For some blacks, the photo was a symbol of how they were losing clout in the neighborhood amid rising home values....
Los Angeles’ African American population has been declining for more than two decades. Latinos now make up the majority in many working-class South L.A. neighborhoods. Leimert Park, nestled at the foot of the Baldwin Hills, has long been home to many of L.A’s African American elites. It’s seeing big changes, with two new light rail lines running through and interest from whites priced out of neighborhoods to the north.
“It’s almost like Leimert Park is the last battleground,” said Earl Ofari Hutchinson, president of the Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable. “It’s the last piece of turf that African Americans can really call and really feel is their home. At this point in time, it’s being encroached upon.”...
March 16, 2017
"Selfie of white joggers in African American neighborhood sets off debate, and quest for understanding."
L.A. Times headline.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
52 comments:
How casual the racism is. Might as well have said "There goes the neighborhood".
Battleground for what?
Are you sure this article isn't from the Onion?
So, is gentrification good or bad? Discuss.
So, is an African American ghetto good or bad ? Discuss.
Fred Sanford didn't like it either when the Fuentes' moved in next door.
For some blacks, the photo was a symbol of how they were losing clout in the neighborhood amid rising home values...
Losing clout but gaining home equity!
I love Karma like this. The selfie makes things really entertaining.
"For some blacks..."
The community organizers.
Net out-migration of whites from California, ethnic cleansing of blacks in California by Hispanics, blame whites for whatever.
I didn't actually read the article. The LA Times wanted me to turn off ad-block to read the article, and I thought "fair enough", so I did. But after doing so the page never stopped jumping around from endless loading and re-loading of ads and self-starting videos I had no desire to watch, and I wasn't interested in waiting around even longer on the off-chance that the page would settle down without freezing my browser, so fuck 'em.
Back in the '80's, I knew a fair number of gay guys who bought old, neglected homes in bad neighborhoods in DC and fixed them up beautifully. Gay men pioneered gentrification. Because they normally had no children, they did what young straight couples with kids were unwilling to do - live in high-crime areas and take risks. After a certain number of gays moved in and renovated, then along came the coffee shops and restaurants.
I remember white liberals praising gays to the skies for restoring the beauty of rundown Victorians (and paving the way for straight white liberals to move back into the areas, once the hookers and dealers and addicts had left and syringes no longer littered the sidewalk.)
Wait, so blacks want to keep their neighborhood segregated?
Angel-Dyne, I had the same experience. IE kept losing the web page so I finally did what you did.
But if a bunch of white people met at an uppity coffee parlor to discuss how to defend the neighborhood against change caused by "other" moving in, what would the reaction by LA Times moralists be?
Tribalism fucks with your head. It's like a funnel that gradually forces you out of options. Eventually you find yourself saying and doing things that are not really your choice or in your best interest.
Headline should read: Selfie of white joggers in African American neighborhood sets off racist uproar by blacks, and pleas for acceptance by whites. Funny how the media uses euphemisms rather than clearly acknowledging black racism.
I have a dream.
You'd think they'd welcome the whites, given that the more whites live in a neighborhood the less likely the neighborhood is to become a shithole.
Block busting was the old name for this, at least when it ran in the other direction.
Massive resistance in all things!
Joggers. Oh, the horror.
Article: "White families currently make up about 2% of the neighborhood, a statistic in sharp contrast to the fleeting moment captured by Halliburton’s photograph."
White people. 2%. Oh, the horror.
Latino gang members firebombed black residents to drive them out of Boyle Heights project, prosecutors allege
The World is explaining to Earl Ofari Hutchinson that the land he is living on would be worth more if he weren't living on it. Why is he being so obtuse?
I thought they liked whites, the government is forever trying to move blacks into white towns and schools, thought that was because the blacks wanted the peace, quiet and good schools that whites used to enjoy, even in lower class neighborhoods such as where I grew up:
Englewood (https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=englewood+chicago&FORM=HDRSC2) (https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Englewood+Shooting&FORM=IRMHIP)
(https://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Englewood+Shooting&FORM=HDRSC6
Chatham: http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/community/chatham
Grand Crossing :http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/community/greater-grand-crossing
Maybe a special preserve could be set aside to conserve the native negro population.
So segregation is good now? I can't keep track of that.
Angel-Dyne said...
I didn't actually read the article.
'Twas rambling screed.
The LA Times wanted me to turn off ad-block to read the article, and I thought "fair enough", so I did.
?!?!? You're not doing it right.
"Lightbeam" addon in a FF non-blocking profile says of that LATimes page:
YOU HAVE VISITED 1 SITE
YOU HAVE CONNECTED WITH 181 THIRD PARTY SITEs
With my blocking profile there are no connections, no ads and no complaint about ad-blocking...I block the thing that checks for ad-blockers.
When the only white folks you see are running, it's probably not a very good neighborhood.
This is not new at all.
Back in the 80's it was CA Democrats, including all black Democrats, against Hispanic illegal aliens for exactly the reasons Hutchison states. It is tribal and it is about the labor competition.
But the Democrats switched policies and alliances, and held on to the black political machine, which is top down due to its funding - its really a bought system of political professionals.
Hutchison complains about whites because it is still politically deadly to complain about Hispanics, even though they are the real issue. Hutchison knows where his teams $ come from.
Leimert Park is the neighborhood where poor Elizabeth Short, 'The Black Dahlia', was found in 1947.
“It’s the last piece of turf that African Americans can really call and really feel is their home. At this point in time, it’s being encroached upon
It's too easy to say "reverse the races here and see what you get" since obviously that's ugly racism of the type the Professor would never allow.
The black-white angle is not that important, though. The black-latino angle is where it's at--and it highlights a dynamic that's been in effect for a while now and that means we're going to have a lot more of this kind of conflict in the future. Namely: blacks vote strongly for Dems, and Dems push strongly for expanded immigration (legal or otherwise) of Latinos (who Dems feel will vote for Dems). Dems push hard for the kind of big government programs that harm black family creation/stability, and Leftist culture pushes hard for a more "past" traditional mores (regarding kids, families, etc). Dems push hard for abortion, and blacks disproportionately obtain abortions.
So. You've got lots of young latinos coming in and hearing Dem promises of government assistance. You've got blacks as a group finding low-skill jobs harder and harder to find, and since they're competing w/cheap immigrant labor the pay for such jobs is much lower than it would otherwise be. You've got Dems taking the black vote for granted so they're not willing to actually DO much/spend much political capital on things that might help blacks, so what you see instead is lip service to black social causes (BLM, etc) but actual work done for latino causes (expanding immigration, etc).
When more-affluent 2nd and 3rd generations latino immigrants start displacing native blacks...well, that's pretty much were we are now in lots of places. To the Left identity politics rules all, of course, but what will they do when one protected minority group starts seeing another protected minority group as the cause of many of their problems?
Sorry dudes, but the democrats have decided your demographics do not supply them with the power they crave. It IS a good thing you vote and vote in such a tribal manner, because if you didn't you would have been dropped years ago.
Trump is your guy. He's a natural ally to black america.
Diversity is our strength, after all.
Trump isnt going to get the bulk of the black vote, ever, unless he buys the black political machine. Thats what its all about. And the other side has the real money and will always outbid Trump & co.
I remember Jack Kemp trying very hard on this, trying to come to an accomodation on policies and shared interests. That failed, because it was far too honest.
So segregation is good now? I can't keep track of that.
If white men want segregation it is bad...evil even.
If anyone else does...it just makes sense...
Compton California was founded by a White racist who wanted a White community. When my dad lived there in the 50's it was almost totally White. Then it became almost totally Black. Today it is mainly Hispanic.
Paging John Vorster, blacks want you to come back and ensure that racial segregation policies are properly respected....
HoodlumDoodlum said...
It's too easy to say "reverse the races here and see what you get" since obviously that's ugly racism of the type the Professor would never allow.
"An especially precocious mischief-maker ["Uncle Chang"] created a Chrome (Spoogle) extension that changes “White” to “black” on various shitlib websites like PuffedHo, Feedbuzz, and Shalom."
It's pretty funny.
Fernandinande @10:25 AM: Thanks for the advice!
"Trump isnt going to get the bulk of the black vote..."
Likely not. But convince someone on the left that, instead of 5%, Trump can garner 20% of the black vote. Then watch their eyes.
Angel-Dyne said...
Fernandinande @10:25 AM: Thanks for the advice!
I dunno if it was advice, it was probably bragging...I rilly rilly hate advertising and tracking and use a combination of privoxy (500+ domains completely blocked), "adblock plus" (a few remaining ads and anything that blinks or moves is blocked, including those title-bars that appear as you scroll) and a few entries in the "hosts" file. I run that Lightbeam addon every once in a while to find new loose ends.
Yep, plenty of free time.
gerry: But if a bunch of white people met at an uppity coffee parlor to discuss how to defend the neighborhood against change caused by "other" moving in, what would the reaction by LA Times moralists be?
That would very much depend on whether they were goodwhites or badwhites. These can generally be distinguished by the following criteria:
1) Goodwhites vote Democrat and are fairly well-heeled to very well-off indeed. Badwhites can be well-to-do but they're not Democrats and they don't fulfill goodwhite condition number 2:
2) Goodwhites know the right code-words for discussing keeping their neighborhood racially exclusive. They're very adept at using Compassionate Progressive government housing programs (e.g. Section 8) for ridding territory they want of property value-lowering minorities and dumping them on the neighborhoods of badwhites. In my region the goodwhites in the major metropolitan agglomeration have been carrying out this program for several years now. Not only does it improve the quality of life and property values of the goodwhites, but it allows them to fuck with the neighborhoods and schools of badwhites and call them racists if they dare to grumble about it. Win-win!
Though I am a badwhite my own neighborhood is a little too pricey for the goodwhites to section-8. But I hear they've been working on that by pushing for significantly more generous housing vouchers for the people they want to get out of their own neighborhoods and into more well-to-do badwhite areas.
Shouldn't the citizens of the "black" neighborhood be chanting "diversity is our strength!"?
"So, is gentrification good or bad? Discuss."
Am I buying or selling?
@ M Jordan "So, is gentrification good or bad? Discuss."
It's a very good thing. I have lived in Minneapolis (north-side) for 30+ years (my family since the 1930's). When I moved here, it was just a bunch of Germans, Swedes and folks from other European countries. I could walk my dog at midnight without a care. Gang activity was nonexistent. It really only happened a couple of miles or so to the south. By 2005, the gangs had moved up to my neighborhood and were shooting each other left and right. Imagine people running through your yard shooting at one another. I and my neighbors picked bullets out of our houses. Toddlers in the crossfire were being shot and killed. One develops the ability to count the number of shots fired to the point where it's second nature -- your brain starts counting at shot number one.
The reason the gangs moved up here was because they could buy a house in their mother's name with no money down (usually in August) and also get an extra $5-10k. The had no intention of ever making a payment. And because the moved in in August, they didn't have to pay for gas or electricity because by the time they were overdue to the point where those utilities would be shut off, Minnesota's Cold-weather Rule was in effect (utilities can't shut down service from October-April) and foreclosure takes about a year or so. This is a pretty good set-up for gangs. Free housing to run their drug and money laundering operation, free utilities and $5-10k to boot. Then come spring so they'd need no heat and by the time they were finally booted out for not paying the mortgage, they'd trash the place, rip out all the copper pipes and wiring, and often, as happened across the street from my house, burn the place down.
Then in 2008, the housing crisis hit. No more loans to people without incomes and a credit history. So they had to rent apartments in up in Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park. So now that's where the crime is, along with further south as it was 30+ years ago.
So people who could actually buy a home started moving back, which is great because there are fantastic, inexpensive starter-homes in the neighborhood with tons of oak and built-in cabinetry. Now it's lots of families from Somalia, Mexico, Laos, Nigeria, Ecuador, etc. A pretty diverse place. And restaurants and shops are moving back to the neighborhood too.
Now I'm not saying things are as safe as they were 30+ years ago, but I haven't heard gunshots in months. Maybe even longer. And I have some wonderful neighbors and great little shops and restaurants.
So from my perspective, gentrification is a wonderful thing.
Yeah, encroachment upon that ancient, antebellum African-American communities of Crenshaw, Compton, and Leimert Park.
I just chuckled at the sentence "Tucked in the very back were two black runners". Damned racist joggers, making like they're being chased by black folks.
So, apartheid is cool now?
I have seen interviews and conversations of blacks who talk about not feeling "safe" in the suburbs. As in, suburbs that haven't had a murder in years. Suburbs where women go for walks late at night with no worries at all. And that is why they don't move there. But in what possible sense are they "not safe"? Do they just imagine that blacks would get murdered there? As an example, my suburb has all sorts of people, though generally pretty well-off. Still no crime, not a single racially based beating. Safety comes with income, not race.
These immigrants need to move back where they come from!
Maybe blacks could put convenants on their houses?
Nothing anti-racist progressives hate more than having blacks living near them.
When Compton isn't even really all that Black anymore, things have changed.
Thing is, there's no love lost between the Latinos and Blacks; the Latino gangs are hardcore on a quest to kill off the inner city Black youth, pretty much. They've essentially taken over the bulk of South Central LA, Compton, etc., and it's not going so well for the whole "minority united" thing from the Black perspective. Makes for good news stories and TV ratings, though. And hella good social justice protest placards, natch.
Good living though? Not so much.
This all due to our response to global warming. Global warming amped up the whole "light rail" thing. The "light rail" in that neighborhood raised property values and the rest ... is history. Without global warming, the neighborhood would still be segregated and poor -- which, apparently, is the desired outcome because tribal and cultural appropriation, white privilege and stufff.
If you can't find a fight to join, start one. Isn't that what the McDonald's Twitter clown said today?
Post a Comment