tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2058188035264594577.post5955957061496391103..comments2023-09-29T05:16:37.208-04:00Comments on PragmaticIdealists: Progressive and Not Diverse? Not Reallymike3550http://www.blogger.com/profile/09621465191508532187noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2058188035264594577.post-38509208013658281532009-10-27T11:21:08.386-04:002009-10-27T11:21:08.386-04:00I've commented on this elsewhere, so forgive t...I've commented on this elsewhere, so forgive the recycling of an argument, but Minneapolis does not necessarily have a "small" African American population. The percentage of Black residents in Minneapolis is about 150% the national percentage. So this may be small in comparison to Detroit, but I would hesitate to call such numbers small.<br /><br />Also, as a white person living in North Minneapolis, I must say it isn't quite as segregated as popular opinion would have it. And to be fair, there is a fair amount of money coming in to the area for purposes of urban renewal, though we have yet to see whether it's meaningful or just another attempt at gov't-led gentrification.<br /><br />That being said, I do think the main thrust of the idea (that we can't just ship Portland's policies elsewhere) is still valid, but probably for a lot more reasons that the arguable differences in racial diversity and segregation.Wozhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13247249018163299884noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2058188035264594577.post-23148587691635530092009-10-23T12:28:23.580-04:002009-10-23T12:28:23.580-04:00AD- These are really great points, so let me addre...AD- These are really great points, so let me address them as best I can one-by-one.<br /><br />First, you are correct that there is not a single measure of segregation that captures the entire experience. There are generally five: dissimilarity (uneveness), isolation/exposure, clustering, concentration, and centralization. The two of which I report here are the most commonly used. I also agree entirely that African Americans remain the single most disenfranchised race in America. On the other hand, that doesn't justify Renn's conclusions that these are "white" cities as much as they are "not black" cities. African American's unique disadvantages not withstanding, it is an important distinction.<br /><br />I would disagree that studies have come up with different results. The different measures of segregation are all highly correlated and, though there are quirks, Midwestern cities tend to have the highest degrees of segregation on all five measures (<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=uGslMsIBNBsC&printsec=frontcover&dq=american+apartheid&ei=MNjhSv29LpO2yATyiLTWCw#v=onepage&q=&f=false" rel="nofollow">Massey & Denton</a>). That doesn't take away your extremely valid point that studying the experience of segregation on the ground is also important and manifests itself in different ways -- though there are similarities. And, as sociologist <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=rvglqO_gtYkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=black+pickett+fences&ei=4djhSuKHO4G0yQS0-fShDA#v=onepage&q=&f=false" rel="nofollow">Mary Pattillo</a> has shown, it is true that even middle class black neighborhoods tend to be more disadvantaged than comparable white neighborhoods.<br /><br />Now, on your last point, I completely agree. Simply transferring policies from Portland to other areas -- and snootily looking down one's noses for being in cities that don't have Portland's composition -- is not going to work. The built environment is different (e.g., New Orleans is a city based on a four hundred year old layout) but, more than anything, racial politics are coded into redistribution policies that make accomplishing those goals much harder. And, particularly for Portland, that is true. <br /><br />But, as I said before, to call these cities (with the exception of Portland and possibly Seattle) exclusively white is just not supported by the data.mike3550https://www.blogger.com/profile/09621465191508532187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2058188035264594577.post-91919499424378667372009-10-23T11:37:29.243-04:002009-10-23T11:37:29.243-04:00You've offered a worthwhile rebuttal to Mr. Re...You've offered a worthwhile rebuttal to Mr. Renn's provocative post, but I can't help but think that some of the subsequent commentary puts it most effectively, by focusing on aspects of urban living that remain stubbornly empirical. The Mumford Center's segregation measurements are just a few of many exhaustive attempts to calculate segregation across American cities; no single one that I am aware of has been endorsed by a preponderance of demographers. Segregated or not, cities like Portland/Austin/Denver/Minneapolis with small African American populations (not referring to other races) have to contend with far less concentrated urban poverty and the ensuing public safety or social welfare that absorbs large amounts of city funds for what remains the most disenfranchised race in American cities. This is hardly due to progressive policies that have effectively addressed these issues: the poor African American communities in Minneapolis and Austin and Denver are just as struggling as they are in Cleveland and St. Louis--the only difference is they are much smaller and comprise a lower portion of the city's population at large.<br /><br />I'm not arguing with the Mumford Center's numbers per say, but I know that other studies have produced entirely different results through their own calculation methodologies. Sometimes how the city looks from a ground-level, empirical perspective matters just as much, since this is what average citizens react to, and influences relocation decisions. And from that angle, of the cities on this list I know well, Minneapolis and Austin both have a visible presence of segregation. North Minneapolis and East Austin are their respective "black" sides of town; visual surveys would reveal that these parts of town are lagging in vibrant neighborhoods that the class of people for which Renn writes are seeking. But these neighborhoods are dwarfed by the surrounding white, vibrant neighborhoods that are not burdened by high crime, abandonment, or high concentrations of persons with less than an 8th grade education. Indianapolis, conversely, has no identifiably black "side of town", with pockets scattered throughout the city, as well as a number of neighborhoods where they comprise 15-25% of the population; in turn, Indianapolis (its successful downtown notwithstanding) by and large lacks the sort of vibrant urban neighborhoods that a person would easily find in the largely white (or at least overwhelmingly non-black) Portland.<br /><br />Thus Renn argues that the policies in place in the aforementioned white cities simply cannot be successfully transposed to Cincinnati, Memphis, or Baltimore. They have to work with their concomitant higher rates of poverty and need, and some cities (Houston and Atlanta) are doing a better job of this than others. Other cities have simply organized "progressive" policies that have been abetted as a result of segregation: cities as divergent as Chicago and Louisville manage to attract an urbanite vibe because all of their vibrant, white neighborhoods are more or less clustered along one side of town with the majority of political capital. The dividing line that separates these successful neighborhood from the African American ones is profound. New Orleans, always an anomaly of which I am quite familiar, has managed to retain a number of successful urban neighborhoods despite being quite unsegregated and having no clearly black "side of town". However, New Orleans' ostensible liberal infrastructure has completely failed to translate into progressive policymaking the way one might see in Denver or Portland.AmericanDirthttp://dirtamericana.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.com