race- maybe?

[English]

Okay, right there I see your problem. Neither I nor anyone else in this thread has said anything remotely offensive. Yet the very fact that we're talking about race is offending you.

I get it now. No point in dicussing this any further. Seeya.

I'm absolutely and totally offended by you, dookie joe. You are the epitome of all that is offensive. I bite my thumb at you!!!

[dookie joe]

I'm absolutely and totally offended by you, dookie joe. You are the epitome of all that is offensive. I bite my thumb at you!!!

Shrug. I don't know what to tell you. I don't think I've said anything offensive whatsoever. But if you're offended by me, then I guess it's best we just cut this conversation short, eh?

[English]

The automobile companies had taken their tax base that supported the neighbrhood with them. Whites had moved to get away from blacks and crime. The retails that were mainly supported by whites followed. Coleman Young's tirades and bad decision making had ran more people out. Crack cocaine. Dennis Archer's lifiting of the residential rule. Kwame's and Monica Conyer's antics. Dave Bing's downsizing and cutting. That is the 60yr history of what happened to Detroit

Wow. Sociologists and urban planners have been wrestling with what happened to Detroit and why for more than 40 years, and here you've solved it all before bedtime!

[dookie joe]

OK, I agree that the Young Administration was one of the main points of origin of Detroit's downfall. And it could just as easily have happened regardless of the race of the mayor. But now just what was it about the Young Administration that led to "unfettered corruption that has plagued this city?"

I maintain that it was two primary aspects of his administration:

1) In an attempt to reverse perceived "racism" in the police department, Young made it impotent. He reversed strong anti-crime measures such as S.T.R.E.S.S. previously established by the police commissioner John Nichols. He destroyed the Detroit police force, with the resultant increase in crime. I believe it was the year 1974 - the very year that Coleman Young took office - that Detroit set a new annual homicide record of 801 recorded murders.

2) And yes, there is that word again - racism. Young made it the be-all and end-all of his entire campaign and of his administration. If you didn't agree with hizzoner [[as Pete Waldmeir used to call him), you were automatically a racist. And of course, Young reserved the right to define racism however and whenever he pleased. Right or wrong, Young's only significant contribution to the Detroit Metro area was to offend and polarize white people, and accelerate the resulting population decline.

I can't disagree with most of what you wrote, but I would point out that STRESS wasn't just a strong law enforcement effort; they were going around the city beating the crap out of innocent people, and they needed to be checked.

The problem wasn't getting rid of STRESS. The problem was, Young merely transferred those STRESS officers to the Big Four, where they continued riding around the city beating the shit out of people. So Young took credit for a "reform" that didn't really happen.

I'm all for strong police enforcement. But the cops shoudln't be breaking the law in the process. And STRESS and the Big Four did that. You can't just roll up on people and start strong-arming them when they didn't do anything wrong. I had it happen to me, as have my friends. So I know it goes on.

The rest of your post, I agree with. Young played the race issue like a violin. So did Kwame, and several recent City Council members.

[English]

Shrug. I don't know what to tell you. I don't think I've said anything offensive whatsoever. But if you're offended by me, then I guess it's best we just cut this conversation short, eh?

I was being sarcastic. Sigh.

The initial premise of the thread is offensive because it assumes that all black people from Detroit are the same. The progressive majority of the country got over "all ------s are alike!!!" years ago.

I'm not offended by anyone in particular here. How can I be angry at someone because of something they don't know and couldn't know? This is an informal Internet message board. Nothing that's said or done here will make or break anyone. If I saw you in real life, I'd buy you a beer and because I've got a full plate in my professional and social life, six months from now, I might not even remember your screenname or this conversation unless prompted.

There are no hard feelings on my end. I just strongly disagree with your position in this particular thread.

[Bearinabox]

Wow. Sociologists and urban planners have been wrestling with what happened to Detroit and why for more than 40 years, and here you've solved it all before bedtime!

My brain instinctively skips over the contributions of certain posters on this board. I find it does wonders for my mental state.

[Tig3rzhark]

Sad, but true. Our city needs a wake-up call. The only color that should matter at this point should be green. This city is so concerned about black vs everyone else while the agitators have bled the city dry.

I stay in hopes to live long enough to be in a Detroit that I can easily get around without owning a car. However, we have a long way to go.

But let's concentrate on the color that matters, GREEN.

[dookie joe]

I was being sarcastic. Sigh.

The initial premise of the thread is offensive because it assumes that all black people from Detroit are the same. The progressive majority of the country got over "all ------s are alike!!!" years ago.

I'm not offended by anyone in particular here. How can I be angry at someone because of something they don't know and couldn't know? This is an informal Internet message board. Nothing that's said or done here will make or break anyone. If I saw you in real life, I'd buy you a beer and because I've got a full plate in my professional and social life, six months from now, I might not even remember your screenname or this conversation unless prompted.

There are no hard feelings on my end. I just strongly disagree with your position in this particular thread.

Okay. My sincere apologies. I didn't know you were joking.

I totally understand what you're saying. Race is used by the powers that be as a divide-and-conquer technique. This has been going on ever since the early days of this country, when black slaves and white indentured servants got together and started fighting those who had them each in bondage. So the rich and powerful devised plans to keep poor whites and black slaves at each others' throats. It's a fairly simple tactic; happens to work.

But this thread asked a question. I agree that too many people see things through this prism -- which answers the question posed by the starter of this thread. Has race played a hand in why Detroit is unable to pull itself up? I say yes, it has.

I've made it clear that I don't think race is the MAIN reason Detroit is in the crapper. But I do think it's A reason. And I don't think that's too unreasonable a stance.

[English]

Okay. My sincere apologies. I didn't know you were joking.

I totally understand what you're saying. Race is used by the powers that be as a divide-and-conquer technique. This has been going on ever since the early days of this country, when black slaves and white indentured servants got together and started fighting those who had them each in bondage. So the rich and powerful devised plans to keep poor whites and black slaves at each others' throats. It's a fairly simple tactic; happens to work.

But this thread asked a question. I agree that too many people see things through this prism -- which answers the question posed by the starter of this thread. Has race played a hand in why Detroit is unable to pull itself up? I say yes, it has.

I've made it clear that I don't think race is the MAIN reason Detroit is in the crapper. But I do think it's A reason. And I don't think that's too unreasonable a stance.

Fair enough. Now that you state it this way, I totally agree. And I also agree that CAY and KMK were a disaster for the city, along with their followers.

BTW, the offer for the beer stands at any forum gathering. Have a great night!

[Motor City Sam]

Why do people think that corruption in Detroit started under Coleman Young? People never heard of Charles Bowles? The Grecian Gardens city official bribery case in the 1960s? The reason we ditched the ward system in the first place was because of graft and corruption.

I'm not making a judgement as to whether or not Young was corrupt, but he in any case he was not the pioneer of that crime in Detroit government.

[dookie joe]

Why do people think that corruption in Detroit started under Coleman Young? People never heard of Charles Bowles? The Grecian Gardens city official bribery case in the 1960s? The reason we ditched the ward system in the first place was because of graft and corruption.

I'm not making a judgement as to whether or not Young was corrupt, but he in any case he was not the pioneer of that crime in Detroit government.

Good point. I can't speak intelligently about what went on during those years, although I'm aware of the instances you cite.

While there were certainly instances of corruption before Young, I don't know if the ingrained, open culture of dishonesty was as bad back then as it would later become under Young. Maybe it was, I honestly don't know. Perhaps someone better educated than I can enlighten me.

[dookie joe]

OK, I see, Blame the black mayor. Everything was great before that, eh?

No. It's just that Young is the first mayor I happen to remember, and he was openly corrupt.

As I said in my previous post, while I know there were instances of corruption under previous administrations, I don't know one way or another whether Young ushered in what would become an era of rampant, unchecked corruption, or if he was merely continuing where previous mayors had left off.

[Hermod]

OK, I see, Blame the black mayor. Everything was great before that, eh?

Jeffries, Van Antwerp, and Cobo ran pretty honest administrations. Cavanaugh wasn't too bad [[I worked for the city under Cavanaugh).

[English]

I say we blame that scoundrel Hazen Pingree as the First Cause of Everything.

[65memories]

First of all, thank you English, Royce, Dookie Joe and others for some poignant and intelligent conversation here, something often missing when this subject comes up. Let me second the fact that the decline of Detroit is not due to Coleman Young. Racial politics were happening well before Mayor Young...his election was simply a sign that the racial politics as practiced before would happen no more; the population had shifted. But people were genuinely concerned with the effects of race in the 40's and 50's. If you study Cobo's election campaign in 1950, you will see that his tactics were built on racism, specifically under the umbrella of block busting and segregated housing...Cobo had the real estate moguls, white citizen councils [[also known as block clubs or civic organizations) and conservative press in his corner. This coalition allowed him to defeat the supposed favorite and liberal George Edwards, who was Council President at the time and thought to be a shoo-in for Mayor, until prejudice got in the way. I could write a book about the negative effect of this campaign alone. Royce mentions many other factors, all true but too numerous to mention here. My point is, as English and Royce point out, when analyzing this problem, one pulls one causal layer up and exposes it only to find a different causal layer underneath.

[dookie joe]

65, I consider myself edjumakated. Thanks...you're right, the race thing certainly didn't start with Coleman. Obviously. Hell, we had federal troops patroling the Briggs Stadium bleachers back in '43. Coleman Young had nothing to do with that.

As I said: I see the whole race issue as a divide-and-conquer tactic used by the powerful elites to distract us while they keep on screwing poor and middle class people of all races, harder and harder.

The point, as it relates to this thread, is: I think a lot of people in Detroit fall for this trick, hook line and sinker.

But you're right, 65 -- that was the case long before Coleman Young came onto the scene. And Detroit certainly isn't the only place where race still is an "issue."

And it'll keep on being an "issue" because the media keeps presenting it, and people keep gobbling it up. I guess the mere fact that we're still discussing it, as to English's point, is proof.

[sumas]

I agree green is the color we need to see here in Detroit. Decent jobs for decent pay.

Really glad I live in a viable neighborhood. Race isn't an issue here probably since most people are gainfully employed.

Race, sex and sexual persuation seem to be a divide and conquer type issue.

We had a black male friend who I got into a major hissing fit with. I told him black women have it the worst when it comes to discrimination. He pretty much disagreed almost violently. He did not acknowlege his bias against women.

People, we need to unite. Bias of any sort needs to be addressed and eliminated

[Danny]

There are so many causes for Detroit's decline. Race plays a huge part. Regarding race, the following events speak volumes: the trial of Dr. Ossian Sweet; the conflict at the Sojourner Truth Homes; the riot of '43; redlining; the clearing of Hastings Street for the Chrysler Freeway; the treatment of blacks by the predominately white police force, which led to the '67 riot; white flight; and the election of Coleman Young.Non-race issues that affected Detroit's decline: the oil shortage; closings of manufacturing plants due to foreign competition and cheap labor over seas; the loss of jobs due to the closing of those manufacturing plants; welfare; crime; slumlords; crack cocaine; declining schools; declining property values; and John Engler.Another issue that white suburbanites don't seem to understand about the decline of Detroit is that in the '60s prior to the riot of '67, whites owned the majority of businesses. Once whites left under white flight, they took their businesses. Since blacks did not own many of the businesses, storefronts became vacant, neighborhood residents, especially teenagers, didn't have jobs, crime increased. Also, because many blacks worked for the Big Three and jobs were being lost because of the oil shortage, competition, and jobs being shipped overseas, black neighborhoods declined. Throw in crack cocaine and slumlords in the 1980s and you have more decline in the neighborhoods. Now, because many blacks worked for the Big Three, when it came time for someone to operate a business in the neighborhood, blacks weren't prepared or ready to take on these businesses. However, Arabs and Chaldeans were willing to fill the gap that white businesses owners had left behind. They learned the businesses, brought family members over from their homelands, and taught them the businesses. Then they opened up a business. Eventually they owned most of the businesses in the black community.

GREAT QUOTE royce! I agree on your comments. Detroit is what it is today because of this negative requirements. If people can fix themselves, they can't fix their comunities. Today most poor and low-income Detroiters are living like out of the movie Claudine, an African American single mother with 6 troubled kids living off on welfare.

WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET

Listen to this song http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CACNkGP2nJ0 and vision how Detroit is.

In Memoriam: Neda Soltani

[exmotowner]

What I would like to know is the people that were left after "white flight", had beautiful homes to live in [[Brush park comes to mind) and they didnt even care enough to just not let them fall apart. I would love to write a book and call it "They lived in Mansions" [[and tore them the F up). My sister lives in a VERY poor area of Southern Illinois, but the houses are kept up and kept clean. Hell I'm poor and my house is kept up. You can make of this what you want. its just my thoughts.

[gnome]

Alright guys, I need a ruling here. Or at least reactions.

I was walking out of a store the other day during one our recent snow storms. I spotted a guy's jacket that looked warm and well-made. Leather with a hood, mid-length and it looked sharp. Fast forward to walking out of the store, the coat guy is on my right and I say, "Boy, that coat looks really warm."

Coat guy snaps around and says, "Who you calling boy, motherfucker?"

Me, "Whaat?"

CG, "Boy, motherfucker, you deaf? who the fuck you calling boy, you cracker ass?!"

A new face enters from the left, "He ain't your boy!"

Me, "Whoa ho hey hold on here I just liked his coat."

CG, "You fuckin trying to steal my coat? You broke ass motherfucker. This cracker here is trying to steal my coat!" To a now very disturbed group which have gathered behind me.

So, wise folks, this thing was a real down-the-rabbit-hole experience. Besides saying anything in the first place, my obvious failing here was using the word 'boy' as an exclamation of admiration, ... how would you have gotten out of the situation?

[R8RBOB]

Alright guys, I need a ruling here. Or at least reactions.

I was walking out of a store the other day during one our recent snow storms. I spotted a guy's jacket that looked warm and well-made. Leather with a hood, mid-length and it looked sharp. Fast forward to walking out of the store, the coat guy is on my right and I say, "Boy, that coat looks really warm."

Coat guy snaps around and says, "Who you calling boy, motherfucker?"

Me, "Whaat?"

CG, "Boy, motherfucker, you deaf? who the fuck you calling boy, you cracker ass?!"

A new face enters from the left, "He ain't your boy!"

Me, "Whoa ho hey hold on here I just liked his coat."

CG, "You fuckin trying to steal my coat? You broke ass motherfucker. This cracker here is trying to steal my coat!" To a now very disturbed group which have gathered behind me.

So, wise folks, this thing was a real down-the-rabbit-hole experience. Besides saying anything in the first place, my obvious failing here was using the word 'boy' as an exclamation of admiration, ... how would you have gotten out of the situation?

As I was reading this, I thought I reading someone's funny idea of humor but I assuming this happened.

First off, I am going to assume you made your remark you were looking at him when you said it. Even if you didn't mean it, never, never, never, never use the word boy to start off a statement. It is what it is. You say boy even if you don't mean it like the racists used to, you are going to get an angry response. As for stealing his coat, well I guess he was clowning you. The guy knew you didn't want to steal his coat. He wanted attention and he got it. It's too bad you had to go through that but next time use "man" not "boy" to start off a comment around a Black man.

[R8RBOB]

An easier way of avoiding this is to move to the suburbs.

Face it, you are unwelcome. You cannot be you in this city, you must adopt and adapt to what is expected of you in order to be temporarily tolerated by those who are entitled as the 'true owners' of that place.

Face it, you can't be you, this can never be 'your' city, there is no place for you, you can never belong, you don't belong, you will never belong, and you are not wanted.

Oh, Johnny I love it when you post. I couldn't help but noticed that you said "you can't be you in this city" and I want to know what that means? Is it that you can't wear your white sheet and hood and march down Woodward Ave. without getting a brick thrown your way. Or is it that you can't be you in this city because you can't tell a darkie to "fetch you a dip of that water" like they did in your good ole' days. Explain why you can't be you in Detroit? Enlighten us.

[EMG]

As I was reading this, I thought I reading someone's funny idea of humor but I assuming this happened.

First off, I am going to assume you made your remark you were looking at him when you said it. Even if you didn't mean it, never, never, never, never use the word boy to start off a statement. It is what it is. You say boy even if you don't mean it like the racists used to, you are going to get an angry response. As for stealing his coat, well I guess he was clowning you. The guy knew you didn't want to steal his coat. He wanted attention and he got it. It's too bad you had to go through that but next time use "man" not "boy" to start off a comment around a Black man.

OK, I'm going to call it like it is on this one: The above scenario is an example of unmerited overreaction on the black man's part, plain and simple. And to seriously tell anyone he must "never, never, never, never" use an innocent word like "boy" just because somebody might be offended is way out of line.

[softailrider]

Alright guys, I need a ruling here. Or at least reactions.

I was walking out of a store the other day during one our recent snow storms. I spotted a guy's jacket that looked warm and well-made. Leather with a hood, mid-length and it looked sharp. Fast forward to walking out of the store, the coat guy is on my right and I say, "Boy, that coat looks really warm."

Coat guy snaps around and says, "Who you calling boy, motherfucker?"

Me, "Whaat?"

CG, "Boy, motherfucker, you deaf? who the fuck you calling boy, you cracker ass?!"

A new face enters from the left, "He ain't your boy!"

Me, "Whoa ho hey hold on here I just liked his coat."

CG, "You fuckin trying to steal my coat? You broke ass motherfucker. This cracker here is trying to steal my coat!" To a now very disturbed group which have gathered behind me.

So, wise folks, this thing was a real down-the-rabbit-hole experience. Besides saying anything in the first place, my obvious failing here was using the word 'boy' as an exclamation of admiration, ... how would you have gotten out of the situation?

Just out of curiosity, what store and in what part of town were you when this happened? Obviously, the guy was an asshole who was just trying to start an argument.

[EMG]

As I was reading this, I thought I reading someone's funny idea of humor but I assuming this happened.

First off, I am going to assume you made your remark you were looking at him when you said it. Even if you didn't mean it, never, never, never, never use the word boy to start off a statement. It is what it is. You say boy even if you don't mean it like the racists used to, you are going to get an angry response. As for stealing his coat, well I guess he was clowning you. The guy knew you didn't want to steal his coat. He wanted attention and he got it. It's too bad you had to go through that but next time use "man" not "boy" to start off a comment around a Black man.

OK, I'm going to call it like it is on this one: The above scenario is a case of unmerited overreaction on that black man's part, plain and simple, and it demonstrates that "man's" emotional immaturity. And to seriously tell someone that he may "never, never, never, never" use an innocent word like "boy" even in an innocent just because somebody might be offended is way out of line. THAT TOO will "get an angry response."