Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New York City Losing Blacks, Census Shows
NY Times ^ | April 3, 2006 | SAM ROBERTS

Posted on 04/03/2006 8:52:10 PM PDT by neverdem

An accelerating exodus of American-born blacks, coupled with slight declines in birthrates and a slowing influx of Caribbean and African immigrants, have produced a decline in New York City's black population for the first time since the draft riots during the Civil War, according to preliminary census estimates.

An analysis of the latest figures, which show the city with 30,000 fewer black residents in 2004 than in 2000, also revealed stark contrasts in the migration patterns of blacks and whites.

While white New Yorkers are still more likely than blacks to leave the city, they are also more likely to relocate to the nearby suburbs (which is where half the whites move) or elsewhere in the Northeast, or to scatter to other cities and retirement communities across the country. Moreover, New York remains a magnet for whites from most other states.

In contrast, 7 in 10 black people who are moving leave the region altogether. And, unlike black migrants from Chicago, Philadelphia and Detroit, most of them go to the South, especially to Florida, the Carolinas and Georgia. The rest move to states like California, Ohio, Illinois and Michigan with large black populations.

Also, New York has a net loss of blacks to all but five states, and those net gains are minuscule.

"This suggests that the black movement out of New York City is much more of an evacuation than the movement for whites," said William Frey, a demographer for the Brookings Institution, who analyzed migration patterns for The New York Times.

The implications for a city of 8.2 million people could be profound. If the trend continues, not only will the black share of New York's population, which dipped below 25 percent in 2000, continue to decline, particularly if the overall population grows, but a higher proportion of...

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Florida; US: Georgia; US: New York; US: North Carolina; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS: blackmigration; blacks; census; migration; newyorkcity; nyc; nydemographics; population; populationshifts; whitemigration
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: no dems

No. Interestingly, NYC has been hostile to Puritans, and Whigs and Pubbies since its founding. Morality was never allowed to get in the way of money. Blame the Dutch.


41 posted on 04/03/2006 10:13:32 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: no dems; Torie; neverdem

The last time there was a moral crusade in New York, it was the one led by Reverend Parkhurst in the late 19th Century. A proponent of the "good government movement", Tammany later had the last laugh when the Tabloids reported his, uh, "extracurricular affairs."


42 posted on 04/03/2006 10:15:33 PM PDT by Clemenza (I Just Wasn't Made for These Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: KellyAdmirer
That's basically the only way to get one there. That, or strike it rich in the city.

Bought a house in Nassau 19 years ago and then traded up once.

I don't see how anybody could buy a starter home here now.

43 posted on 04/03/2006 10:18:55 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: no dems
Gee, does this mean that there might be a chance that the GOP could someday carry New York if this trend continues?

Bush carried Staten Island buy a comfortable margin in '04.

44 posted on 04/03/2006 10:20:30 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign

Staten Island or Long Island? Either way; that's good news.


45 posted on 04/03/2006 10:24:12 PM PDT by no dems (Are there any other Populists in the GOP other than Tom Tancredo?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: no dems; FreeReign

The GOP has NOT carried Long Island in a Presidential election since 1988.


46 posted on 04/03/2006 10:26:58 PM PDT by Clemenza (I Just Wasn't Made for These Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Did you know that at one time, Flatbush had the highest percentage of slaves vis a vis the population, of anywhere in the colonies, something like 45%. Long Island was slave city, with Dutch masters. That flat fertile land was perfect for a slave economy. Don't hold me to it, but this was around 1720. NYC (lower Manhattan) was 20% slave. In 1741, they tried to burn the city down, and about 100 were executed (some burned at the stake), and another bunch deported. Who knew?


47 posted on 04/03/2006 10:28:40 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: no dems
Staten Island or Long Island? Either way; that's good news.

Believe it or not, L.I. went for Kerry in '04 while the borough of S.I. in NYC went for Bush.

48 posted on 04/03/2006 10:29:15 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign

Staten Island has always been a slice of upstate transported to downstate. It's where all the Wall Street clerks live. If you ever wondered, how can NYC be so liberal and still have the financial heart of the country there with financially-savvy Republican types, well, Staten Island is the answer. Downstate in general, though, has been trending left for the last twenty years. Nassau County used to be bedrock Republican, now sadly it has turned liberal.


49 posted on 04/03/2006 10:32:52 PM PDT by KellyAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: KellyAdmirer
Nassau County used to be bedrock Republican, now sadly it has turned liberal.

It was disturbing to watch in '92 when L.I. went for Clinton.

It was the first time I thougth, "what's wrong with these people"?

50 posted on 04/03/2006 10:44:57 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Torie

All correct. Suffolk County was also a Ku Klux Klan stronghold during the 1920s. The flagpole for Islip Township still has a plaque from its dedication from the Daughters of the Ku Klux Klan.


51 posted on 04/03/2006 10:48:46 PM PDT by Clemenza (I Just Wasn't Made for These Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Interesting. I used to live in Islip. Where is that flagpole?


52 posted on 04/03/2006 11:07:51 PM PDT by Buck W. (Avoid Evian Flu--Don't Drink Bottled Water.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

On the same block as the Town Hall.


53 posted on 04/03/2006 11:24:40 PM PDT by Clemenza (I Just Wasn't Made for These Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Just wait, the D's will be blaming Bloomberg for being racist, even though he's the second most liberal high-profile R in the country, behind Lincoln Chafee (although, Bloomberg is actually smart and effective, while Chafee is....not.)


54 posted on 04/04/2006 12:13:20 AM PDT by zbigreddogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

true and well summarized, but what are "DINKs and SINKs"?


55 posted on 04/04/2006 1:15:30 AM PDT by quesney
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KellyAdmirer

In terms of Staten Island, even though there are far more listed registered Democrats than Republicans, the island has only voted for the Democratic presidential nominee three times since 1952 — in 1964, 1996 and 2000. In 2004 Bush received 57% of the Island's votes, to 42% for Kerry.


56 posted on 04/04/2006 1:16:15 AM PDT by M. Espinola (Freedom is not free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza; no dems; Torie; neverdem
The last time there was a moral crusade in New York, it was the one led by Reverend Parkhurst in the late 19th Century. A proponent of the "good government movement", Tammany later had the last laugh when the Tabloids reported his, uh, "extracurricular affairs."

Aren't you overlooking the morals crusade against Bertrand Russell in 1940-1941 to prevent his appointment to City College?

... the famous incident of Bertrand Russell’s dismissal from appointment as a Professor at the City College, New York (1940-41) on the ground of morality. The campaign against Russell’s appointment at the City College centered on his alleged lack of morality since he supported premarital sex, advocated for condoning adultery to certain extent instead of mandatory divorce and his being an atheist. As his invitation for appointment at City College was announced, it raised furor amongst the New Workers, politicians and jurors, which included all sorts of defamatory remarks and name-calling from all quarters. The Tablet editorial demanded dismissal of his appointment describing Russell as a “Professor of Paganism, Philosophical anarchist and moral nihilist of Great Britain”. The Jesuit Weekly, America, referred Russell as, “a desiccated, divorced and decadent advocate of sexual promiscuity who has betrayed his mind and conscience.” Reverend John Schultz, Professor of Sacred Eloquence at the Redemptorist Seminary at Esopus (New York), described Russell as a, “mastermind of free love, of sex promiscuity for the young and of hatred for the parents”. Referring to Russell as a “dog”, Councilman Charles Keegan remarked that, “if we had an adequate system of immigration, that bum could not have landed within a thousand miles.” But now that he has landed, Miss Martha Byrnes, the registrar of NY County, told the audience, what do we do with the “dog”? Russell, she shouted, should be “tarred, feathered and driven out of the country”. Amongst a deluge of uncountable insults and slanders against Russell, a Mrs. Jean Kay’s (of Brooklyn) Lawsuit against Russell’s appointment got celebrity attention whereby she declared herself concerned over what might happen to her daughter, Gloria, if she were to become Russell’s student. In court, Mrs. Kay’s lawyer Joseph Goldstein described Russell’s work as “lecherous, libidinous, lustful, venerous, erotomaniac, aphrodisiac, irreverent, narrow-minded, unfaithful and bereft of moral fiber.

Most of the genius scientists, academicians and philosophers of his time, including Whitehead, Einstein, Dewey, Shapley and Kasner et al., rallied behind Russell. Einstein wrote in his letter of support: “Great spirit have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence.” Yet democracy, which should be characterized as “mob fanaticism” in this case, prevailed and Russell’s appointment was disallowed by a judge arguing, “Russell was unfit to teach” amongst many other judgments on moral issues.
http://www.islam-watch.org/AlamgirHussain/churchill_case.htm

Oh my how times have changed in New York!

57 posted on 04/04/2006 5:50:37 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
The GOP has NOT carried Long Island in a Presidential election since 1988.

Brooklyn and Queens are part of Long Island. I really doubt any Republican has ever carried it, at least since 1928.

58 posted on 04/04/2006 5:52:07 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Long Island was slave city, with Dutch masters. That flat fertile land was perfect for a slave economy.

Long Island, the eastern part of New Jersey, and the Delmarva Peninsula, are all closely related in climate, vegetation, and soil to the rest of the southern coastal plain. That their colonial economies should be similar is unsurprising. Long Island alone of these today, and only because of its proximity to Manhattan, lacks the poor blacks living in tar paper and tin roof shacks.

59 posted on 04/04/2006 5:55:08 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker

Thanks. A piece of NYC history I didn't know.


60 posted on 04/04/2006 5:56:08 AM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson