
3
@FDRT It's the shared genetic component that makes a race. And those races are still distinct when they migrate to another geographical area. They are distinguishable by eyeball as white versus black. This article is not about hairsplitting differences between tribes.
3
Its very hard to interpret what this data might mean without additional detail.
Does the desegregation of previously all white neighborhoods mean primarily that wealthy Asian Americans have moved in?
Is there increasing residential proximity for lower income minorities? Is that a form of progress?
Is increasing diversity in previously predominantly African American neighborhoods an indicator of "gentrification" (that African Americans are being priced out)?
What may be move clear is that many parts of the country are in transition, with a shift in demand (increasing costs and wealth) in urban areas and decreasing costs and wealth in some suburbs or ex-urbs.
18
Ok, let's go over it again, what history has taught us re progress.
1-Make sure it is right.
2-Do it voluntarily, at least in the beginning and slowly.
Examples of mistakes re #1, prohibition and promoting hard drugs in the 1960s. At the time they were thought of as progress but turned out to be horror stories.
Examples of mistakes re #2, going to fast on gay rights. Instead of going slowly like civil unions instead of gay marriage, a backlash is now coming and a Supreme Court may now rule that sexual preference re gays is not protected in the workplace.
It takes time for people to accept a minority. History has taught us this over and over. If you go too fast you hurt the people you are trying to help. Get what you need, not what you want. Gays need civil unions, they don't need gay marriage at least not yet.
5
@Paul Not sure exactly how your comment relates to the article but, according to Gallup, in May 2018, 67% of Americans approved of same-sex marriage. That is a clear majority. It seems your opinion is in the minority - I understand that can be an uncomfortable position - but progress marches on.
37
@Paul
Are you sure you are commenting on the right article?!?
26
@Paul and who decides what gay people need? The almighty Paul? Because they can't decide for themselves?
16