About The Browntable
2009
Print
Email
I've taken on the concept of "white flight" on the internet, but the question of how and why individuals segregate themselves in real life is far more interesting to me. When it comes to conurbation, the racial and class-based variables are literally endless. Aaron Renn, aka Urbanophile, writes provocatively at New Geography about the phenomenon of self-segregation, and how it overlaps with our elite media consensus about where is "best" to live:
[T]here’s a generally standing answer to the question of what cities are the best, the most progressive and best role models for small and mid-sized cities. The standard list includes Portland, Seattle, Austin, Minneapolis, and Denver. In particular, Portland is held up as a paradigm, with its urban growth boundary, extensive transit system, excellent cycling culture, and a pro-density policy....
If you take away the dominant Tier One cities like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles you will find that the “progressive” cities aren’t red or blue, but another color entirely: white. In fact, not one of these “progressive” cities even reaches the national average for African American percentage population in its core county.
He also provides the (tiny) graph in this post, which indicates that the "good" cities are indeed below the national average for black folk. A new article by Rich Benjamin at the American Prospect has much more on "Whitopias" (or "White Meccas. Or White Wonderlands. Or Caucasian Arcadias. Or Blanched Bunker Communities. Or White Archipelagos").
Ta-Nehisi Coates weighs in, saying that "the notion that black people are pawns on a chess-board, which conservatives and liberals move around in order to one-up each each other, has got to go."I can agree to that. The Root also touched on this issue in a story about black cowboys (!) chilling in the Wild, Wild West. But if Medicine for Melancholy taught us anything, it's that being the only two black people in San Francisco is rough.
But should we care that all the "good cities" are taken by non-whites? Of course, as Renn concedes, one must exclude the "dominant tier one cities" like my hometown of Chicago that are almost definitionally bursting with diversity. This pours a bit of cold water on the whole theory that those in search of urban utopia "choose" nonblack cities--though even Chicago is still enormously segregated.
It's certainly a fascinating conversation. My friend Reihan Salam and I got into it recently on Bloggingheads.TV. Watch:
--DAYO OLOPADE
Comments
UGG Boots Cheap Ugg Boots Women's Classic Tall Tall Sheepskin Boot Ugg Classic Short Boots Classic Short Boot Ugg Classic Cardy Boots Women's Classic Cardy Ugg Classic Mini Boots Ugg Sundance Boots Ugg Sundance II Boots Ugg Kid's Boots Ugg Children Boots Ugg Bailey Button Boots Ugg Ultral Short Boots Ugg Ultral Tall Boots Ugg Metallic Tall Metallic Tall Boots Nightfall Boots Ugg Nightfall Boots
Did someone put Northeast Portland into another county? I guess they're just invisible now. So inconvenient when reality doesn't fit into your "theory."
Aaron Renn is such a hack.
Come on, actually using the “core” county demographics that the cities are in to base conclusions on...?
That is just data manipulation and has no real meaning.
Even the cities selected aren't lilywhite... Minneapolis has a higher proportion of African-Americans than either Minnesota or the nation. Wouldn’t that be considered a mark of success in attracting African-Americans to the city, in addition to many other groups?
Many cities become "white" if we focus only on the core county demographics instead of the municipal demographics alone. Detroit would be majority white, for example, if we just looked at Wayne County. Cincy would overwhelmingly white if we just looked at Hamilton County. Looking at the “core” county skews the data
Now, the trick is why does Renn focus on county demographics as opposed to city?
If the intention to to put the city into a broader scope, wouldn't the most accurate measurement be the metropolitan statistical area, which would be a more equitable unit of analysis than core counties?
If we look at MSAs for any city, you'll find all areas to be majority white... Is the person living in the mostly white city of Portland somehow different than the person living in the Chicago Metro Region that resides in lilywhite DuPage County next door to Cook when it comes to diversity?
This is not a real quantitative study; this is popular news story that would never be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
The whole idea of diversity for residential neighborhoods is a bunch of hooey. I saw a piece on CNN last night about a town in California that's 92% Hispanic, and the residents talked positive about solving community problems "the Hispanic way."
Neighborhoods are cohesive when residents share a common expectation of public behavior, which is usually motivated by common culture. Was there anything wrong with Chinatown, Little Italy, or Spanish Harlem? Maybe it would work best if Hispanics, blacks, Koreans, Muslims, etc. all had enclaves to call their own.
Diversity in and of itself is not an indicator of quality of life. Chicago and DC might be very diverse places but they are also high crime, have ineffective city government, high costs of living, and horrible public schools. Most people of any color would live somewhere without those characteristics given the opportunity and all the desirable places have those qualities plus are located in areas with great access to the outdoors and active lifestyles.
It's one thing to find places like DC, Chicago, and NY exciting to be when you are relatively young and/or childless, but the afore-mentioned factors make them a much more difficult place to want to live once you have a family and your focus shifts from your social and professional life.