"Frank Rizzo"

[Islandman]

Dearborn may or may not have had it easy during the 60s, but Detroit's leadership failed during that pivotal time. Let's not make anymore excuses for Detroit's leadership. Many former industrial cities were faced with the same challenges described above, from Chicago, to Seattle, to New York City. Even some sunbelt cities, such as Dallas, also experienced white flight, disinvestment, and was heavily carved up by freeways. Somehow these cities found a way to adapt, survive, and grow.

All of the cities you mentioned have come together as a region and only one, Chicago, has had anything near the racial, financial, and demographic divide [[in modern times) we have here between the core city and its satellites.

Another thing to note about Chicago is that it did not put all of its eggs in one basket like we have. They have also experienced a great fire as Detroit did.

[jpbollma]

All of the cities you mentioned have come together as a region and only one, Chicago, has had anything near the racial, financial, and demographic divide [[in modern times) we have here between the core city and its satellites.

Another thing to note about Chicago is that it did not put all of its eggs in one basket like we have. They have also experienced a great fire as Detroit did.

Detroit remains one of the most racially segregated cities in the United States.^[137][138] Blacks moved to the city en masse to escape Jim Crow in the south and find jobs.^[139] However, they soon found themselves excluded from white areas of the city--through violence, laws, and economic discrimination [[e.g., redlining).^[140] White residents attacked black homes: breaking windows, starting fires, and exploding bombs.^[140][137] This pattern was later magnified by white migration to the suburbs.<sup>[138]

-- Rizzo's family tree! Growing up white in a mostly white area, I had always heard about how blacks "ruined Detroit". They sure never talked about this stuff.</sup>

[Hermod]

No, Hermod is right. Orville Hubbard had it easy on his watch. And it's not somehow an anomaly that Detroit suffered at the same time. It's a fact of history.

One of my uncles lived in Dearborn back in the 40s, 50s, and 60s [[before it became part of the caliphate) and the city provided "Cadillac" levels of services to the populace.

[Pam]

One of my uncles lived in Dearborn back in the 40s, 50s, and 60s [[before it became part of the caliphate)

Speaking of racist code words....

[canuck]

Speaking of racist code words....

How about "Man bites dog" would make the news? "Those animals" is one step away, isn't it. When "the man" bites "the dog", we will all be shocked at the implausibility.

Funny but when you think of legal concepts like "Affirmative Action" that happened not long ago, lawmakers were up against a system of collusion.
The need for "Action" rather than "Words", or worse; "Charity"; was what these laws were all about.

Because so much of what happened to visible minorities, jews, italians, catholics, depending on time and place was due to hidden practices, and the resulting injustices untenable in the long run, Affirmative Action had to come about. You can argue that it may be too little too late, you can argue that the injury to african-americans is the product of a history of iniquity that is too deep to remedy, but the steps to recovery for american cities with racial divisions have to be accompanied by more active integration.

What has happened to Detroit in the past 50 years in a slow incremental way is
the opposite of integration; disintegration.

The result of having a marginalized central city, city government and state reps is that it supports a system of collusion, and all manner of corruption when accompanied by poverty, and a culture of iniquity. The dangers that faced Detroit fifty years ago were addressed by a few, but unheeded, the response was "We will disintegrate". Add to that the anger of guys like Coleman Young,
the enmity that would hinder further development and/or the lack of vital allies that would help a majority black metropolis become better.

We will move further apart until culturally, we are so different, that it will be easier for the "Rizzos" to say; there, I told you.: Look at the mess they made!

[Detroitnerd]

Dearborn may or may not have had it easy during the 60s, but Detroit's leadership failed during that pivotal time. Let's not make anymore excuses for Detroit's leadership. Many former industrial cities were faced with the same challenges described above, from Chicago, to Seattle, to New York City. Even some sunbelt cities, such as Dallas, also experienced white flight, disinvestment, and was heavily carved up by freeways. Somehow these cities found a way to adapt, survive, and grow.

Yeah, Detroit's leadership hasn't been terrific. In later years, the Democratic party has treated it like a Baltic Avenue property to be given to crumbs like the Kilpatricks. Of course, you have to love how people of means ditched Detroit, left it to the poor, the uneducated, the powerless, the civically unengaged, and then blamed the poor, the uneducated, the powerless, and the civically unengaged for electing bad leaders. That's a joke.

But let's face it. Every right-wing fart wants to use Detroit as an example of failed liberal leadership. And, really, that is so effin' stupid. Detroit is the perfect fucking storm. A political team of L. Brooks Patterson, Hazen Pingree and Jesus H. Christ couldn't have helped Detroit given the battering it took. It's not that failed leadership ruined the city. It's that the metro totally gave up on the city and the metro was totally fine with that.

Or as Frank Rizzo would say, "Those bastards down there made their mess -- let them lie in it."

[canuck]

Yup, Detroitnerd; they loved the place with total abandon.

[Zozo]

Of course, you have to love how people of means ditched Detroit, left it to the poor, the uneducated, the powerless, the civically unengaged, and then blamed the poor, the uneducated, the powerless, and the civically unengaged for electing bad leaders. That's a joke. "

This is too broad and way overgeneralized. To claim everyone who lived in Detroit from the 1960s to present is a disenfranchised victim smacks of elitism, and I dare say racism.

Detroit is the perfect fucking storm. A political team of L. Brooks Patterson, Hazen Pingree and Jesus H. Christ couldn't have helped Detroit given the battering it took."

I don't feel as if you have presented a convincing case that Detroit faced a unique set of challenges that no other city in the US faced during that time frame. Every city in the US dealt with white flight, urban renewal, de-industrialization, and over reliance on certain industries. The scale varies, but the scale varies because other cities responded better than Detroit did, not because Detroit was weighted with more challenges than other cities.

I guess I tend to agree somewhat with your Frank Rizzo stereotype. Not so much that Detroit has gotten what it deserves, but it has gotten what it has gotten. Detroit's leadership has failed, and continues to fail [[bankruptcy). That being said, I'm a lifelong, native Detroiter, and I do my small part to help the city, and I want to see our renaissance as much as anyone.

[JVB]

I don't feel as if you have presented a convincing case that Detroit faced a unique set of challenges that no other city in the US faced during that time frame. Every city in the US dealt with white flight, urban renewal, de-industrialization, and over reliance on certain industries. The scale varies, but the scale varies because other cities responded better than Detroit did, not because Detroit was weighted with more challenges than other cities.

Exactly. Look at what Pittsburgh has done since the collapse of the steel industry. It went from being a grimy one trick pony to consistently rated one of the most beautiful, livable cities in the US. All in what - 25 years?

It's impossible to point the finger at any one thing that put Detroit in this position, and all sides of the argument sound foolish blaming it all on the other. But one thing everyone can agree on is that the leadership has completely failed to do much of anything right, so that seems like a good place to start.

[jt1]

But one thing everyone can agree on is that the leadership has completely failed to do much of anything right, so that seems like a good place to start.

But one thing everyone can agree on is that the leadership in the city, region and state has completely failed to do much of anything right, so that seems like a good place to start

Fixed it for you.

[313WX]

But one thing everyone can agree on is that the leadership in the city, region and state has completely failed to do much of anything right, so that seems like a good place to start

Fixed it for you.

That's fair to say.

Let's face it, the economic and political leaders in NY and Illinois didn't just up and abandon their city center to die like the political and economic leaders did in Michigan did when times got rough.

[Honky Tonk]

Let's face it, the economic and political leaders in NY and Illinois didn't just up and abandon their city center to die like the political and economic leaders did in Detroit did when times got rough.

You had a typo....

[313WX]

Let's face it, the economic and political leaders in NY and Illinois didn't just up and abandon their city center to die like the political and economic leaders did in Detroit did when times got rough.

You had a typo....

Detroit is a state?

I fail to see how it can be compared to two other states.

Michigan is the state of course in which Detroit is located in, just as Chicago and New York are in the states of Illinois and New York...

[Detroitnerd]

This is too broad and way overgeneralized. To claim everyone who lived in Detroit from the 1960s to present is a disenfranchised victim smacks of elitism, and I dare say racism.

Haha. Look at you all offended and shit. "Oh, I dare say, racism!" Oh, indeed? A-hahaha, did your monocle fall out when you read that? Ra-ther!

Listen, Zozo, first of all, this claim, "everyone who lived in Detroit from the 1960s to present is a disenfranchised victim" is a FUCKING FIGMENT OF YOUR IMAGINATION. You've pulled this out of your fucking ass and nowhere in my posts have I said that. That is called a straw man. Do you get me? Instead of responding to the actual statement, you build up a different, weaker, obviously FALSE argument, which, with great ferocity and indignance, you then rip apart.

But nobody said that but you. You made up some bullshit statement because, maybe the real statement, that people of means largely ditched Detroit, and the factories pulled out, and the shopping centers finally pulled out, and disinvestment finally got so dire that Detroit was bound to fail is true.

And it is incontrovertibly true.

I don't feel as if you have presented a convincing case that Detroit faced a unique set of challenges that no other city in the US faced during that time frame. Every city in the US dealt with white flight, urban renewal, de-industrialization, and over reliance on certain industries. The scale varies, but the scale varies because other cities responded better than Detroit did, not because Detroit was weighted with more challenges than other cities.

You don't have to take my word for it. Look at the census records. Look at the average income levels. Look at the subsidies that were provided to white people to move out. Read some history books. Read Thomas Sugrue's book. Look at the FUCKING RECORD and it PROVES that people of means left the city. Then you're gonna blame the poor, the uneducated, the people left behind to elect some kinda fucking SAVIOR? What are you, NUTS? That's the most disingenuous pile of bullshit peddled about Detroit history, and you gotta dig that out and try to sell it again? Everybody who's done any studying about Detroit knows that's horseshit.

What made Detroit different? High levels of white racism. A nearly complete transfer of wealth from the city to its suburbs. Hick leadership in the suburbs that figured the city was a lost cause, so all we have to do is hold the line on them getting any funny ideas about moving out of the city.

The truth is, what made Detroit different is that it's surrounded by a lot of narcissistic well-to-do white assholes who don't understand the history of their own fucking city and instead cling to dumb mythologies that soothe their fevered imaginations and agree with their parochial ideologies, and are TOTALLY UNWILLING TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL HISTORY. And when they mewl little platitudes like "I want to see our renaissance as much as anyone," it makes me want to puke all over them.

[Honky Tonk]

Detroit is a state?

I fail to see how it can be compared to two other states.

Michigan is the state of course in which Detroit is located in, just as Chicago and New York are in the states of Illinois and New York...

No, Detroit is not a State, I learned that in geography. But I don't feel the State is what killed Detroit. NY, [[the City, that always confused me in geography), decided they had had enough of being the world's cesspool, and they REALLY were @ the time, and started making the necessary changes to turn the City around. Being THEE driving force in NY's economy, the State, [[see the confusing part?), started helping, and today you have what it is. We still don't have that kind of committment here in Detroit. On either the State or City level.

[JVB]

Haha. Look at you all offended and shit. "Oh, I dare say, racism!" Oh, indeed? A-hahaha, did your monocle fall out when you read that? Ra-ther!

Listen, Zozo, first of all, this claim, "everyone who lived in Detroit from the 1960s to present is a disenfranchised victim" is a FUCKING FIGMENT OF YOUR IMAGINATION. You've pulled this out of your fucking ass and nowhere in my posts have I said that. That is called a straw man. Do you get me? Instead of responding to the actual statement, you build up a different, weaker, obviously FALSE argument, which, with great ferocity and indignance, you then rip apart.

But nobody said that but you. You made up some bullshit statement because, maybe the real statement, that people of means largely ditched Detroit, and the factories pulled out, and the shopping centers finally pulled out, and disinvestment finally got so dire that Detroit was bound to fail is true.

And it is incontrovertibly true.



You don't have to take my word for it. Look at the census records. Look at the average income levels. Look at the subsidies that were provided to white people to move out. Read some history books. Read Thomas Sugrue's book. Look at the FUCKING RECORD and it PROVES that people of means left the city. Then you're gonna blame the poor, the uneducated, the people left behind to elect some kinda fucking SAVIOR? What are you, NUTS? That's the most disingenuous pile of bullshit peddled about Detroit history, and you gotta dig that out and try to sell it again? Everybody who's done any studying about Detroit knows that's horseshit.

What made Detroit different? High levels of white racism. A nearly complete transfer of wealth from the city to its suburbs. Hick leadership in the suburbs that figured the city was a lost cause, so all we have to do is hold the line on them getting any funny ideas about moving out of the city.

The truth is, what made Detroit different is that it's surrounded by a lot of narcissistic well-to-do white assholes who don't understand the history of their own fucking city and instead cling to dumb mythologies that soothe their fevered imaginations and agree with their parochial ideologies, and are TOTALLY UNWILLING TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL HISTORY. And when they mewl little platitudes like "I want to see our renaissance as much as anyone," it makes me want to puke all over them.

You really need to get laid.

[Detroitnerd]

You really need to get laid.

Oh, I get mine. Ladies generally like intelligent, well-read, experienced men.

[Honky Tonk]

You really need to get laid.

Meds are off, let it go.

[p69rrh51]

Haha. Look at you all offended and shit. "Oh, I dare say, racism!" Oh, indeed? A-hahaha, did your monocle fall out when you read that? Ra-ther!

Listen, Zozo, first of all, this claim, "everyone who lived in Detroit from the 1960s to present is a disenfranchised victim" is a FUCKING FIGMENT OF YOUR IMAGINATION. You've pulled this out of your fucking ass and nowhere in my posts have I said that. That is called a straw man. Do you get me? Instead of responding to the actual statement, you build up a different, weaker, obviously FALSE argument, which, with great ferocity and indignance, you then rip apart.

But nobody said that but you. You made up some bullshit statement because, maybe the real statement, that people of means largely ditched Detroit, and the factories pulled out, and the shopping centers finally pulled out, and disinvestment finally got so dire that Detroit was bound to fail is true.

And it is incontrovertibly true.



You don't have to take my word for it. Look at the census records. Look at the average income levels. Look at the subsidies that were provided to white people to move out. Read some history books. Read Thomas Sugrue's book. Look at the FUCKING RECORD and it PROVES that people of means left the city. Then you're gonna blame the poor, the uneducated, the people left behind to elect some kinda fucking SAVIOR? What are you, NUTS? That's the most disingenuous pile of bullshit peddled about Detroit history, and you gotta dig that out and try to sell it again? Everybody who's done any studying about Detroit knows that's horseshit.

What made Detroit different? High levels of white racism. A nearly complete transfer of wealth from the city to its suburbs. Hick leadership in the suburbs that figured the city was a lost cause, so all we have to do is hold the line on them getting any funny ideas about moving out of the city.

The truth is, what made Detroit different is that it's surrounded by a lot of narcissistic well-to-do white assholes who don't understand the history of their own fucking city and instead cling to dumb mythologies that soothe their fevered imaginations and agree with their parochial ideologies, and are TOTALLY UNWILLING TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL HISTORY. And when they mewl little platitudes like "I want to see our renaissance as much as anyone," it makes me want to puke all over them.

I was thinking something more like xanax was more in order! Its rather simplistic that its all just a bunch of white racists who took their money and ran, there are factors far beyond that and would take more than this forum to discuss on the decline of the city. Everyone seems to be flogging a dead horse and when its all said and done we all have prejudices! Its how you deal with them that makes you a Rizzo or not!!! And that goes for EVERYONE on here not just certain ethnic backgraunds.

[Honky Tonk]

I was thinking something more like xanax was more in order!

Ok then, I'll have one.

[Detroitnerd]

I was thinking something more like xanax was more in order! Its rather simplistic that its all just a bunch of white racists who took their money and ran, there are factors far beyond that and would take more than this forum to discuss on the decline of the city. Everyone seems to be flogging a dead horse and when its all said and done we all have prejudices! Its how you deal with them that makes you a Rizzo or not!!! And that goes for EVERYONE on here not just certain ethnic backgraunds.

Dude. To say "its all a bunch of white racists who took their money and ran" is simplistic. To say that the city lost most of its residents of means, investment, industry, commercial businesses, jobs and wealth is a fact. And that it was surrounded by former residents who'd taken their wealth away from the city and then blamed the city for its condition -- all while ensuring not a red cent of their tax money went to the city.

That's a fact, man. That's where Rizzo comes in. Rizzo keeps peddling myths. Rizzo has a mythological view of history. "They did that. Those animals down there ruined that city. Let them live in that hellhole."

It doesn't get any more "simplistic" than that.

[coracle]

Oh, I get mine. Ladies generally like intelligent, well-read, experienced men.

As intelligent as you think you are, while you are "calving" with your ladies you have at least learned to recognize and critique your own "modus operandi" in starting this thread.
"That is called a straw man. Do you get me? Instead of responding to the actual statement, you build up a different, weaker, obviously FALSE argument, which, with great ferocity and indignance, you then rip apart." [[post #164)

[313WX]

No, Detroit is not a State, I learned that in geography. But I don't feel the State is what killed Detroit. NY, [[the City, that always confused me in geography), decided they had had enough of being the world's cesspool, and they REALLY were @ the time, and started making the necessary changes to turn the City around. Being THEE driving force in NY's economy, the State, [[see the confusing part?), started helping, and today you have what it is. We still don't have that kind of committment here in Detroit. On either the State or City level.

I never said the state of Michigan killed Detroit alone [[and Detroit while dying is still alive last I checked).

But to say that the state of Michigan with some of its legislative policies played absolutely no role in Detroit's decline shows that you really don't have a good grasp of the city's history.

[Detroitnerd]

As intelligent as you think you are, while you are "calving" with your ladies you have at least learned to recognize and critique your own "modus operandi" in starting this thread.
"That is called a straw man. Do you get me? Instead of responding to the actual statement, you build up a different, weaker, obviously FALSE argument, which, with great ferocity and indignance, you then rip apart." [[post #164)

Whoa! I guess you really showed me!

Except ...

Except, uh, you don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about. As usual. Thank you for playing.

[Detroitnerd]

I never said the state of Michigan killed Detroit alone [[and Detroit while dying is still alive last I checked).

But to say that the state of Michigan with some of its legislative policies played absolutely no role in Detroit's decline shows that you really don't have a good grasp of the city's history.

Yeah, the enshrinement of home rule in the state constitution front and center.