urbanSTL

southsidepride wrote:I'm going back to Ferguson Brewing and Malone's Bar as soon as I can.

We don't let them win.

Right on

Anglophile wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote: White people fleeing neighborhoods because they got worried by the black people moving in is definitely thing, if not as prominent lately as before, and much more complicated than the slogan suggests.

Yeah, but were they fleeing merely because some of their new neighbors were black or because the influx was accompanied by increased crime and decreased property values? I don't buy the argument that white people are so terrified that they uproot their entire lives at the first sign of black people. There's usually something more going on that pushes people out.

Maybe your white relatives are less racist than mine? Lucky you, then.

I'm not saying most of those white people would as soon spit on a black guy as shake his hand. But, a lot of people have an association (with some reason) between black people moving in, and a loss of property value. And many whites seem to think that even if their neighbor is One of the Good Ones, they'll still be entertaining visits from their drug-dealing city cousins. For the most part I think it's a self-fulfilling prophecy: if whites think blacks moving into their neighborhoods will cause their neighbors to sell out and leave, they'll want to sell their houses first before it becomes a buyer's market. That reinforces the "tipping point" phenomenon. This is all on top of other non-racial cultural issues, like wanting neighbors who you see at church, enjoy the same sports you do, etc.

As someone earlier said, the big reason it's a problem is that the whites tend to take more capital with them than the blacks bring in. The disparity in wealth between white and black is a big problem in that respect.

What it all comes down to, in the end, is that all of our civic problems are Whitie's fault.

sirshankalot wrote:What it all comes down to, in the end, is that all of our civic problems are Whitie's fault.

What's the point of a post like this?

Why, when people bring up problems rooted in racism, do other people always say we shouldn't talk about race?

The point is I get tired of people assigning our north side's woes to white people. It's too easy and simplistic. We can talk about race all you want, I'm not afraid of it. I have told a story here previously about my extended family who lived in the Baden neighborhood. After two generations (~50 years) of living there and owning a cleaners, they packed up a few years ago. They moved to Sunset Hills and there cleaners is doing thrice the biz....So I ask you big boy:

Is their moving to Sunset Hills racist? Is their need to salvage a fledglingfamily biz and relocate it racist? Maybe in your pie-in-the-sky mentality it is. Maybe they should have stayed and gone down with the Titanic...

In my more practical mind, I think they made a GREAT move....you know why? because with the increased biz they have hired 2 more full-time employees.. 2 jobs that didn't previously exist. I hope that is important to you, because it should be.

MarkHaversham wrote:

Anglophile wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote:I'm not saying most of those white people would as soon spit on a black guy as shake his hand. But, a lot of people have an association (with some reason) between black people moving in, and a loss of property value. And many whites seem to think that even if their neighbor is One of the Good Ones, they'll still be entertaining visits from their drug-dealing city cousins. For the most part I think it's a self-fulfilling prophecy: if whites think blacks moving into their neighborhoods will cause their neighbors to sell out and leave, they'll want to sell their houses first before it becomes a buyer's market. That reinforces the "tipping point" phenomenon. This is all on top of other non-racial cultural issues, like wanting neighbors who you see at church, enjoy the same sports you do, etc.

I think it truly is a build up, and not a straight cause and effect. Some wealthy whites move(d) out because they didn't like having black neighbors. Then some moved out because they associate black neighbors with crime. The property values drop. Black families that haven't been able to escape poverty or near poverty move in to fill the void. Because poverty comes, crime really does follow. Remaining wealthy white families eventually make the move too.

I think my family (though wealthy might have been a stretch at the time, but well-off enough would work) falls into that last group potentially. My parents lived in Tower Grove East up until the late 80s. But with my sister approaching school age and me being "on the way," frequent enough prostitution taking place on Grand and Pestalozzi was (from what they've told me) the last straw. They didn't feel comfortable raising us around that. I'm not sure why they took the leap all the way out to St. Charles County. I know at the time the Wentzville Schools were very good, and I imagine it also had something to do with being able to build their own affordable house.

My parents never raised me to be anything but accepting of everyone. I don't think they realized the flow and the sprawl they were a part of. And that's the tough thing. When the racism is so systematic and cultural (and not necessarily overt and one-to-one), it's so easy to miss. And I think it was missed by many (and willfully ignored by others) for decades in St. Louis.

And now the task is ours to fix it.

We can't ignore it any more.

Time for a sports analogy. Blacks can field a pretty good starting lineup but the roster depth, or the bench so to speak, isn't very good and it really keeps the team down. They keep the team from winning. Sometimes the problem isn't the other team. Sometimes the problem is right there in your own clubhouse and that's when you need a strong team leader to pull it together.

I just don't see how anyone else besides the team captain can strengthen the bottom end of the roster and get the team on track.

Now, I realize there are no teams in real life so please don't twist this into anything more than a simple sports analogy.

The point is that there is a segment of the black population that consistently keeps the community down and I don't know what I personally can do about that. I can barely take care of myself!

sirshankalot wrote:The point is I get tired of people assigning our north side's woes to white people. It's too easy and simplistic. We can talk about race all you want, I'm not afraid of it.

Ok, cool. I somewhat agree, but I think it's less about blaming 'white people' so much as blaming the systems that have kept black people down for centuries. Which were incidentally constructed by and for the benefit of white people.

And your family story is interesting and it's pretty impressive they stuck it out that long, but I'm not sure how it's relevant. I was just calling out a caustic and non-constructive comment, not accusing you of anything.

The point is that there is a segment of the black population that consistently keeps the community down and I don't know what I personally can do about that. I can barely take care of myself!

Sorry, it's a cute analogy and all (if a little absurd), but I don't believe this idea that some subset black people are the engineers of the disadvantages/discrimination they face.

jstriebel wrote: My parents never raised me to be anything but accepting of everyone. I don't think they realized the flow and the sprawl they were a part of. And that's the tough thing. When the racism is so systematic and cultural (and not necessarily overt and one-to-one), it's so easy to miss. And I think it was missed by many (and willfully ignored by others) for decades in St. Louis.

And now the task is ours to fix it.

We can't ignore it any more.

I think that's a good point. If the problems were just due to individual actors and their prejudices, we wouldn't have any problems. It's the macroscopic systems driving these phenomena that have to be addressed, and most people would rather pretend there's no problem than have to worry about yet another thing in their busy, stressful lives.

sirshankalot wrote:What it all comes down to, in the end, is that all of our civic problems are Whitie's fault.

Eat the rich.

i,Iive,to,draw wrote:Can we all agree now Ferguson, and North county is dead.

spoken like a true St. Louisan. count us out, that's fine. we play well the underdog.

And despite the media making it appear so only a small portion of North County was in turmoil last night.
Florissant, Hazelwood, Spanish Lake, Jennings, Normandy, Bel Nor, Berkeley all were quiet from what I understand.

Anyone else see this sign last night? It made me laugh.

I really enjoyed Don Lemon asking the reporter covering NYC protests if the police were acting differently etc. perhaps I read to much into it but it certainly seemed to hint at NYC doing things so much better and were being more accommodating. What about the NYC police that shot the black man in the vestibule 40 times a few years ago?! Talk about excessive force.
I also think Ferguson can potentially really heal and rebuild from this. There should be a region wide program to rebuild downtown ferguson. Build it even better this time. Things certainly need to calm down first and if history is a guide, it doesn't look promising, but it would be awesome to change it this time. Already have the roots of some cool companies up there. Ferguson brewery, Nathalie's bakery, the burger place, bike shop, etc.

roger wyoming II wrote:This AP photo seems to capture it all for the state of the region

It certainly does. It shows that this is all happening at a distance from central St. Louis. It shows that this is not the familiar story of urban ghettos being broken by one more incident. They showed instead, that this is a story of poverty and racism moving to the burbs while the areas in the distance in the photo are getting whiter and wealthier. Ferguson happened BECAUSE St. Louis is changing, NOT because its stuck in the same pattern in which its always been. The protests in Shaw reinforce this point. It's one an area that has gone from mostly black to majority white in the last 15 years.

I am afraid all this may drive folks of all races to move to the one place where protesters are not active. St. Charles.

Any one want to predict how all this would effect the city?

gary kreie wrote:I am afraid all this may drive folks of all races to move to the one place where protesters are not active. St. Charles.

You've got it backwards. Ferguson happened because poor blacks are moving away from the central corridor, not whites. Shaw happened because blacks are moving out and whites moving in. The Central Corridor is seeing investment it hasn't seen in decades. This is an EFFECT of St. Louis changing demographics, not a CAUSE. The riots only accelerate this process by hurting north county, pulling in more poor blacks northward away from the center and make more room for new investment in the center.

Well, it depends. If the powers that be in the region, namely white Democrats, decide to actually do something constructive to address the longstanding problems of the region, this could be the first chapter in a new future for St. Louis. I really don't want to contemplate what will happen if nothing is done.

Ebsy wrote:Well, it depends. If the powers that be in the region, namely white Democrats, decide to actually do something constructive to address the longstanding problems of the region, this could be the first chapter in a new future for St. Louis. I really don't want to contemplate what will happen if nothing is done.

My bet for the most part if nothing happens, I don't think in terms of prior trends before Ferguson would change economically speaking, business doesn't only care about if they can make money. Should things change yes but would it be a death knell for the region if they don't of course not.

i,Iive,to,draw wrote:

Ebsy wrote:Well, it depends. If the powers that be in the region, namely white Democrats, decide to actually do something constructive to address the longstanding problems of the region, this could be the first chapter in a new future for St. Louis. I really don't want to contemplate what will happen if nothing is done.

My bet for the most part if nothing happens, I don't think in terms of prior trends before Ferguson would change economically speaking, business doesn't only care about if they can make money. Should things change yes but would it be a death knell for the region if they don't of course not.

All sorts of things are happening in St. Louis. The Central Corridor is changing more than in decades. Ferguson happened BECAUSE of the changes. St. Louis' biggest problem is a dysfunctional urban core. That's finally changing in a decisive way. It's also pushing, or pulling, poor blacks who were isolated in that dysfunctional core to the suburbs where there are different choices for them. Hopeless people don't riot. People who see a chance at something better riot. That is why Ferguson happened.