I think it's tough to get a good grasp because issues are much more complex than political ideologues and historical revisionists like to portray.

I don't know how many times I've heard people that lived in Detroit during the riots say things like "Everybody left after the riots" when the population was already in rapid decline before the riot. Riots, terrorism, and even warfare usually do not kill cities. LA did not spiral into a decline after a 90's race riot. NYC did not plummet into oblivion after 9/11. Berlin did not stay abandoned after WWII. When people want to rebuilt or reinvest...they will. So riots cannot destroy a city on its own [[which is why the '43 riot did not have a long-lasting effect). Detroit probably would have been very similar today even if the '67 riot had not happened. It just serves as a convenient scapegoat/nice narrative for those that do not want to look more deeply at the social, economic, political, urban planning [[and probably more) issues that contributed to the decline seen.