The Most Diverse Cities Are Often The Most Segregated

[Chase Unperson]

This is from Nate Silver's blog and he says Chicago is statistically the. Most segregated city.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...st-segregated/

This data totally correlates with my lifetime of observations. The South is forever maligned by the north and west as being racist and segregated but the truth is that racism of the upper Midwest and northeast was probably even greater than blacks experienced in the south after the great migration.

[sentinel]

No.f**kin.duh.

Everyone knows Chicago is highLy segregated - not sure why it's necessary to be continuously reminded of this...when we saw a nearly identical article in 2014. And 2103. And 2012...

Also if you sincerely believe that the upper Midwest has been more racist than the South, you need help. Should I also assume that you believe in the "War of Northern Aggression"?

[Chase Unperson]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Also if you sincerely believe that the upper Midwest has been more racist than the South, you need help. Should I also assume that you believe in the "War of Northern Aggression"?

Most racist begets most segregated.

Perhaps more racist is not the best description. Perhaps equally racist is a better description.

No I don't believe in war of northern aggression or even know what that mean s

[hauntedheadnc]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Also if you sincerely believe that the upper Midwest has been more racist than the South, you need help. Should I also assume that you believe in the "War of Northern Aggression"?

Your defensiveness indicates that you find it a touchy subject, and one you'd perhaps rather not confront. However, the facts stand that some cities in the supposedly enlightened North and Midwest have very poor track records when it comes to race relations. Some of those cities to this day have very clearly drawn lines of demarcation between the races. I seem to recall seeing, probably on here, a color-coded map of where people of various races live in Detroit. I was struck by how 8 Mile Road is the line of demarcation between black and white. Almost no whites on the inside, almost no blacks on the outside.

Race relations nationwide suck, but the South serves as a scapegoat for the rest of the country to point a finger at while ignoring their own problems.

[RCDC]

Income mobility is probably more important than what areas people live.

[pico44]

I appreciate this study very much due to the fact that every integration study in the past has listed New York as one of the most highly segregated cities in the country. I remember one listing it as more segregated than Chicago! This always seemed ridiculous to me. Sniff test failed. So I just figured their analytics sucked and hoped that at some point, someone would put a little effort into it. This seems closer to my perception of reality. Although I still find the results dubious. You're honestly gonna tell me Kansas City or Detroit are more integrated than New York. I know there is no statistical power in anecdote but all you gotta do is drive through Queens.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

Most racist begets most segregated.

Racism and residential segregation aren't necessarily closely linked issues.

Segregation tends to be lower in areas developed in recent decades. Doesn't mean that people living in sprawl are more kumbaya, means (in part) that sprawl is more transient, inward-focused and non community-oriented.

And it depends on one's definition of segregation. Many towns in the South are technically integrated, but have stark residential segregation within the town. I never understood the term "other side of the tracks" until I explored the Delta South. Heading down the Mississippi, 9 times out of 10 the railroad tracks divide the white part of town from the black one.

And areas with low populations of African Americans probably aren't going to have high segregation. Speaking broadly, Asians and Latinos move into areas without causing whites to move out.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

I was struck by how 8 Mile Road is the line of demarcation between black and white. Almost no whites on the inside, almost no blacks on the outside.

Both sides of 8 Mile Rd. are majority black, for the most part (with exceptions on either side). There isn't a big difference. Areas to the north are a little healthier, but that's largely because they're not Detroit, not because they aren't black (in fact many areas north of 8 Mile are almost entirely black).

[goat314]

Originally Posted by sentinel

No.f**kin.duh.

Everyone knows Chicago is highLy segregated - not sure why it's necessary to be continuously reminded of this...when we saw a nearly identical article in 2014. And 2103. And 2012...

Also if you sincerely believe that the upper Midwest has been more racist than the South, you need help. Should I also assume that you believe in the "War of Northern Aggression"?

The worst mob violence Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. every experienced was in suburban Chicago. With that said there is definitely a palpable racial tension in Chicago and most of the Midwest (Detroit, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Cleveland, Cincinnati, etc.), that is just not felt in most of the urban South today. I think in many respects, people stereotype racial hostility and mistreatment as an uniquely Southern problem, when time and time again we are proven otherwise. In fact, I would be willing to go out on a limb and say that the South has done a lot more to work on its image in regards to race relations, many places in the North felt they weren't "as bad" as the South 100 years ago, so there was no need for change and in many respects their mentality is still stuck somewhere in 1960, which is worse than the South TODAY!

[goat314]

Originally Posted by RCDC

Income mobility is probably more important than what areas people live.

Exactly! What makes racial segregation in America so horrible is that it has always been tied so closely to class segregation. If segregated neighborhoods were truly "separate but equal" then it would not be viewed so negatively.

[goat314]

Originally Posted by pico44

I appreciate this study very much due to the fact that every integration study in the past has listed New York as one of the most highly segregated cities in the country. I remember one listing it as more segregated than Chicago! This always seemed ridiculous to me. Sniff test failed. So I just figured their analytics sucked and hoped that at some point, someone would put a little effort into it. This seems closer to my perception of reality. Although I still find the results dubious. You're honestly gonna tell me Kansas City or Detroit are more integrated than New York. I know there is no statistical power in anecdote but all you gotta do is drive through Queens.

Maybe not Detroit, but probably Kansas City. New York always struck me as hyper-diverse but also highly segregated. I think the density of the city gives people the illusion that its a well integrated city, because you will see people of all races riding subway cars, walking the streets, spending time in parks, but at the end of the day people are going back to very homogenous neighborhoods.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Someone should probably change the title of the thread so that, you know, it actually represents the point Nate Silver is trying to make: "The most diverse cities are often the most segregated."

The whole point of the article is to bring more nuance to the terms "diverse" and "segregated." OP's message runs counter to that spirit.

[Steely Dan]

^ good call....... the OP completely missed Nate Silver's point........ a swing and a miss on the reading comprehension front.......

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

Most racist begets most segregated.

The idea that segregation, as defined and measured by this study, is the best indicator of racism is laughable.

Anti-miscegenation laws:


Gray = no laws passed
Green = law repealed before 1887
Yellow = repealed 1948-1967
Red = Loving v. Virginia

Some states didn't even formally take the law of the books after the Supreme Court decision. Alabama repealed it in 2000, and even then 40% of Alabamans voted to keep it!

Voter ID laws:


Gray = no law
Dark Red = strict photo ID law
Red = photo ID law
Orange = strict non-photo ID law
Ochre = non-photo ID law

Some of the West, some of the Midwest, some of the Northeast, all of the South.

[James Bond Agent 007]

The Most Diverse Cities Are Often The Most Segregated

If you think about it, this is kinda stating the obvious.

Let's say you have a city that's 100% white. If you have only one racial group in a city, you cannot have segregation, because there are no minority groups in which to get segregated. Silver's example of Lincoln, Nebraska is close to that.

But if you have a city that is 1/3 white, 1/3 Hispanic and 1/3 black, you're going to get some segregation, even if the races were distributed randomly, because random numbers tend to cluster anyway.

So, the mere existence of more than one group is going to guarantee at least some segregation. The bigger the minority group(s), the chances increase of larger clusters of those minorities. That is, if you have a city of 100 people, and only 5 minorties, distributed randomly they are unlikely to be noticeably clustered. But in a city of 100 people including 40 minorities, distributed randomly the clusters are probably going to be more measurable.

[Chase Unperson]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ good call....... the OP completely missed Nate Silver's point........ a swing and a miss on the reading comprehension front.......

My point is that for my whole life I have heard the NE, West disparage the SE for being racist and backwards, but the truth is that the conditions in the North were as bad or worse than what African Americans left during the early 20th Century. That era lives on today in that map of Chicago.

[Steely Dan]

^ that's neat. but your point is way less interesting than the one Nate Silver was making in that article, a point which seemed to completely evade you.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

My point is that for my whole life I have heard the NE, West disparage the SE for being racist and backwards, but the truth is that the conditions in the North were as bad or worse than what African Americans left during the early 20th Century. That era lives on today in that map of Chicago.

I don't think that's the "truth". It may be a debatable point, but don't think there's some consensus that African Americans living in delta Mississippi had it worse when the moved to Chicago or wherever.

Assuming that blacks in the great migration were rational actors like everyone else, why would they have flocked to Detroit, Chicago, and the like if conditions were so much worse?

I have never seen anyplace in the U.S. poorer or more desperate than the Delta South. Even today, it seems quite obvious why someone would want to get out of that environment. Back in the 1950's and 60's, the North had tons of high paying factory jobs, so it made lots of sense to move your family to the industrial belt. Detroit was a pretty good place for a working man back in 1960, even for a working man of color.

[Ryanrule]

Originally Posted by Chase Unperson

My point is that for my whole life I have heard the NE, West disparage the SE for being racist and backwards, but the truth is that the conditions in the North were as bad or worse than what African Americans left during the early 20th Century. That era lives on today in that map of Chicago.

no.
false.
the south was conquered by the north.
deal with it.

[Beedok]

I wonder if diversity leading to segregation is as much of a thing in Canada. There seems to be a degree of it in Toronto in maps I've seen, but more blurriness from what I remember of American cities.

(Not trying to say Canada is better or anything in case anyone gets that impression. Just interested in how we compare to our bigger neighbour.)