Do people regret the 1967 riot?

[p69rrh51]

Don't bother, T. This is straight-up right-wing trolling, trying to goose people who know the actual history with poorly informed rhetoric that gathers a few selective facts to support a self-serving narrative.

What's the matter, guy? Freep boards just not cutting it for you?

DN how is it "straight-up right-wing trolling'? I would just classify it as completely uninformed!
There are a myriad of books and articles on the subject. But then 48009 is showing his/her utter lack of knowledge of the subject even though there are numerous threads on here dedicated to white flight. Even the laziest reader could take some time out to catch up before starting a thread like this.

[Detroitnerd]

Fair enough ...

[rb336]

just to add a little cognitive dissonance....

[swingline]

Growing up in Chicago, I know very little about Detroit history, and was only a toddler when this event occurred. But from what I hear, Detroit was the most socially progressive city in the nation [Detroit's black population had the highest rate of home-ownership of any black urban population in the country, and their unemployment rate was just 3.4 percent. It was not despair that fueled the riot.], but for some reason the most devastating racial riot occurred here. The people with means fled the city for the suburbs and Detroit entered a downward spiral, and has never recovered.

But there was also a small racial riot in 1943. Did this event already put people in motion to flee the city for the suburbs or did the majority start fleeing in the late 60s?

The 1967 Detroit was not a "racial riot." That term is generally applied to disturbances between two racial groups. Rather, the 1967 riot arose out of a highly charged atmosphere of racial discrimination, police brutality and other very serious social justice inequalities. The rioters "fought" the "authorities." That is not to defend or excuse the lawlessness. But it is an explanation. On the other hand, racial riot is an apt term for the 1943 riot. Blacks and whites fought each other.

[48009]

Don't bother, T. This is straight-up right-wing trolling, trying to goose people who know the actual history with poorly informed rhetoric that gathers a few selective facts to support a self-serving narrative.

What's the matter, guy? Freep boards just not cutting it for you?

No, it's not.

I don't follow the Free Press.

[Detroitnerd]

No, it's not.

Oh, yeah, right. Just happen to be posting the brilliant observations of Thomas Sowell and flirting with historical revisionism for the fun of it? Whatever ...

[48009]

Oh, yeah, right. Just happen to be posting the brilliant observations of Thomas Sowell and flirting with historical revisionism for the fun of it? Whatever ...

It's on the wikipedia page, genius.

[Detroitnerd]

It's on the wikipedia page, genius.

Wikipedia is ... ahem ... less than scholarly, what with all kinds of folks with serious ideological biases "editing" the history of major events.

For your information: The 1943 riot was not small; it was the largest race riot in the United States during a summer full of race riots from Texas to L.A.

The 1967 riot did not "destroy ... much of the city."

The other poster was right: You're reading the wrong Thomas. If you want to understand the history of Detroit, read Thomas Sugrue.

If you really know that little about Detroit's history, maybe you should do some thread searches and use the board to read up on the things you're curious about. There are several very long threads about 1967.

For more information about 1967, visit your local library. Reading is fundamental.

[Novine]

I know it's feeding a troll but why does 48009 think people rioted if things were so dandy in Detroit? Why would people burn down their own city if they were so happy with their circumstances? Sounds a bit delusional to me.

[Bham1982]

I know it's feeding a troll but why does 48009 think people rioted if things were so dandy in Detroit? Why would people burn down their own city if they were so happy with their circumstances? Sounds a bit delusional to me.

I don't want to speak for 48009, but those don't sound like contradictory statements. It isn't like a majority [[or even a large number) of blacks were looting and burning down the city. It was a small group of people, and probably wasn't even exclusively black.

[Novine]

" The result was 43 dead, 1189 injured, over 7,200 arrests, and more than 2,000 buildings destroyed."

A small group of people?

[Bham1982]

" The result was 43 dead, 1189 injured, over 7,200 arrests, and more than 2,000 buildings destroyed."

A small group of people?

I wasn't around back then, but I would say yes. Out of millions of people, thousands were involved [[and obviously not everyone arrested or injured was burning down buildings or raising hell). The vast majority of people, of whatever race, probably had no involvement in the riots, except as indirect victims.

[p69rrh51]

I wasn't around back then, but I would say yes. Out of millions of people, thousands were involved [[and obviously not everyone arrested or injured was burning down buildings or raising hell). The vast majority of people, of whatever race, probably had no involvement in the riots, except as indirect victims.

This one comes under the heading of you had to be there! There were elements of the Michigan National Guard[[not a big deal) and the 82nd Airborne Division[[Very big deal) deployed during the riots. Enough said!

[firstandten]

It was a big deal to me, walking by Linwood and Tuxedo on Central HS campus [[ remember in those days a junior high and elementary school shared the campus) which is pretty large there were tents, tanks and jeeps covering every square foot of that campus. I believe there was the same deal over at Southeastern High as well. Closest thing to an occupying army I've ever seen.

[RickBeall]

The black ghetto had been destroyed in the early 1960's [[Hastings Street). It was technically illegal to have enforced housing segragation. The blacks were moving out in all directions, since their part of the city had been destroyed to make room for the freeway. Whites were scared to death of these strange creatures who threatened their home values. And the white police force acted like an occupying army, acting as judge and jury doing pretty much whatever they wanted. All the blacks had their horror stories of having dealt with the police, if not them personally, a friend or family member did. The civil rights movement was happening, maybe it made some people anxious for faster changes. People just blew up with their hatred of their oppression under the still white police force. The white police force was just an expression of the racism at the time.

That is my impression of what happened.

[SWMAP]

I do regret that riot. I saw an academic study that documented how much ground Blacks lost economically in cities that experienced the riots: lost jobs, lowered housing value, less investment in those cities even decades later.
Sugrue documents all the white flight brfore the riots and people love to use him to "prove" that Detroit was diminishing well before the Riots- that the Riot did not change much.
But who knows if more white people would not have moved into Detroit in a return to city living if the riots had not made such a family decision obviously dangerous.Not many people want to actually live with such a threat when they saw it happen once. Yet those few of us who lived through it and are still here do live with the threat- didn't Shabazz threaten to burn Detroit down just this year? He was invoking the 67 Riot and stoking that fear. I don't blame average white families for avoiding the whole thing by staying away from here. A major riot happened once, it is a constant threat and could happen again because stupid people think its useful for something.

[IrishSpartan]

Really? What the hell was the almost 200k people that moved between 1967-1970 called? I'm not saying people were not moving in significant numbers before the riots, but they weren't leaving in the late 60's and early 70's for bigger back yards.

'67 was the ton of bricks that broke the camel's back when a straw could have done it. Folks did not suddenly pick up and move out en masse in the immediate aftermath. Instead movement away continued at its already steady pace.

Much of city was not destroyed. At most 10-20 square miles of Detroit's 140 were affected and only a handful of those affected severely. Downtown was almost untouched.

The expressway system had matured. Combined with federal and local subsidization of new housing and development, a newly instituted city income tax, block-busting real estate agents and the simple yearning for bigger, newer houses with big yards a perfect storm for the suburban movement was in place.

The freeway excuse is overused at times. Warren was the fastest growing suburb in the 1960's. What freeway went through Warren before 1976? People were going to leave anyway regardless of the freeways, and were not willing to live in integrated neighborhoods.

[gnome]

I find it interesting that so many people still think of the National Guard and 82nd Airborne as an occupying force. An invasion.

Truth is they saved your ass.

they kept the snipers at bey, and they kept the Big Four from doing what they were famous for doing. If those troops had not been here there is no telling how bad things could have gotten.

i have also noticed in all my years here I have never met anyone who rioted. Never met a looter, never even met anyone who knew anyone who looted. A city of liars.

[Wesley Mouch]

You're reading the wrong damn Thomas.

I've read both. Nothing wrong with Sowell's broad view. Nothing wrong with Sugrue's either. Sugrue's a very important read for any Detroiter. Doesn't diminish Sowell's insight. Both good Thomases.

[sumas]

The police force back then was pretty evil.Our next door neighbor was a cop and a very nasty man. I grew up on the far east-side which was lily white. His son Billy was my best friend until we were about 6 when his Dad told him he could only play with the boys in the area cause he didn't want a sissy for a son.

I digress, one day in summer when I was about 5 was the first time I saw a black person while I was with Billy playing. He gasped told me to run cause his dad told him "all N...s will knife you in the back". All I saw was a tired looking older black lady in a uniform. I think I remember that incident because Billy was really terrified. By age 5, he was a trained racist. I grew up in a house that was free of racial slurs but that changed with the 67 riots. My Dad became quite racist.

Side note: Billy is gay.

[sumas]

Although racism is alive and well in all walks of life.

I was seeing a therapist, provided by a Christian funded org.She was a middle aged black lady and we really liked and respected each other. In one session, she went ballistic on Jews,calling them dirty nasty cheaters. I didn't mention it, but my grandfather was Jewish. Maybe I should have.

[sumas]

The one story that makes me sad though was our neighbors the Taglivias. They had 5 small markets around the east side in black communities. These were little grocery stores with meat counters, produce and dry goods, not liquor stores. Three were looted and burned and two were saved because area residents came out to help protect their "neighborhood" stores with guns to help those who gave them credit and charged fair prices. The loss wiped them out financially.

[Danny]

The 1967 Detroit was not a "racial riot." That term is generally applied to disturbances between two racial groups. Rather, the 1967 riot arose out of a highly charged atmosphere of racial discrimination, police brutality and other very serious social justice inequalities. The rioters "fought" the "authorities." That is not to defend or excuse the lawlessness. But it is an explanation. On the other hand, racial riot is an apt term for the 1943 riot. Blacks and whites fought each other.

​That is historically incorrect!

The 1967 riot was not a race riot nor race related! It started as a 'blind pig' incident at a bar on the corner of 12th Street and Clairmount after 2:00 am Sunday morning in a warn but heat wave July night. All white Detroit Police force just trying to stop drunks from causing their little riot before it got out of control. When the riots flare up, Black folks in Detroit's West Side put these rumors white police officers messing with our people. White Detroiters said that blacks are tearing up their own neighborhoods and soon it would spread to ours. Let's move out here.

So far we don't know that drunk or drunks color of their skin who started the riot. But we do know that it left some wounds all over Detroit for ages to come.

[jerrytimes]

" The result was 43 dead, 1189 injured, over 7,200 arrests, and more than 2,000 buildings destroyed."

A small group of people?

Compared to the size of the black population in Detroit at that time, yes, that's a small group of people.

[swingline]

​That is historically incorrect!

The 1967 riot was not a race riot nor race related! It started as a 'blind pig' incident at a bar on the corner of 12th Street and Clairmount after 2:00 am Sunday morning in a warn but heat wave July night. All white Detroit Police force just trying to stop drunks from causing their little riot before it got out of control. When the riots flare up, Black folks in Detroit's West Side put these rumors white police officers messing with our people. White Detroiters said that blacks are tearing up their own neighborhoods and soon it would spread to ours. Let's move out here.

So far we don't know that drunk or drunks color of their skin who started the riot. But we do know that it left some wounds all over Detroit for ages to come.

Danny, thanks for the classic post. Now, just to clear things up, what exactly do you find "historically incorrect?"