« Star Trek, the morning after | Main | A "miracle" in Harlem? Not likely »

May 09, 2009

Comments

I've generally used Portland and Seattle as comparison points to Toronto since they have roughly similar numbers of blacks. The interesting difference is that while Canadians will say Toronto is "filled with black people", by American standards, Seattle and Portland have no black people.

I'm less sympathetic to the arguments about the loss of the black community and the evils of integration on black culture, but I'm Caribbean, so those arguments have less appeal to me.

Re: Portland

Yes it was great! Circa 1970s there was a restaurant ( I think it was called the Captain's Galley or some such. ) where they served Shad Roe on toast with bacon strips. What a glorious meal.

Dan Kurt

While my position is that ethically homogeneous communities offer man the best, happiest and most free way to live, I accept that America's blacks have been here since Jamestown and they are here to stay.

That's why upsetting this country's workable mix of about 85% white (mostly Anglo-Saxon Christians), 10% blacks (assimilated to white cultural norms), and 5% other was a crime for which many need to be hanged.

Doesn't this go along all of the SWPL worship of places like the Netherlands, Denmark, or Finland. They cannot even find a country in Southern Europe that the like as much as the virtually all white Nordic countries.

Obviously this guy needs to be forced to watch a PSA announcemnt "celebrating diversity".


I wonder if China "celebrates diversity"?

I wonder if India "celebrates diversity"?

I wonder if Kenya "celebrates diversity"?

I wonder if Indonesia "celebrates diversity"?

When you think about it, Africa has been "black" for how many thousands of years? 60? 80?

China has been "yellow" for how many thousands of years? 10? 20? more?


Europe has been white for how many thousands of years? 10? 20? more?


Now our elites have found the best way to "divide and conquer" an electorate is to "bring in" diversity to create tons of little pressure groups and create as much division as possible where there was none before. Can you imagine when we someday have maybe 30% whites, 20% blacks, 30% hispanics, 10% Asians, and maybe 5% middle easterners and 5% from Pakistan/India here? All those groups sqabbling over job-set-asides, scholarships, rewards, loan guarantees and perpertual "offenses" socially against their person and "stereotypes" in TV and radio commercials?

Meanwhile China will be all Chinese, full of people with a shared history and ethnic background who all tend to -like- each other.


Which nation will have an advantage?

Which nations will be the true powers in 2109 and not 2009? Your great grandkids will have to live with what the world will be then.......

I live in the Portland, Oregon area. I can tell you it is very much a white/Asian place. It is mostly white, but significant numbers of Asians (Chinese, Koreans, Thai, etc.) live here as well. I am white, my wife is Japanese. So, we fit in well in the Portland area. There are many good Asian food grocery stores and even the Wallmart sells the kind of Asia food we usually can only get in Japan.

I can also tell you that there are very few blacks, but there are some Mexican and other Latino people here. Overall, the percentage of blacks is less than 3%, whereas the percentage of Mexicans and other Latinos is around 6%.

The unique condition of Portland is that the downtown area is the "whitest" of all major (1 million plus) U.S. cities. Cities such as Pittsburgh may be whiter in general, but have significant NAM communities in the downtown area. Portland does not have this, so its downtown area has the "European" hipster atmosphere that is so popular among the "SWPL" crowd.

Portland is definitely an SWPL paradise. The Seattle area actually has a significant black community, both just south of downtown as well as Tacoma, about 20 miles south. The downtown area has many new condos for the SWPL's, but has become grungy due to crime and "undesirables".

"The Seattle area actually has a significant black community, both just south of downtown as well as Tacoma, about 20 miles south. The downtown area has many new condos for the SWPL's, but has become grungy due to crime and "undesirables"."

I've only been in Seattle once, for a few days in 2001, but the one thing I noticed about the downtown area was a significant population of skells: drinking out of paper-bag-wrapped bottles,* panhandling, or just lying around on the sidewalk. Much larger Los Angeles is the only city where I've seen more skells.

* = it's a safe bet that the bottles didn't contain Chateau Lafite '29

**That's why upsetting this country's workable mix of about 85% white (mostly Anglo-Saxon Christians), 10% blacks (assimilated to white cultural norms), and 5% other was a crime for which many need to be hanged.**

It's interesting that the person who posted that is not a part of the Anglo-Saxon ethnic group...

Mind you, as I've stated before, if you want to choose such an demographic arrangement, it implies to the non-white population that there's something wrong with them. I'd just wish that the commenters who allude to such ideas would just openly admit that they believe that white people are superior instead of dancing around the idea. Just openly state that you feel that increasing the proportion of the black population (or any other non-white group) will cripple or ruin America (or any other majority white nation) due to some inferior characteristic.

*They cannot even find a country in Southern Europe that the like as much as the virtually all white Nordic countries. *

Slightly higher crime rates, corruption, somewhat more conservative politics, less developed social welfare, and weaker economic conditions.

"If you want to choose such an demographic arrangement, it implies to the non-white population that there's something wrong with them. I'd just wish that the commenters who allude to such ideas would just openly admit that they believe that white people are superior instead of dancing around the idea."

Is it not also possible that any more homogeneous population will be more harmonious than a more heterogeneous population? Is it not possible that even if my black, asian, and mestizo brothers and sisters were exactly equal to me in every way, I would still prefer to avoid the inevitable racial tensions that result from a multicultural society?

Different need not be unequal to be undesirable. If I go to a barbecue at my neighbor's house, or he comes to mine, wouldn't it be better if we and our families share a language, a common taste in food and in music? Isn't it better if when we talk about sports, movies, or authors, we both follow at least some of the same ones?

DA,

The only reason that people believe that Southern Europe hass less developed social welfare or more conservative politics is that the same programs that appear to work in Finland (Four million white people who are virtually all from one ethnic group) is that the same programs are much less successful in Italy or Greece and in Sweden or Finland. If you want to point to policy differences, please do, but they have similar governments.

There was some list of Most Miserable Cities to live in, and they used some composite of days of sunshine, suicide, unemployment, etc. Portland was #1 Most Miserable, and all the others were basically NAM hellholes.

The White People in Portland can apparently fuck up the fun that a non-NAM city makes possible through lack of crime, ethnic trust, etc.

You will find a lot of skells lingering within a several-block area in downtown Seattle. There's a cluster of drug clinics and homeless shelters there which, somewhat strangely, is situated in close proximity to the heavily tourist-trafficked areas.

There is a lot to like about Portland. For one thing, it offers viable public transportation throughout the downtown core, which makes it a true anomaly for the West Coast.

That said, the worshipful tone of this article is sickening. I didn't realize there was such a thing as SWPL travel writing until I read this.

re: "You will find a lot of skells lingering within a several-block area in downtown Seattle."

You must be writing about "Skid Row" now called Pioneer Park, I believe.

The original "Skid Row" was in Seattle and apparently is still there.

Dan Kurt

"You must be writing about "Skid Row" now called Pioneer Park, I believe."

Yes, good point. It's Pioneer Square (which is also home to a lot of tech startups--go figure).

Here's your Cliff Clavin factoid of the day: The phrase skid row comes from "Skid Road," which was the name given to the steep road they used for skidding logs down to the water back when Seattle was a timber town. Today, that road is Yesler Way which runs right through Pioneer Square.

One other comment about the skells. I don't have any statistics, but it appears to me that a disproportionate number are amerindian.

Western Washington is dotted with a good number of reservations. One thing that's interesting to consider is that white settlers arrived at the Seattle site in the 1850s--fairly recently. PNW Indians have had fewer generations to assimilate than those on the E. Coast.

When I visited Portland I was amazed at the many bars in the suburbs East of downtown Portland; in some areas one a block on main roads. But I didn't go inside to check out what they are like. Any info?

I suspect that this reflects the fact that you will have bars where there is ethnic homogeneity. Can't get high if what you say spontaneously might start a fight; or force your fellow drinker to say something not socially acceptable.

This reflects Robert Putnam's conclusion that diversity generates a lack of communication among even the dominant ethnicity, not just between ethnicities.

Hey Kurt, where do you live? I'm in NoPo, near Pen Park.

My biggest fear is Portland gets too popular, and as Yogi Beara would say, nobody goes there anymore.

*I suspect that this reflects the fact that you will have bars where there is ethnic homogeneity.*

In contrast, in my former majority black neighbourhood had no bars...

AllanF,

I actually live in Vancouver, WA, just across the river.

Agnostic,

I don't consider Portland area to be miserable. I rather like it here. I can go hiking, wind surfing, and other outdoor activities at the drop of a hat and, yet, still have a decent sized city with a decent downtown area to enjoy.

I think the Portland area is quite nice. On the other hand, I would not even consider living east of the Rockie mountains (except for Florida and maybe the gulf coast) because it is outside my habitable zone.

What does NAM stand for?

Kurt, do you work in Portland? Curious your thoughts on the CRC.

NAM == non-asian minority

I believe Sailer coined it.

No, I work out of a home office. That's why I live in Vancouver (to avoid the state income tax).

Amazing!

This travel writer is almost beyond parody- Portland unemployment is the country's second highest but the citizens have an "enchanting" "indifference to wealth".

Perhaps they should send Matt Gross to Sacramento's tent city
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tent-city20-2009mar20,0,4125317.story.
"People stuffed the holes in their shoes with such of-the-moment magazines as Frank and ReadyMade" and there are also communal showers.

I work out of a home office, which is why I live in Vancouver.

The article is generally true. One of the things I like about Portland is that people here do not seem as obsessed with the outward displays of wealth and status as they are in other areas of the country. However, I think the current obsession with display of wealth is mostly a manifestation of the 1995-2007 bubble, as it was not nearly as prevalent in places like Phoenix in the early 90's as its been for the past 10 years. In the early 90's, Phoenix was very much the sun-belt version of Portland, with regards to frugality and living well cheaply, whereas in 2001 (last time I was there) it was much more like Orange County or Bel Air.

I think the obsession with the outward display of wealth will go the way of the bubble, just as it did in Japan.

What's wrong with the NAMs? Are you all saying that you'd prefer to live in some small town that is all white than say a city like Chicago or NYC?

"What's wrong with the NAMs?"

It may help if you call them "underachieving minorities" like the do-gooders do. The problems are the bad schools, the higher crime rates, and the higher social service costs. All those things typically drive middle class parents into the suburbs, leaving American cities with only childless yuppies and the poor.

The ethos of Portland originates in the 1975 cult novel "Ecotopia" by Ernest Callenbach (although it had been forming for ten years before that too).

"Ecotopia" refers to Oregon, Washington, and northern California, which secede from the US to form this environmental paradise. No cars and everyone smokes dope constantly. Very much like what the area has become.

They also sealed off the border and defend themselves by placing nuclear mines in US cities.

My family all live in Portland (although not natives). Back in the 70's it was indeed a great place--same urban amenities but a lot cheaper--but today it is far more multicultural with attendant problems, and too many Ecotopians living off the productivity of the remaining Oregonians. I can think of a lot better place to live.

PS. Kurt9 has the right idea: live and work in Vancouver to avoid Oregon income tax (Washington has none), and shop in Oregon to avoid Washington sales tax.

David Alexander --

A relatively homogenous society is a harmonious one. Much actual social science research has been done on this (I know, icky awful science) including Putnam's "Bowling Alone" and his just published follow-up studies (Putnam is the Harvard Prof who found to his dismay diversity means social disarray).

The effect of racial diversity is that even among same races, people hunker down, distrust others, don't volunteer for civic groups, and generally retreat from the public square. In order for people to "own" the Public Square and a decent public life (including monitoring and forcing honest spending on social goods like public saftey and ahem ... trains) this requires people who mostly look like you and share the same cultural background.

This doesn't mean everyone has to be a Mainline Protestant. This does mean the 85-15% breakdown between Whites/Blacks should be maintained. Because that's the only way to create both an orderly and productive society.

"I suspect that this reflects the fact that you will have bars where there is ethnic homogeneity. Can't get high if what you say spontaneously might start a fight; or force your fellow drinker to say something not socially acceptable."

Interestingly, my wife and I went to a jazz/R&B club (http://www.portjazz.com/) last Saturday evening and it was a pretty well mixed crowd in racial terms, about one-third black and a few Asians. Everybody seemed to be getting along just fine together. It was almost entirely a 30+ crowd, in some cases very much "+", perhaps that might have contributed to the easy mixing.

By the way, it was definitely not a sausage party. More like a fish taco festival.

HS: "No doubt, kicking out all of the NAMs would improve other major cities."

Forbes magazine recently reported* on Mercer's list of the best cities on Earth. This year's winner: Harare!

Kidding.

Not surprisingly, they're pretty NAMless places. The tops, Vienna, Zurich, Geneva & Vancouver, are in countries with notably restrictionist immigration...

...So restrictionist that Forbes opened its article by mentioning Austria's recent past with the hard right! (But framed, natch, as "Vienna's nice in spite of it," rather than "Vienna's nice because of it.")

* http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/27/cities-best-live-lifestyle-real-estate-best-places-to-live.html

More data here.* America sucks, with its best city, Honolulu, coming in at #29.

I love Mercer's dry little note, "NB: There are no Middle Eastern or African cities in the top 50."

* http://www.mercer.com/qualityofliving

"NAM == non-asian minority"

Whew! That's a relief. For a second there I thought it stood for Ni&&ers and Mexicans. I couldn't believe he said that. A rather unfortunate misunderstanding, I'm sure.

The comments to this entry are closed.