Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Politically correct white flight

Surprise! The most "progressive" leftwing/ liberal cities in the US are..you guessed it, mostly white! A case of "do that racial integration thingy over there but not in my back yard". Who wudda thunk it that progressives/ liberals were so racist, huh?!

Aaron M. Renn at the indispensable New Geography site has a fascinating analysis of a curious aspect shared by progressive urban havens like Austin, Portland and suchlike: they have relatively few black people in them.
Excerpt:


This raises troubling questions about these cities. Why is it that progressivism in smaller metros is so often associated with low numbers of African Americans? Can you have a progressive city properly so-called with only a disproportionate handful of African Americans in it? In addition, why has no one called these cities on it? As the college educated flock to these progressive El Dorados, many factors are cited as reasons: transit systems, density, bike lanes, walkable communities, robust art and cultural scenes.

But another way to look at it is simply as White Flight writ large. Why move to the suburbs of your stodgy Midwest city to escape African Americans and get criticized for it when you can move to Portland and actually be praised as progressive, urban and hip?


Many of the policies of Portland are not that dissimilar from those of upscale suburbs in their effects. Urban growth boundaries and other mechanisms raise land prices and render housing less affordable exactly the same as large lot zoning and building codes that mandate brick and other expensive materials do. They both contribute to reducing housing affordability for historically disadvantaged communities. Just like the most exclusive suburbs.

More:

Imagine a large corporation with a workforce whose African American percentage far lagged its industry peers, sans any apparent concern, and without a credible action plan to remediate it. Would such a corporation be viewed as a progressive firm and employer? The answer is obvious. Yet the same situation in major cities yields a different answer. Curious.


In fact, lack of ethnic diversity may have much to do with what allows these places to be "progressive". It's easy to have Scandinavian policies if you have Scandinavian demographics.

It doesn't surprise me that people want to live around people like them, whether in terms of race, class, educational level, whatever. I object only to any legal impediment to people being free to move and to live where they want to. I simply find it risible that progressives would criticize others for allegedly having bad racial motives for what they call "white flight" (though middle class people of all ethnicities do the same thing) when they themselves are doing the same thing.

4 Opinion(s):

Viking said...

Of course there are no blacks there!
That's why Europeans who lectured on diversity and equality for years are now swallowing their words.
I think how liberal someone is is inversely proportional to their proximity to blacks.
And the tendency of liberals to lecture on the subject is inversely proportional to how many they've had to live near ...

Doberman said...

@ Viking, "I think how liberal someone is is inversely proportional to their proximity to blacks." Yep. To live with blacks is to never want to again. Like you say, Europeans who lectured us all those years are feeling it too. All together now, awwww....not.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps they are liberal because of the fact that they still stay in a overwhelmingly white society.

My favourite joke is as follows.

Q: What is the difference between a racist and a tourist in Africa?
A: A week.

You're not laughing.
It is because you see the truth in the joke.

Fact is that white people that live amongst other whites are not racist and they tend to think that blacks are like whites, but just with black skin.

As the black numbers in white societies increase, the white liberals quickly realise that blacks are not merely whites with black skin. They quickly see the difference in quality between an all white society and a mixed one.

This realization of existing racial difference is what the MSM tries to pass of as racism.

Blacks agree that whites are racist, BECAUSE THEY HAVE ONLY ONE POINT OF REFERENCE, which is of course their own. Blacks have never experienced a white society, because everywhere they go they take their genetic criminality with them.

White can compare the quality of life before blacks arrived in their communities and life after and the comparison always reflects badly on the blacks. Very, very badly.

Uhmm, vewry, very, very badly

This comparison and realization is the essence of racism and it is entirely the fault of the blacks and the way in which they handle themselves.

Blacks cause racism by merely being whom they are, very much like a virus causes flu by being what it is.

A4

Anonymous said...

Reminds me of when I lived in CT - all the liberal Jewish people lived in Sea Point and carried on about the poor blacks. They were the first to emigrate when Apartheid fell and the blacks moved in.