This past year I read the book, The Color of Law, by Richard Rothstein. He writes about a forgotten history of how the government segregated America. The two most striking things about the book are that, first, many of these segregated housing developments occurred outside of the south, including in California, at the behest of the federal government itself.
The second is that the residential patterns that these programs helped to establish have persisted to the present day.
This book was what came to mind as I read Rik Keller’s account of the history of Davis. For those who wish to argue that we have beat this subject to death – in fact, we’ve never once touched the issue of formal covenants. The fact is that for years Davis restricted housing to exclude non-white populations from specific areas.
This was just part one of Mr. Keller’s story and I had wanted to sit back and allow him to tell the story before weighing in myself.
Mr. Keller maintains that the key point here is that discrimination did not end in 1968, and, just as we saw with Mr. Rothstein’s account, the patterns of discrimination were not undone and they persist to this day.
Unfortunately, the response from usual commenters was fairly predictable. One commenter denied the premise that Davis is more white than the rest of California. He posted data from a link that said Davis is 63.8 percent white, while California is 61.26% white.
The problem is that such data fails to break out the Hispanic population. In California the Hispanic population is 37.6 percent of the population. In Davis it is 12.5 percent. That is according
to the 2010 Census.
Factor in the Hispanic population, and the California population is 40 percent white, 37.6 percent Hispanic, 6.2 percent Black and 13 percent Asian. Put it another way, in California the four categories account for about 60 percent of the population. In Davis, about 37 percent. While Davis is definitely not nearly as white as it used to be, it is definitely much more so than the rest of California.
The commenter never acknowledged his error.
Instead the argument was that “this was a long time ago.” He continued, “Maybe it contributed to the demographics we have today, maybe not. Is there a problem that Davis has a few more percentage points of white people than the state average?”
And then: “Why are we bringing this subject up now? Hasn’t this been beaten to death over and over through the years. It seems like it’s just stirring the pot.”
The second part of the story by Rik Keller is the connection from past practices to the present day and how those patterns and inequities remain with us. The story that Richard Rothstein told is that those initial patterns laid the grounds for current residential patterns and inequities.
And the story of the Vanguard has been the story of racial inequity in Davis across a host of lines, long after the legal boundaries went away.
What we have seen in Davis is a long history of racial strife. Some longtime residents, people of color, tell me about the 1970s and the pockets of white supremacy groups and racial incidents at Davis High. The murder of Thong Hy Hunh in 1982 at Davis High punctuates a period of racial strife and led to the initial Human Rights Commission.
We have seen over the years that the much more diverse UC Davis population has had problems with the more white population within the city of Davis. Students of color have often described various racial incidents, reported about being pulled over for biking while black, walking while black and, of course, driving while black.
Talk to any African American who has spent any time in Davis, and they will invariably have a story about being pulled over by the police or otherwise racially profiled.
In 2012, when the Davis Human Relations Commission held its first “Breaking the Silence of Racism” event, there were so many people coming forward to speak – more than 60 spoke in all – we extended our comment period by a full hour to accommodate them.
The biggest issue they raised? The treatment of students from mixed-race backgrounds and the treatment by both teachers and their peers in the schools that led many into counseling and many more to transfer to other districts.
And, of course, one of the most recognized and pervasive discrepancies in this community is the Davis Achievement Gap. For students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, the scores resemble those in Woodland and West Sacramento. However, for advantaged students, mainly those who are Asian and white, they resemble their peers in Palo Alto.
The achievement gap at times in Davis has been among the largest in the state and it has been pervasive.
I have noted, however, that in recent years these patterns are starting to change. We are seeing one indicator of that in our schools where the white population is now just 54 percent.
Then there is the official census data. In 2000, the racial composition of Davis was 70 percent white, 2 percent black, 17.5 percent Asian and 9.5 percent Latino of any race. By 2010 that number was down to 65 percent white with 22 percent Asian and 12.5 percent Latino of any race. And by 2020, some expect that white number to be 60 percent.
We are still more white than surrounding communities, but that is a huge change in just two decades.
The question many will ask is what we can do about this – and that’s a fair question. But understand that the first step in diagnosing that we have a problem, is to acknowledge that we have a problem.
The first step is for people to acknowledge that there is a problem. After all, if there is no problem, what are we going to solve? I therefore await Part II of Mr. Keller’s piece and then we will see.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Get Tickets To Vanguard’s Immigration Rights Event
And all of your articles about race are predictable.
Using school age racial diversity to claim Davis’ racial profile is changing is not necessarily true. This is because we import 650 + kids per day into our grammar schools (see Sac Bee article – “Lack of kids in Davis fuels K-12 transfers from outside the school district”-http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/education/article139244218.html).
I have seen one bus from Woodland unload its students at Marguerite-Montgomery and they appear to be primarily Latino. Thus, using school kid racial make-ups as a proxy for resident racial diversity will make it appear that we are more racially diverse than we are in reality.
This statement ignores the huge increase in student population from UC Davis which has a disproportionately high Asian student population. You should really do a deeper dive into the age-group statistics on race in Davis and not use general population data to claim Davis’ racial imbalances are getting better.
And when I pointed this out yesterday, our esteemed moderator pulled it. Perhaps because I framed it in a comedic framework. Apparently humor is dead at the Vanguard. Ha F-ing ha.
DJUSD does not have its own bus system, but Woodland JUSD does. Sometimes DJUSD at various times contracts out to Woodland for some of their few bus needs, including from the Campo del Sol migrant camp south of Davis, which is legitimately within DJUSD’s attendance boundary. Students from migrant families maybe found at several district sites, but a large percentage of them go to Montgomery Elementary.
I see you still didn’t answer the question?
The premise of the question “that Davis has a few more percentage points of white people than the state average” was incorrect. The deed covenants restricted ownership by Hispanics as well. So David corrected the question and answered it.
The Davis Asian population is 22.19% while the state avgerage is 13.85% Should we look into that too, do you consider that a problem?
Secondly, why does Davis have to mirror the rest of California? Hardly any city mirrors California by the numbers exactly, you have some that have much less white people while having much higher minority percentages.
Why would we? The statewide Asian/Hispanic population is about half the population, in Davis it’s about one-third.
“Secondly, why does Davis have to mirror the rest of California?”
It doesn’t. Ironically you are the one who raised this issue in the first place. You stated – falsely – that the white population in Davis and California were about the same – I simply corrected your claim. No one else even brought up the issue. That’s a strawman argument. The point that Rik raised was restrictive covenants and redlining. Points you’ve never touched.
From your own words:
That’s not baselining it to the rest of California.
Nice dodge. You rightly pointed out that the chart I cited lumped whites with Hispanics so your answer now is to lump Asians with Hispanics? How convenient.
Actually you’re whole post is a dodge from the issues raised by Rik and me.
I guess you don’t want to answer my question,
I already said, I don’t consider that a problem.
Once again, your own words:
So “many will ask”, if having a higher percentage of whites in Davis is a problem why is it not also a problem having a higher percentage of Asians than the state average?
Nobody bothered to answer my question from yesterday:
“I’m wondering if anyone can name a single California farm town with under 5,000 people in 1950 that has more African Americans, Latinos and Asians today…”
P.S. I’m hoping that David can what he thinks would be the “ideal” demographic mix for Davis (percentage of White, Black, Latino and Asian).
P.P.S. I would also be interested in what percentage of Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Atheists (that include FSM people) David thinks Davis should have…
I don’t have an ideal mix. What I have a preference for is a community that addresses some of the problems I laid out in this piece.
Ken A
What’s the point of your question about demographics in 1950? Perhaps no one cares because that’s not the point of the article.
I don’t think so. Sure there have been some incidents but to paint the city as having a long history of racial strife is way over the top.
What’s next, will you soon label it a “crisis”?
You’re better than this David. 😉
Interesting that you have completely ignored the current race issue in Davis, the bias against Asians. Given the hate by progressives against Asians it is not surprising but it is interesting.
What is the bias against Asians in Davis and how is it being ignored?
Asians are discriminated against by schools like Harvard, Stanford and UC Davis that make them score higher on tests and get higher grades then EVERY other race to get in.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/30/us/politics/asian-students-affirmative-action-harvard.html
P.S. UC Davis has a “Center for African Diaspora Student Success ” does anyone know if the school has a Center for Asian or White Success?
Ken A
You assume incorrectly that 1) the sole objective of colleges is continued academic success and 2) high test scores and GPAs predict college success and strong contributions to society. I posted a solution to the college admissions issue in this blog post: https://wordpress.com/post/mcubedecon.com/1734
A. Not what he said – he said specifically in Davis
B. Asians are 33% of the undergraduate enrollment at UC Davis, thus overrepresented – and that doesn’t even account for 14% of enrollment which is labeled “international” of which a good percentage Asian
C. There is no permissible Affirmative Action in California anyway – and I don’t agree that taking steps to increase the black and Hispanic population is discriminating against a group
Jim Hoch
“hate by progressives against Asians ” Please give an example of actual “hate”–are liberals throwing bombs in their houses and churches, or call them names or even refusing to hire them? I can’t even recall a single public statement that would fall into this category. Either document this statement or retract it.
Feel free to disagree.
Jim Hoch,
You made the accusation. I’m asking for documentation of a serious charge. The burden is on you to prove your allegation.
Do we need tangible examples when we know that implicit bias exists in all of us? Or maybe it does not and we should not claim bias unless there is evidence.
Which is it?
Jeff M
If you don’t know the difference between “hate” and “bias” perhaps you’re not qualified to make judgements on this issue.
Again, what I fail to understand is why folks of more liberal persuasion accept these facts, while sometimes actively denying that it “doesn’t occur” for those with lighter skin (e.g., who are in the minority in certain areas).
Ultimately, it has the same impact on victims, regardless of skin color.
And, unless one is lying to themselves, it’s a human problem, not a white-person problem.
It’s also an outright “lie” to pretend that the reason that more African-Americans (particularly young men) are incarcerated is solely due to discrimination by police.
Ron
The circumstances in which our society has placed the African American community is the predominant explanation for the incarceration rates for that group. (Watch “13th” https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5895028/). It’s time that we stepped up and took responsibility for what has occurred to date. Looking at how to remedy past redlining that has perpetuated into today’s housing patterns is one step.
Richard: You’re referring to the underlying causes (which I wasn’t arguing, here). Nor was I suggesting what to do about it. (All are topics worthy of discussion, however.)
Ron
You wrote “It’s also an outright “lie” to pretend that the reason that more African-Americans (particularly young men) are incarcerated is solely due to discrimination by police.” “Reason” is about underlying causes. You’re being disingenuous, and as that you’re anonymous, you can’t be held accountable for your misstatements.
Richard:
Can you explain how “redlining has perpetuated into today’s housing patterns”. Redlining has nothing to do with people and has to do with “areas” (with all races) where lenders and insurance companies did not want to do business (or as Google says: “refuse (a loan or insurance) to someone because they live in an area deemed to be a poor financial risk). Buying a home in an area that was “redlined” was actually harder so it actually helped to change “housing patterns” causing people of color that wanted to buy a home to move out of the “redlined” area (if you talk to people of color in Vallejo and Antioch who bought in the 60’s and 70’s many will tell you they moved from areas of Oakland or Richmond that were “redlined”)…
Looks like the following was not charged as a “hate crime”, since the article specifically mentions this. (However, from what I’ve seen on the news, the Sikh community might view this differently.) The article does mention a different, earlier attack as a hate crime.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/09/us/sikh-man-attacked-california.html
Ultimately, I’m not sure what is to be gained by an honest discussion. But, I’m pretty sure it hasn’t happened, yet.
There are two types of communities that wring their hands over the racial demographics of their community. One is a community like Davis with a high percentage of college-educated liberals. The other is a poor community in the center of the country with a high percentage of working class conservatives.
For the liberal communities, generally the cause of the feeling of too low numbers of minorities is economic, yet the liberals in the community keep making social arguments.
For the conservative communities, generally the cause of the feeling of too high numbers of minorities is economic, yet the conservatives in the the community keep making social arguments.
It is generally the educated conservatives in both communities that make the economic arguments.
Jeff: You have a point, regarding lack of economic opportunity in impacted areas. What might you suggest to address that?
Seems like it’s either 1) never resolved, or 2) an area is “gentrified” – with existing residents of color displaced.
Foster robust and healthy economic vitality in these communities. Communities with a strong and diverse local economy tend to be more racially diverse and stable.
Affordable housing AND employment opportunities are required.
But I also think there is tribalism at play. People want to live with people of their tribe. However, strong economic opportunities play out overtime to help integrate tribes. It is a a simple understanding of individual and macro human behavior that access to resources fosters tribal integration and limited resources fosters tribal conflict. Hence Davis liberals tend to shoot themselves in the foot with this hand wringing over inadequate racial integration in the community as they also vote down economic development to “preserve the character” of their little white hamlet.
Again, I think you have a point (with the exception of this):
Jeff: “Hence Davis liberals tend to shoot themselves in the foot with this hand wringing over inadequate racial integration in the community as they also vote down economic development to “preserve the character” of their little white hamlet.”
My response: There already is “economic opportunity” in Davis (e.g., at UCD), and in Sacramento. Ironically, the council is getting ready to change the zoning at an existing unoccupied commercial site, for more student housing.
In fact, there’s so much “economic opportunity” that Davis is already a net importer of “commuters” from other communities.
I was referring to fostering economic development in communities that actually need it, without displacing the existing residents.
I don’t believe that is true with respect to residents that work for a living… which is the point.
UCD is not an employment opportunity that works for black and Hispanic minorities in general. And your no-growth position causes housing costs to be high which also is a negative attractant for minorities.
So I am back to my “preserve the character of their little white hamlet” as being accurate.
I strongly suspect that most of the (net inflow of) commuters into Davis each day are, in fact, employees.
I assume you’re referring to faculty positions. If your statement is true, then that’s perhaps a problem that UC / UCD needs to help address.
Also, I doubt that your statement is true for non-faculty positions.
Adding even more economic development to a city that doesn’t need it will increase this disparity, and is not the same as fostering it in communities that actually do need economic development (at least in reference to employment opportunities).
There is, however, an opportunity that’s currently being explored for UCD to help offset some of its costs to the city.
“Does not need it” because it is fine the way it is by your standards. That is the point Ron. You like it the way it is and want it to stay that way, and “that way” is not attracting more minorities.
This is for the entire UC system (cannot find it broken out for UCD only) but you will see that blacks and Hispanics are under-represented in UC system employment.
https://ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/_files/workforce-profiles/workforce-profile-2014.pdf
Other than a verified net inflow of employees, what “standards” are you referring to? Your own?
And, you’re blaming this on the city of Davis? To be resolved by more economic development in a city which is already overwhelmingly Caucasian and Asian (and already has a net inflow of commuters)?
Why not foster economic development where it’s actually needed?
Jeff M
Bay Area Economics looked at the data for the Downtown Specific Plan process and found that the City is a net importer of jobs, and that jobs increased 18% in Davis since 2005 while population grew a small percent. I don’t have a ready link to the report summary, but you can get it from the City staff if you’re interested in following up.
It’s a chicken and egg problem. Whenever there is an argument based on economics (e.g., wealth or job opportunities), the next question becomes how those economic differences came to be. And that generally leads liberals to history, context, power, whereas conservatives tend to focus on individual-level factors.
There are more poor whites in America than any other group, so (despite what some might think) white skin is not a ticket to a life of “privilege” with wealth, private jets, country clubs and yachts…
I have not met anyone (of any race) that is smarter than average who works harder than average that is not doing “better than average”.
Only half the people are smarter than average and only half work harder than average so we are (unfortunately) always going to have a lot of people (of all races) that are are doing “worse than average”…
P.S. With that said I am not a “white privilege denier” (but also acknowledge that there is also black and latino “privilege” since few white kids will probably be as successful as Obama’s girls or Carlos Slim’s grandsons who he recently made directors of multi-billion dollar companies)…
Ken A
Thanks for demonstrating Cindy Pickett’s point. The fact is that the poverty RATES among European and Asian Americans are much lower than for African and Latino Americans. It’s disingenuous to look at gross numbers because of course there’s at least five times more European Americans than African American’s nationwide. And I see that you buy into the fiction that all differences in income and wealth are dictated by being smart and working hard. The point is that those differences explain much less of the disparities in wealth than the circumstances into which one is born. Many, many studies demonstrate that fact. (If you don’t believe that, then you also have to believe that cell phones run on magic…)
Well no, not really. The most recent studies connect income disparity to the level of parental education. Preferably multiple generations of family education.
Part of that has to do with the shedding of industry and manufacturing and the turn toward an information and service economy.
I know that the poverty “rate” for whites and asians is lower that other groups, but the High School and College graduation “rate” is also higher for both groups. I’m wondering if Richard thinks that there is any relation between graduation “rates” and poverty “rates” (or if it is just related to white and asian “privilege”)…
I’m also wondering if Richard really thinks that it is “fiction” that “the “differences in income and wealth are dictated by being smart and working hard”. Sure it is not ALL the differences there are plenty of dumb lazy people of all races who will the lottery (the state lottery “and” rich parent lottery) who never have to work a day in their life, but I’m wondering if Richard can name a single person of any race who was smart and hard working enough to get a medical, law or engineering degree from a good college that is living in poverty today (who is still hard working without mental or substance abuse issues).
Ken: Poverty leads to lower graduation rates which leads to move poverty.
I’m wondering if David thinks that intelligence and hard work has anything to do with poverty rates (or if the IQ rates and hours spent on homework is the same between the rich and poor kids)…
P.S. Does David know any kids with “Tiger Moms” who have dropped out of High School?
Complex question that gets us way off track.
Chicken and egg argument. But let’s assume it is the case, how do you think we should decrease poverty for these demographics… resist Trump?
Ken A
Research shows that the US now has among the lowest measures of economic mobility. I’m not going to pay the “what if” game that you created of who might have been a professional; instead the statistics back me up. These two stories will lead to you other studies that will refute your unfounded mythological assertions, if you’re willing to take the time to read them. (Unfortunately, because you’re anonymous, we can’t check in with you on your progress.)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/aparnamathur/2018/07/16/the-u-s-does-poorly-on-yet-another-metric-of-economic-mobility/#6df6d2f46a7b
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-birth-of-a-new-american-aristocracy/559130/?
Richard may be surprised that I agree with him 100% about how “economic mobility” keeps getting harder in the US.
I am someone that grew up poor with working class parents without college degrees that is (sadly) seeing the “classes” in America getting more and more divided.
I live an interesting life with one foot in the world of my wife’s family (with wedding receptions at the PU Club) and my family (with wedding receptions at the San Bruno American Legion Post).
In Davis I find that the “upper class” (who tend to assume I have a CV similar to my wife) are not fans of the “lower classes” of all races and want to make it as harder for anyone to move to Davis or send their kids to a top 25 college.
I agree with this. I think there is some brain wiring difference that provides some explanation for these two views/tendencies.
I also think social and economic success breeds liberalism and liberalism tends to breed a long decline in social and economic success. Since neuroplasticity has been proven, we can understand this American migration left. And one has to wonder if this is also a macro-biological function to regulate population (forced scarcity of resources, etc.)
Demographics matter. Culture and values matter.
Serious question. Can you name many countries that are primarily Hispanic (brown-skinned) or African (black-skinned) that you would point to as good models? Countries where you would want to live. Countries that are economically and socially robust, and with adequate safety and security.
This is a bit rhetorical as I know there are few.
It is interesting that American liberals focus on the negative aspects of history as a call for social justice (or a justification for their protesting behavior tendency) and American conservatives’ focus on history is on the positive aspects as a call for patriotism and traditional values. It seems an easy bridge to form to blend these two views as there is value in both of them. We should not repeat atrocities of the past, yet we should also not lose our perspective for the things that made us great and helped us progress beyond our troubles of the past. From my perspective the latter is the most important because it allows us to progress.
But humans easily reset their expectations to a new normal (it is both a blessing and a curse as it causes us to seek progress, but it also causes us to lose perspective of what got us there).
However, our unique Great Experiment has enabled the profound success… it has allowed a majority of us to hang out at the top rung of the needs hierarchy. We have grown an expectation that we are entitled to this even though it is only recently that we have achieved this and 90% of the rest of the people on the globe can only dream about it. But unfortunately that is rung that will easily collapse without honoring and supporting the ladder itself. This lack of support for the ladder itself is an affliction of the liberal viewpoint and ironically it is the thing that is most damaging to those that have yet to climb… namely minorities.
[edited] Stop calling people a racist simply because they ask a question, and let me know when you have any real data to stem your emotional reaction and join the conversation.
Can you answer the question, or only react with a fit?
Jeff M
[edited]
You wrote “I also think social and economic success breeds liberalism and liberalism tends to breed a long decline in social and economic success.” And what’s the basis for your claim? Given that the most rapid and sustained growth in the U.S. economy and greatest expansion of civil rights coincided with its most liberal economic policies from 1933 to 1973, I’m not seeing support for this claim. In fact, the reversal of these policies that started in 1980 has led to a slowing in economic growth and an increase in income disparity that has left the median household little better off than they were in 1979. (All of these facts are well documented in the economics literature.)
First, modern liberal progressives (not at all classic liberalism) are generally infantile socialists that are really junior Marxists and wanna-be collectivists. We can see this now in the Democrat Party… with a majority now polling to embrace socialism.
– Argentina
– Cuba
– Venezuela
There are only a few previously democratic and capitalist countries that went left and crashed.
Modern liberalism is anti-industry and globalist. Those are not good for the very demographic we are discussing here.
Let me guess, you support Universal Basic Income.
There is nothing supported nor factual in this other than regurgitated leftist ideology. Sorry buddy, but you cannot give people more free stuff and solve income equality. The increase in US income equality was from the bonehead pursuit of globalism and uncontrolled immigration.
You should probably stop reading Krugman. He is a worthless hack.
Jeff M
BS–it’s not the “educated conservatives” here that are making this argument. That’s so much crap and hogwash. Clearly this WHOLE article is about ECONOMIC causes of racial discrimination here, through exclusion from owning the most valuable economic asset in our society, land.
Do you support developing manufacturing and more retail on the periphery of Davis?
You haven’t bothered reading my posts before, have you? I’ve been one of the ardent posters in support of the innovation parks and the other proposed developments. Look for my posts about how those opposing these developments are closing the doors on UC students coming from underprivileged communities. Don’t give me any crap about being inconsistent. Get your facts straight and open your eyes.
That did not answer my question. I am not talking about white-collar jobs that whites and Asians flock to, I am talking the type of jobs that blacks and Hispanic are more likely to be qualified for.
Do you really intend to refer to race, here, or education qualifications?
I took a shortcut. Absolutely education qualifications, but as represented by these different racial groups. I did not write the article. It is about race.
Blacks and Hispanics are two racial groups under-represented in socioeconomic outcomes. Studies have shown that in the economy of the last 30+ years, academic achievement of the parents is the largest indicator of high lifetime earnings.
Studies have also shown that children of poor parents do less well in school.
So how to we break the cycle and life up these children having less privilege?
One path is to given these families more government money, including subsidized housing, so they are no longer poor by some measure… while also throwing LOTS more money at the public schools of these poor neighborhoods to overcome the deficits of learning challenges these kids have. Seems we have tried this for a long time and in many related models and it has not helped. Of course those committed to this path say we just to to spend more. They say we now need UBI.
The other path is to increase economic opportunity for the families so they can work and earn their own way to greater prosperity. We do this by committing to economic development and economic growth. When the father can work to support his family, he is more likely to stay with his family and not turn to crime as an alternative. The pursuit of globalism, environmental over-regulation and other over-regulation, over-taxation, uncontrolled immigration… combined with a welfare entitlement system that discourages work… has broken these families and no money hand-outs are going to fix anything… even the guilt felt by those that pushed these broken ideas and have seen them fail… every time.
Davis has limited attraction to these families, except maybe the school system… but even that is arguable.
Richard… the exclusion from owning land in Davis ended 50 years ago (even then, it was limited… look at the names of those old-time property owners who were “of color” back to the 1800’s)… how far back do we need to go for self or other flagellation? 100 years? 500 years? 1000 years? 2000 years? 10,000 years?
It’s about where we go from here… IMO
Except that both in the case of Rki’s research and in the case of Richard Rothstein, the residential patterns from 50 to 70 years ago have been pervasive over time. So while you are correct, it’s about where we go from here, but how we got here is important to understand and we figure out how to go from here.
Jeff M
I mentor the FRC robotics team at DHS because I see it as providing an alternative education track that can bring together college-bound and career tech students. Implicit in that is the belief that we need more jobs for the latter students here in Davis and Yolo County. I dont’ object to the creation of manufacturing and retail jobs–again would have figured this out from reading my earlier posts before making a baseless assumption. However, we are also seeing the end of the factory worker as a viable economic path. We need to educate those students become “artisans” who are able to work on customizable projects that are more “one-off.” Again, I supported the development of the various commercial parks on the periphery that would have included these types of jobs.
Another phenomenon in our country is the isolation and poverty on Native American reservations. Years ago, I was shocked to briefly travel through one such reservation, in Northern California.
The lack of opportunity remains on these reservations, unless they pursue casinos (which leads to other problems for society). It’s difficult for me to justify any “positive” contributions to society from that industry.
Also, allowing one group to completely monopolize that “industry” is just asking for problems.
Supporting your observation here, Ron, related to
Not the rest…
Ever heard of Ira Hayes?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKDLQWEvubc
And some think that Davis CC&R’s from up to 75 years old, now rendered obsolete for over 50 years, are more significant, more worthy of redress… go figure…
Casinos are not the bane… they tend to be an economic answer… yet, within the Native American community, there has been divisive conflicts… just like in every other racial/ethnic group that I can think of, past and current… and economic disparity within the groups…
Ron
“Reservation” for people itself sounds terrible
It does, now that you mention it. That entire program was (yet) another disaster. To be “fixed” via granting exclusive rights to operate casinos, I guess. Leading to problems such as the one that Howard mentioned.
You completely missed my point… to help you with it… tribes do not share revenues equally among members, due to internal dissensions, ‘politics’ as it were… Republican tax code changes were heavily favoring the rich, and intentionally addressed against CA and a few other states. You can thank Republican congress for your tax changes…
It’s kind of getting off-track from the topic of the article, but the fact that the ability to operate casinos is granted exclusively to Native Americans inevitably leads to “tribes not sharing equally” (e.g., “who qualifies”). Exacerbated by typical negative human emotions such as greed, fear and jealousy.
And that’s only one of the problems with this “solution”. (Without even getting into the external problems.)
Indians Casinos are mostly in the hands of “old boys’ from Nevada and Atlantic City .
I call the Indians Casinos ” The Great White Hope ” after 1970 film with a same title .
The Reservations names should be change to the Sovereign Land of Apaches , Cherokees etc .
To all participants; NO NAME CALLING. NO INSULTS. Posts will be pulled.
Thread cleanup: 7 comments removed.
I’ve been off running some errands this morning and just got back home and read the comments.
Yes David, imo obviously from the vitriol exhibited on this thread today all your article has done is stir it up.
And most of us reading this will never know what you are talking about because it was all pulled — all in the name of comment sanitation!
White white-edy white white white!
This article uses the word “white” 16 times!
Alan Miller wrote “White white-edy white white white! This article uses the word “white” 16 times!”
Actually, it was just used 15 times. The article also used the word “black” 5 times, “Asian” 4 times, and “Hispanic”/”Latino” 6 times. So, the word “white” was used 15 out of 30, or 50%, of the time when describing race/ethnicity in the article. That’s a little bit less the 2017 Census estimate of the share of 55.6% of “white alone, not Hispanic or Latino” people of the total Davis population [see https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/ca,daviscitycalifornia,US/PST045217]
Are you also implying that the percentage of white people in Davis is too high?
Do you have some sort of suggestion as to a better way to talk about race/color in a 1000-word article about race/color?
Rather then using “The W Word” think about “People of the Light”
https://me.me/i/stop-using-the-w-word-we-arent-white-we-are-23040680
Coffee spraying everywhere! That is hilarious.
No.
Judge by the content of their character, not the color of their skin.
Alan,
You were very offended by how many times the article use the word “white” even though the use of that word as a percentage of the other references to specific race/ethnicities was less than the percentage of white people in Davis. Yet, you don’t have a problem with that.
If you are calling for people to be judged “by the content of their character, not the color of their skin,” surely you will condemn the character of people who instituted overt and covert discrimination against other people and judged them by the color of their skin? And you will condemn the continuing discrimination and patterns of inequity that have been passed down to this day? And you will recognize the privilege that some people obtained through this historic and continuing discrimination and call for actions that will make amends for this?
I’m wondering if Rik has any idea what “actions will make amends” for past discrimination.
Over the years it seems like the “actions to make amends” has just made it harder for white kids growing up in Mississippi trailer parks to get into UVA or Duke while the great great grandchildren of slave owners (that have not only “white privilege” but buildings on campus named after relatives) have no problem getting in (or getting a job). Here on the west coast the grandkids of the white guys actually hammering nails to build $30K homes that people of color could not buy driving tractors in Napa or while their bosses exploited people of color seem to take a hit with the attempt to “make amends” while the grandkids of developers and winery owners have their applications hand delivered to admissions by the president of the Cal or Stanford (or head of Enology at UCD) after he gets back from the Bohemian Club…
“I’m wondering if Rik has any idea what “actions will make amends” for past discrimination.”
Focusing on expanding lower income mobility to higher income brackets through education is one angle.
If the outcomes show proportional racial/ethnic demographic successes as the overall demographic profile of lower income students, then that would be ideal. I was struck by this podcast, Changing Class; Are colleges helping Americans move up? which comments on the issue of valuing colleges based on producing income mobility, that there is almost no reference to race/ethnicity.
Yes?
I would replace ‘offended’ with ‘amused-bemused’;
That makes absolutely zero sense. You cannot compare those disparate parameters in such a fashion and remain remotely tethered to reality.
See above comment of mine.
Martin & I . . .
Yes. Without hesitation.
I think you mean “will you” rather than “you will”. Or maybe you don’t.
But to answer the question in the form I changed it to so that it is indeed a question: kinda sorta. I don’t like the fact that this laid down a starting point of inequality, but neither do I believe that a certain percentage of ‘white’ people in town should have their property taken away – or that all ‘white’ people should have a percentage of their property taken away – to somehow make up for this historical evil at the point of the government gun.
Again you with the “you will” thing. In the future YOU WILL ask questions without reversing those two words so as to make demands in a passive-aggressive (mostly aggressive), threatening tone.
I don’t use the word ‘privilege’ in the way you do — your usage is tied to identity politics and cultural appropriation politics. Am I rejecting the notion that as a group ‘white’ people have higher average incomes, and at least in the establishment class, greater opportunity? Not at all, of course that is true.
I do however, reject the implication of the aforementioned political idealizations that this makes the individual ‘non-colored person’ responsible, nor should anything be collectively taken away from one ‘group’ and given to another (likely via the very inefficient method known as ‘taxation’). The best we can hope for is the removal of discriminatory laws, which are bat-S evil, and slowly over time the death of A-holes that are outright racists, plus a mellowing of hearts and minds overall. It will take time, and it will never reach zero.
To answer the question directly: NO. The idea comes from the politics of extreme socialism or communism, of which I am not a fan. The idea is beautiful. The implementation of it by a giant bureaucracy (state or federal government “Bureau of Everything Should Be Fair”) would be a horror, and impossible.
Great post Alan.
How do you like them “biscuits”?
Thank you. It’s one of the greatest things I’ve written, judging it myself.
Smothered in warm veggie mushroom gravy.
“I’m wondering if Rik has any idea what “actions will make amends” for past discrimination.”
Just published online at The Davis Enterprise:
UCD 10th in rankings for research, social mobility, public service
There is no mention of race here, but if there is balanced racial/ethnic demographics included among the students, then there should be, proportionally, more Latino and African American students who are being offered more social mobility opportunities through a UCD education. UC Davis presumably is doing better than most colleges at promoting social mobility.
What’s funny is that whites are under-represented at UCD as a ratio to CA demographics.
It is only “funny” “that whites are under-represented at UCD as a ratio to CA demographics” if your kid got in to UCD and you are not paying ~$150K+ “MORE” – “PER KID” to send them to college in CO, OR or AZ…
No it’s funny because this article stemmed from Davis having too many whites in comparison to the rest of CA but not a peep out of these social justice warriors when whites are under-represented on it’s local campus.
What’s funny is posting statistics and not understanding them. Whites are not disadvantaged in California. Period. Why does it matter that Latinos and Blacks are underrepresented in high education? Because it is related to their status in society. It is related to prejudice, to glass ceilings, to discrimination – both de facto and de jure. That’s not behind the lack of whites at UC Davis. Whites dominated at every level of society from the boardroom to the legislature to the bottom line income. Posting a single stat out of context, is not helpful. It’s not analysis. And it doesn’t make the point you want it to make.
“No it’s funny because this article stemmed from Davis having too many whites in comparison to the rest of CA but not a peep out of these social justice warriors when whites are under-represented on it’s local campus.”
How many buzzwords can you throw in that you don’t understand?
Good comeback, about what I would expect out of a social justice warrior.
Everybody stop with the insults please.
I wonder if Craig has noticed that most of the “homeless” in Davis are “white” (like millions of other super poor “disadvantaged” people in California before he wrote: “Whites are not disadvantaged in California. Period”…
Talk about a problematic statement. First of all, Ken almost never uses data to make his point. Second, he makes a grievous error trying to extrapolate homeless in Davis to whites disadvantaged in California. I don’t know if whites are the majority of the homeless in Davis, but we do know that whites are the majority of the Davis population. Seems like blacks are overrepresented even in Davis.
In California according to the data, the biggest group of homeless people – African Americans.
In LA County, 39% of the homeless are black, 27% Latino, and 26% white. Blacks are only 9 percent of the population in LA. That seems to gibe with SF as well.
I don’t see any basis by which your anecdote is true let alone proves the larger point.
I wonder if Craig, noting his familiar left-side rhetoric related to race, can explain why after eight years with a black President and decades of all big cities, all of New England and most of the east and west coast being in control of liberal Democrats, that things have not improved… and in fact, things in these places controlled by Democrats seem to be in even worse shape when it comes to race relations and economic disparity between whites and under-represented minorities.
I got in a nice conversation with the 22 year old daughter of one of my friends telling me that I was uninformed about white privilege because she was attending college and almost every one of her professors had taught her that it is a real thing.
In terms of Obama… Let’s start with while he was symbolically transformational, he was never so policy wise. Second, even if he had been, he worked with a Republican congress most of his tenure. Third, I disagree with your point that “things have not improved.” By almost every measure they have – education up, income up, more blacks in the middle class, etc. But I would argue until we deal with mass incarceration, something Democrats have been only willing to take on in the last few years (when most are out of power), there is only so far. We’re getting way off topic here.
It is funny how many times when I post something true that David does not like says something like:
“Ken almost never uses data to make his point”
When in reality that I probably post more links than almost anyone else to the Vanguard and David is just hoping some readers (the few who look away when they see the homeless in town and unlike most Davis residents don’t laugh when someone like David says “most” homeless in town are not white) will not take the time to go to a credible source like the one below that shows that (at the 2017 count) not just “most” homeless (as I posted earlier) in Davis are white (BOTH sheltered and unsheltered) and in Yolo County as a whole 2/3 of the homeless are white
http://www.yolocounty.org/home/showdocument?id=41677
If David wants to post that we don’t have millions of poor white people in the state I can post plenty of links showing that more whites live in actual “poverty” than live a life of “privileged” in the state flying from their ski home in Martis Camp to their yacht in Marina del Rey in private jets.
I’m still at a loss as to why you go from California to Davis.
BTW, interesting thing about the data on homelessness in Yolo … whites are almost exactly the same share of the homeless population as their actual population, while blacks are 8 times their share of the actual population.
Ken A: you don’t seem to understand poverty rate.
Here are some stats for California: “In 2016, 26.1% of Latinos lived in poverty, compared with 18.9% of African Americans, 17.6% of Asian Americans, and 13.5% of whites. Though poverty among Latinos is down from 30.9% in 2011, Latinos remain disproportionately poor (making up 52.8% of poor Californians but 39.2% of all Californians”.
http://www.ppic.org/publication/poverty-in-california/
Latinos has the highest rate of poverty as well as the highest absolute numbers.
Ken A.
If you did a simple Google search for “California children poverty,” you would find this article listed very high in the search results: https://calbudgetcenter.org/blog/californias-persistently-high-child-poverty-rate-is-even-higher-for-children-of-color/
It discusses the disparity of the incidence of poverty (“poverty rate”) among children of color in California. It also has a whole section that covers systemic causes and continuing discrimination (I briefly touched on some of these same themes in Part One of my article “Why Is Davis So White”. In Part Two, I’ll go into this in more detail). You can get a head start by reading the below excerpt from the linked website (and note that all of the blue text that has links to other corroborating studies and articles).
Just for fun, I challenge you to provide an equivalently-sourced article that documents that discrimination has ended in the U.S (or just California if you prefer) and that current patterns of wealth and income distribution have no relation to historic discrimination. Time to prove David Greenwald wrong about you just giving us your unsubstantiated opinions on things that are not backed by evidence! Are you up for the challenge?
“Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Child Poverty Did Not Happen by Accident
In large part, these disparities in economic hardship during childhood reflect the legacy of blatantly discriminatory policies and practices, together with other forms of discrimination that continue today, that effectively cut many families of color off from opportunity and continue to limit their mobility up the economic ladder. While these policies and practices were primarily directed at black families and individuals, they laid the foundation for segregation among other communities of color. For instance, a wide range of racist housing policies and practices throughout the past century, such as discriminatory city zoning ordinances, redlining, and racially restrictive covenants, fostered racially segregated neighborhoods. On top of this, national transportation policies facilitated “white flight” from cities to suburbs, which further accelerated public and private disinvestment in communities where black families were confined and cut their neighborhoods off from employment opportunities. Although many of these overtly racist policies have been outlawed or discontinued, discriminatory practices that preserve racial segregation continue today. Outright racist policies have been replaced by subtler methods of racial exclusion, such as ostensibly “race-neutral” exclusionary zoning practices and public housing programs that, in effect, continue to confine many families of color to distressed areas where poverty is concentrated and opportunity is limited. Families living in poverty in these areas face what Elizabeth Kneebone and Natalie Holmes have described as the “double burden of being poor in a very poor place,” as these neighborhoods provide limited access to the building blocks of opportunity, such as good schools and jobs.”
I understand that whites have a lower poverty “rate” I was responding to Craig’s comment:
“Whites are not disadvantaged in California. Period.”
I’m hoping that David will tell us why he circled the whites + hispanic whites percentage after giving other people a hard time for not breaking out whites and hispanic whites.
I’m also wondering if Rik and Davis agree or disagree with Ross that “”Whites are not disadvantaged in California. Period.”
Ken A.
I challenged you to provide an equivalently-sourced article that documents that discrimination has ended in the U.S (or just California if you prefer) and that current patterns of wealth and income distribution have no relation to historic discrimination. Time to prove David Greenwald wrong about you just giving us your unsubstantiated opinions on things that are not backed by evidence! Are you up for the challenge?
So David, were you skewing the data?
Keith O: it doesn’t appear that you have an understanding on how data by race/ethnicity is tabulated and reported. This was apparent from your very first post on my article in which you tried to claim that the racial/ethnic composition of Davis is very similar to that of California as a whole.
In the U.S. Census, race and ethnicity are considered entirely different categories. Designations like “black”, “Asian”, and “white” are considered race, while “Hispanic or Latino origin” is an ethnic category: “Hispanic origin can be viewed as the heritage, nationality, lineage, or country of birth of the person or the person’s parents or ancestors before arriving in the United States. People who identify as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish may be any race.” [source: https://www.census.gov/topics/population/hispanic-origin.html%5D
In some U.S. Census tabulations you will see a “white” category which could include persons of Hispanic or Latino origin. And in some cases there will be a “White alone, not Hispanic or Latino” category which would also exclude anybody checking 2 or more races.
The survey instrument used in the Yolo County homeless count also treated race and ethnicity as two separate things (see page 26 of the document). However, David can only report the data that is tabulated and in this case, he simply used a table in the report (on p. 2) that compares “apples to apples” for equivalent categories for the U.S. Census count vs. the Yolo County homeless count. The homeless count document does not report stats for a “White alone, not Hispanic or Latino” category. The “white” category in both columns also includes persons of Hispanic/Latino origin. However, the table also shows the percentage Hispanic/Latino. You’ll note that the columns in the table add up to more than 100% because the race and ethnicity counts overlap.
That is quite a different thing that what you did which was to ignore the Hispanic/Latino population completely in trying to claim that Davis and California are equally “white.”
Rik, try to follow. David pointed out to me that the chart I used lumped whites and latinos together which I later acknowledged. Then David uses a chart that does exactly the same thing without acknowledging that was the case.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Keith O: oh, I’m following. I have produced dozens of professional reports over the past 20 years involving detailed demographic analysis. You are some guy who thinks that the demographic composition of Davis and California are very similar, and you are now trying to play “gotcha” with a subject that you have no knowledge of.
Rik, we all wish we could be as smart as you think you are.
YOU WILL realize that sounds like the title of a satirical comedy bit on modern liberalism?
You WILL realize that I intended the article title a bit tongue-in cheek to get people’s intention, and also (as amply demonstrated in the discussion) because because white people don’t like being called white and get very fragile?
Let’s go back to why someone would get so worked up about the word count of the word “white” used in an article about race/ethnicity in Davis? One likely answer is that person does not want to be described as a “white person” because they think of themselves (and other like them) as the “default” for a person and don’t need a descriptor. This NYT Magazine article goes into this phenomenon:”White people are losing the luxury of non-self-awareness, an emotionally complicated shift that we are not always taking well.” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/13/magazine/white-people-are-noticing-something-new-their-own-whiteness.html
Wow — and I thought us Jews were a conundrum . . .
Jew ain’t no default, and don’t you forget it.
I do now . . . #eyeroll#
You can call me Jew, but don’t call me late for dinner.
Say WHAT? You’d have to have ‘White Guilt Complex’ to ‘get fragile’. Haven’t seen that “amply demonstrated in the discussion” by anyone here.
And they have certainly been subject to housing covenants and ‘gentleman’s agreements’ to restrict and control where they could live.
http://www.lajollalight.com/sdljl-a-specter-from-our-past-longtime-residents-will-2005apr07-story.html
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23885530?read-now=1&googleloggedin=true&seq=1&socuuid=02d6af38-4fdf-48ed-996f-887aca2f0367&socplat=email#metadata_info_tab_contents
We are SO impressed.
Hey, if there’s an article in the NY Times Magazine it must be true.
Really? It looks like all the “fragile white people” missed that. Maybe you should work on your sarcasm delivery?
As one of my greatest left-side-of-me’s heroes Chris Chandler says: “It’s not a race problem, it is a problem with the race.” –>
Some people say we have a race problem in this country. and I say yea, it is a race problem because they think it is a race.
It is a race problem because ya start off one group of people 20 miles behind the starting line and call it a raceYa put one group of people twenty miles behind the starting line and make them wear a set of leg irons as running shoes and call it a race.
It’s not a race problem – it is a problem with the race.
You wonder why impoverished youth will kill each other over a pair of running shoes – it is because you call it a race.
They think they have a chance…
But I say this is not a race – because the world is round – and if it were a race who ever is in first place is slightly behind the guy in last… and if I were you I would be looking over my shoulder…
I like this! Has some element of philosophy, in it.
I think it’s interesting to compare City of Davis demographics to UC Davis student demographics.
Thanks for the link, with 25% white students and 41.5% male students it looks like UCD is still (barely) above 10% “white male” (Cal dropped below 10% in to “single digits” five years ago (It has been close to 40 years since Cal had a big “all white” fraternity)…
P.S. Looking at the SAT and GPAs the UCD kids today sure to have higher than average test scores and GPAs than they did in the late 70’s…
Anyone reading Ken’s posts wondering how he can credibly claim to not be a Trumpian. There’s not much difference there.
Anyone that does not believe me that I think the current president is narcissistic crazy person either has not read much that I have posted (or not read anything that the current president has posted to Twitter)…
P.S. I do have a lot of friends paying ~$50K/year to send their white and asian kids to public colleges out of state (and even more to “private:” colleges) so “classmates of color” (in some cases kids their kids tutored) with lower grades, lower test scores and less extracurricular involvement can go to Cal, UCD and UCLA…
I have no doubt you believe he’s a crazy narcissist but my comment was related to the distance, or lack thereof in your views.
UC Davis Students Demographic. See charts
https://www.scribd.com/document/386151192/20131119-UC-DAVIS-MEDICAL-CENTER-African-Americans-Inclusion
And the story of the Vanguard has been (a particular view of the) story of racial inequity in Davis across a host of lines, long after the legal boundaries went away.
Kinda like picking at a scab… an injury, but kept fresh… leaves a scar bigger than if it had been just left to heal…
[And yes, like many young boys, I picked on scabs…but grew up… learned about the scar thing]
I get your meaning here, and would like to point out that SOME PEOPLE thrive on inflicting scabs on townspeople and yelling “Pick your scabs!” in a crowded theater.
Although the past can be informative of where we’ve been, my experience is that we need to focus on where we are going… being stymied as a white male early in my career to even get a job when I graduated college, but then able to get on by a reputation I had as an intern, it turned out OK… great, in fact… it was not white privilege, it was performance privilege… at a time when if you were male, and white, ‘go sit in the back of the bus’ for hiring in the public sector… they needed to meet their ‘quotas’ for female and minority… no one can deny that, with credibility… a severe recession, but ‘affirmative action’ was the mantra.
Dr King nailed it… basing things on the character of a person, not on their race or gender… yet, for many, equal outcomes, based on race or gender, is the holy grail… it is what it is…
Are you sitting down Howard, I agree with you on your 7:07 and 7:27 comments.
Ditto
In reference to the title, I’m wondering if we’ll ever get to the “root”.
It sure is a sensitive topic, though. And, virtually guarantees a lot of comments. (Probably another sign that it’s still a problem in society – and not limited to any particular city.) Maybe it will always be with us, even as its impacts are reduced.
Thread cleanup: 11 more comments removed.
Why would someone get so worked up about the word count of the word “white” used in an article about race/ethnicity in Davis? One likely answer is that person does not want to be described as a “white person” because they think of themselves (and other like them) as the “default” for a person and don’t need a descriptor. This NYT Magazine article goes into this phenomenon:”White people are losing the luxury of non-self-awareness, an emotionally complicated shift that we are not always taking well.” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/13/magazine/white-people-are-noticing-something-new-their-own-whiteness.html
When that person congratulates themselves about their disingenuous misuse of the MLK quote about color of skin/content of character, you can be sure they are unaware of how stereotyped and tired doing that is–so much so, that it is the central square in this bingo board that is a helpful (and fun!) shortcut to identifying other tired tropes in this discussion board: https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/the-reverse-racism-is-a-real-thing-bingo-card
When reading some of the comments on this article, the sociological concept of “white fragility” should be kept in mind: “In more than twenty years of running diversity-training and cultural-competency workshops for American companies, the academic and educator Robin DiAngelo has noticed that white people are sensationally, histrionically bad at discussing racism. Like waves on sand, their reactions form predictable patterns: they will insist that they “were taught to treat everyone the same,” that they are “color-blind,” that they “don’t care if you are pink, purple, or polka-dotted.” They will point to friends and family members of color, a history of civil-rights activism, or a more “salient” issue, such as class or gender. They will shout and bluster. They will cry. In 2011, DiAngelo coined the term “white fragility” to describe the disbelieving defensiveness that white people exhibit when their ideas about race and racism are challenged—and particularly when they feel implicated in white supremacy.”
https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/a-sociologist-examines-the-white-fragility-that-prevents-white-americans-from-confronting-racism
One key thing about white privilege is that “To be perceived as an individual, to not be associated with anything negative because of your skin color…is a privilege largely afforded to white people.”
What are some solutions to this pathology for white people?: “Listen, don’t center yourself, get educated, think about your responses and what role they play.” That would involve, for example, listening to the stories of people of color and believing them when they describe how they are discriminated against, reading research about the history of discrimination and its ongoing presence and effects, not putting your own personal history and stories of your family first in a conversation (or discussion board)…
I’m wondering if Rik just forgot about all the white serial killers, white biker gangs, white pedophile priests and the entire “first family” when he wrote: “not be associated with anything negative because of your skin color…is a privilege largely afforded to white people.”…
Ken A.: I don’t wonder whether you were curious enough to read the rest of the quote after the ellipses I inserted. Clearly you weren’t, because you would have found this:
“To be perceived as an individual, to not be associated with anything negative because of your skin color, she notes, is a privilege largely afforded to white people; although most school shooters, domestic terrorists, and rapists in the United States are white, it is rare to see a white man on the street reduced to a stereotype.”
Have you ever been profiled as a pedophile or a serial killer or a domestic terrorist because of being white?
Your point?
I missed a flight from Burbank to SFO in since the TSA thought some vintage car parts in my carry on wad dangerous and I needed senior management OK before they would let me on the plane (I only wish they said “he is white let’s get him on the plane”). Rik must live a dream life if every cop, Denny’s employee and person you pass on the street removes their hat and bows to your “white privilege”…
Ken A:
I haven’t been saying that Davis is a “horrible racist city”. I have been looking at the structural and systemic reasons why Davis might have fewer persons of color than some surrounding communities and California as a whole.
There are mountains of evidence and studies produced by economists, sociologists, historians, geographers, and the like to support the thesis that the effects of structural and systemic racism and discrimination are still with us decades later. And there are mountains of evidence that discrimination is still rampant (if we are just talking about housing, i have seen published estimates of 4 million fair housing violations per year related to race/ethnicity). So, the key question is: what statements, if any, you disagree with in the following paragraph? And what sourced evidence can you provide that contradicts them?:
“Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Child Poverty Did Not Happen by Accident
In large part, these disparities in economic hardship during childhood reflect the legacy of blatantly discriminatory policies and practices, together with other forms of discrimination that continue today, that effectively cut many families of color off from opportunity and continue to limit their mobility up the economic ladder. While these policies and practices were primarily directed at black families and individuals, they laid the foundation for segregation among other communities of color. For instance, a wide range of racist housing policies and practices throughout the past century, such as discriminatory city zoning ordinances, redlining, and racially restrictive covenants, fostered racially segregated neighborhoods. On top of this, national transportation policies facilitated “white flight” from cities to suburbs, which further accelerated public and private disinvestment in communities where black families were confined and cut their neighborhoods off from employment opportunities. Although many of these overtly racist policies have been outlawed or discontinued, discriminatory practices that preserve racial segregation continue today. Outright racist policies have been replaced by subtler methods of racial exclusion, such as ostensibly “race-neutral” exclusionary zoning practices and public housing programs that, in effect, continue to confine many families of color to distressed areas where poverty is concentrated and opportunity is limited. Families living in poverty in these areas face what Elizabeth Kneebone and Natalie Holmes have described as the “double burden of being poor in a very poor place,” as these neighborhoods provide limited access to the building blocks of opportunity, such as good schools and jobs.”
Just FYI: when you post with lots of links, it goes automatically into the moderation queue and has to be released manually, so your post may sometimes not appear immediately.
. . . but not Jewish. Although most comedians and lawyers are Jewish, which may be just as bad.
Two out of three ain’t bad.
Ken A
You have no clue about how we as European Americans avoid generalized profiling when we go about our business. Your example of TSA is meaningless–were you pulled aside because you were European American? We’ve already seen in Dallas has gotten to the point that even “being home while black” triggers a police response. Come out from behind your anonymity so that you can be accountable for your highly biased views.
Ken A.: some advice I mentioned: “Listen, don’t center yourself, get educated, think about your responses and what role they play.” That would involve, for example, listening to the stories of people of color and believing them when they describe how they are discriminated against, reading research about the history of discrimination and its ongoing presence and effects, not putting your own personal history and stories of your family first in a conversation (or discussion board)…”
And your response to that is to tell a personal story where you are lamenting that you didn’t have enough white privilege. OK then.
Still waiting to hear your well-sourced articles arguing the opposite points I am making about ongoing discrimination and the lasting effects of historic discrimination.
Look as I’ve said many times I know “some” people (of all races) have privilege and multi-generational wealth (some that is related to slavery/plantations and racist real estate developments and even selling other blacks to slave traders or finding out what PA Quaker families were part of the “underground railroad”) and “some” people are racist and hate people of different races and religions for no reason.
Rik and David may feel differently that me but I’m pretty confident that most people in America are not racist an the number of racist people is even lower in places like Davis (and unfortunately higher in places like Jackson MS). The number of racist people is also much higher for people over 70 than it is for people under 30 so pretty much every day as racists (of all races and religions) die off America is a little less racist.
If Rik and David want to keep posting every day that we live in a horrible racist city because a racist developer put a racist deed restriction in place 68 years ago (before most of us were born) and in the same 68 years the Davis cops have hassled a single African American guy for “mowing while black” they have every right to and I can still keep posting that we need to not just reduce racism, but reduce the “frequency” that people of color are hassled (I am aware that guys that look like 50 Cent are hassled more often than guys that look like Eminem).
You said that already.
Ken A
You wrote ”
“If Rik and David want to keep posting every day that we live in a horrible racist city because a racist developer put a racist deed restriction in place 68 years ago (before most of us were born) and in the same 68 years the Davis cops have hassled a single African American guy for “mowing while black” they have every right to and I can still keep posting that we need to not just reduce racism, but reduce the “frequency” that people of color are hassled (I am aware that guys that look like 50 Cent are hassled more often than guys that look like Eminem).”
You are of course missing the point–that thanks to the multiple forces of inertia in the real estate market and wealth formation, what happened in the past defines today (and the future). Only by identifying those defining forces can we address what is happening today. You appear to want to ignore what has happened up to now and make the same mistake that all “free market” proponents make which is to believe the myth that we can start over with a clean slate by simply declaring the past doesn’t matter. All of the evidence points the other way, which is why the “Ayn Rand” solution is meaningless.
Alan Miller, to be exact
I assure you I didn’t nudge a single arm on the lie detector machine. My point was that you and those of your political bent use the word ‘white’ like a stabber uses a knife.
I actually describe myself as a Jew. L’Shanah Tovah Tikatevu V’taihatem everyone!
At 1.4% of the US population (I know RK likes his numbers), we ain’t no default human race — and we ain’t no hollaback girl, neither.
Jew.
Jews are very aware of themselves.
Alan Miller . . .
Alan Miller, congratulations. Sincerely, Alan Miller.
I was completely genuine about my misuse.
Yes I am. Completely unaware. Still am.
We are playing bingo now? I hate bingo.
I’m not clicking on your links anymore than I am going to click my heels together and return to Kansas. I don’t need the location of sources of support for your political ideology any more than I need the location of sources of water that are too filled with bacteria to drink.
If I drop a white person on the floor, do they shatter like fine china?
8 hours I’ll never get back . . .
How did he rate Jews at discussing racism?
How I wish my parents taught me to treat people of color as lesser-than. What were they thinking, teaching us decency?
Hardly.
I’ve got to be honest. I hate polka-dotted people. I really do. God, I’m a racist. FORGIVE ME LORD!!! Purple people can suck it, too.
Or Jewishness . . .
I am so ashamed of my family’s history of civil rights activism . . . I repent on behalf of all Millers, living and dead! We should have been racist f**ks! What were you thinking O family?!!!
Or being Jewish.
You video-taped my cultural diversity training?
Well. Isn’t that special.
I defend my right to disbelieve in disbelieving defensiveness.
Pretty hard to feel implicated in white supremacy when white supremacists have this nasty habit of hating Jews as much as they hate people of color. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
And yet, ironically, you are associating ‘white people’ with racism . . . so what you are saying is that racism isn’t negative? Got it.
Solution: Ignore people that call this a pathology.
Listening . . .
Ok, I’m un-centered . . . next demand? Wait . . . what?
I tried by going to UC Davis for several years . . . still dumb as a rock.
Responses to what?
I do believe them (that actually wasn’t sarcastic).
I’ll leave reading of reasearch to some guy who has produced dozens of professional reports over the past 20 years involving detailed demographic analysis.
Oh, I’m SO sorry. I’m actually NOT Jewish. How selfish of me.
Oh, wait, that was only for ‘white’ people . . . I’m a Jew!
I’m also a pesco-vegetarian. Can we put our own personal history and the stories of our families first in a conversation?
. . . AND ON DISCUSSION BOARDS!
US Census says California white (non-hispanic) population is 37.2%.
You point out that UCD’s reported percent of white students is below the state percent, being at 25%.
I think you might not be considering that the younger population in California skews non-white, whereas the older population skews more white. The California Dept. of Education reported that their K-12 population was 23.2% white. So if it matters to you, UC Davis is actually “over-represented” by white students, considering the general age bracket that applies.
Excellent point…
Yet, many look at aggregate (across ages) info… as they say, “figures don’t lie, but liars can figure…”
Tell me what you want to ‘prove’, and I can cite stuff to bolster your position… for a price…
My upcoming article in the series disaggregates a lot of data–including by age–to try to answer the question “how white is Davis?” One interested factoid: about 50% of the Asian population in Davis is college-aged (18-24), whereas that age cohort makes up only about 10% of the Asian population in California as a whole. And the share of the Asian population at 55+ years of age is significantly less in Davis than in California as a whole.
The key demographic in Davis where there is the most disparity compared to other nearby places and California as a whole is Hispanic/Latino. And as much as there is a very large disparity in the overall group, when broken down by certain age category and housing tenure (ownership vs. rental), the disparities are even more extreme.
Before anyone blames “racism” (and racist zoning from the 1950’s) for the lower than average of Hispanic/Latino residents in Davis it is important to remember that we have some of the highers home prices in the region and even quite a few young families where both husband and wife have advanced degrees and good jobs struggle to afford to buy a home in town. It would be interesting to see the racial mix of Davis compared to other cities (or neighborhoods) in the region where the median home costs ~$650K (and a higher than average number of families are headed by adults with graduate degrees)…
While accurate, I think you are missing a crucial point – the home prices weren’t always at that level. A lot of people bought their homes when the cost of housing was at or below $100K. That’s where the existing patterns of residential development mattered.
A lot of people in Davis bought homes prior to 1960 when the (non hispanic) white population of the state was over 92% (and even higher in Davis).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_California
When “almost every” home was told to a white person in a state, city and county where “almost everyone” looking to buy a home was white the reason for the high percentage of sales to whites was not “racism”.
As Howard said yesterday H Jackson made an “Excellent point” by linking to good data that shows only a 1/4 of people under 18 vs. more than twice as many in some older age groups.
Anyone that looks at overall home ownership rates and screams “racism” without adjusting for age is either trying to fool people or is the kind of person that screams “racism” every day as the reason for every problem…
Great points Ken A. The demographics in 1950 were much different than they are today. So how does applying today’s demographics equate to who bought homes in the 1950’s when the population of Davis had a much higher white presence?
Because the residential patterns that were enforced by law have carried over across eras.
Any chance that “progressives” will protest this disparity by leaving?
Jim, I was wondering the same thing. If our local white progressives bemoan the fact that Davis is too white why do they want to live here? If they leave maybe a person of color will inhabit their old residence thereby helping the numbers.
Why leave when there are other remedies
Here we go again, what are the remedies?
In due time
Nice dodge, you’ve been doing a lot of that lately.
Reparations? Kick out whites and give their homes to people of color? A city ordinance that restricts incoming white people from buying homes or renting apartments in Davis?
Of course I’m being facetious here but I have a hard time imagining what remedies you’ll be able to come up with.
How is telling you that I will lay things out at the appropriate time dodging? I’ll suggest however my solution will be much more mundane than what you’ve come up with.
“Why leave when there are other remedies”
Because it is something you can do on your own, right now, to avoid being complicit.
However given this is the Vanguard I foresee the solution to be proposed involves a bunch of old white people telling a bunch of other old white people what to do.
Ken your 9:12 Sept 12 post…
It was not racist zoning… it was racist CC&R’s
I dare anyone to find historic zoning ordinances that were even close to racist…
The City has never “approved” CC&R’s… the City has reviewed CC&R’s to ensure that they covered things like utilities, drainage, and maintenance of access means, were adequately covered…
None of that review covered much (if anything) as to “race”… although comments have been made when CC&R’s banned dogs, without recognizing need for service dogs… I know… I made those comments…
In the 40’s and 50’s most subdivisions did not have CC&R’s… and as I understand it, the City did not even review CC&R’s until the 70’s… “old North Davis”, and some “old East Davis” were the ones who had the racist CC&R’s… inconvenient fact for those who live there… I know what I am talking about… when there was a ‘house-cleaning’ of old records of the City, I glommed onto them… for history… they are in boxes, somewhere in the City records… but Yolo County Records are the true archive… the CC&R’s were recorded documents, intended to “run with the land”.
I post this for clarification… not a personal attack…
Howard:
Thanks for the info, sorry that I was not clear in that I was talking about “racist zoning” & “racist CC&Rs” put in place by “racist developers” NOT zoning from the city (aka racist zoning by the state).
P.S. In 1926, the same year that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld exclusionary zoning, it also upheld restrictive covenants, finding that they were voluntary private contracts, not state action. With this decision to rely upon, successive presidential administrations embraced covenants as a mean of segregating the nation.
https://readthinkact.com/the-color-of-law-richard-rothstein/
Ken… re: your most recent post…
Am affirming, but also note that the SCOTUS decision is nearly 100 years old, and as fond as I am of history, not convinced that in 2018, any of us experience the “problems” today, in Davis… most folk I met in Montgomery, AL have “moved on”… there are still economic disparities, but with all the folk I know, met, there is very little racial animus.
I don’t see general racial animus in Davis… yet, it is true there are “oddballs” (freaking idiots/scumbags), but they do not reflect the “community” as a whole…
I’m very tired of folk trying putting guilt on me because I’m a white male… similar to any black being considered lazy, shiftless, and loving fried chicken and watermelon… bogus stereotypes…
I’ve noticed that the groups that spend the most time complaining about “profiling” and “stereotypes” are the same groups that do the most “profiling” spend the most time talking about the negative stereotypes that the bankers of one religion “all” have and the negative stereotypes that the men on one race “all” have…
Jim: Sometimes I can’t tell the difference between extreme tunnel vision and poor sense of humor. Are you seriously not understand where the obvious solution lies?
“Are you seriously not understand where the obvious solution lies?”
No I think I have nailed it. Anyone distressed by the history of Davis should refuse to support the city going forward. If you have property, sell it. If you are living in subsidized housing move out.
It’s very simple, boycott Davis!
BTW if you find the town unworthy of the statue and want to take it with you I will understand.
My guess is you’re going to push for even more affordable/subsidized housing. If I’m right can you tell us how you plan to keep whites from applying and receiving these benefits too in order to make Davis not so white?
Good job Keith. I knew this wasn’t complicated. That’s precisely it. Nothing is going to prevent anyone from applying. But by creating affordability, you shift the mix incrementally over time.
“Love it or leave it!” Where have we heard that right-wing rallying cry before?
Eric, since you are currently employed by a state that is currently boycotting Texas, Alabama, Kentucky, South Dakota, Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee I would suggest you hear it at work.
Adding the City of Davis to the mix does not seem like a big thing
“But by creating affordability, you shift the mix incrementally over time.”
We could require all current residents of subsidized housing to reapply for their slots. That would accelerate the process.
Why Jim? Those are already more diverse than the rest of the population. How is that going to change the mix at all?
Since your desired goal is to “shift the mix incrementally over time” you need to continually select new people from the current list. If you allow people selected previously to remain in the units for decades you will never reflect current need. Every five years may be an appropriate interval to reapply.
That’s assuming that that mix would even change. You’re taking an already more diverse group that is very small to begin with. That’s not going to produce much if any change.
Whereas if we add affordable housing or shift existing housing from market to affordable, that will produce a small shift over time.
“That’s not going to produce much if any change” You don’t know that, it’s entirely speculation on your part.
Even so the principle that the our affordable housing population should reflect the current need is an essential part of the solution and every little bit helps. It’s hardly appropriate to ask for more money when we are not good stewards of existing resources.
It is worth noting, affordable housing projects are exempt from Measure R requirements.
David G you wrote:
“Jim: Sometimes I can’t tell the difference between extreme tunnel vision and poor sense of humor. Are you seriously not understand where the obvious solution lies?”
I don’t think there’s an obvious solution to the problem yet. There are serious problems with the solutions that you appear to be promoting, so I don’t think you can make this statement without opening a whole different discussion thread.
Thanks to H Jackson for the for the great year by year link to CA public school students. I could not find as much detail on the private schools in the state, but I’m pretty sure that most (except maybe Rik) will agree with me that private schools in CA have a higher percentage of white kids than the public schools in CA bringing the percentage of high school age white kids pretty close to the current percentage at UCD.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ps/cefprivinstr.asp
P.S. Has anyone heard an explanation for the huge (almost 17% jump) in enrollment in CA public school kindergarten this year compared to the past couple years?
Haven’t… but recall there was a huge jump in kindergarten kids in NYC 5 years after the big blackout there… no TV, no power, “what else can we do?”
Thank you for this chart H Jackson. I had no idea that CA demographics for younger people had shifted that much.
The California Dept. of Education database site has information on ethnic/racial demographics that go to county, school district, and school site level, going back to about 1993. What I find interesting is that from the first year in which that data is available to the present (2018), a span of 25 years, all of the surrounding school districts — Dixon, Winters, Esparto, Woodland, Washington Unified (West Sacramento) — all went from having white students representing either a majority of the student population or the largest cohort to Latino students representing either a majority or the largest cohort. Davis is the only district that didn’t follow that trend during that period of time, but it appears to be following the trend at a slower rate.
I am white, so I don’t personally know the experience of living in Davis as a non-white. But I have observed many instances in which I think Davis is socially not very welcoming to adults who don’t have a college education, and I think that cuts across whatever race/background one identifies with. Obviously there is also an economic component to this — more education correlates with higher earnings and more ability to buy a home in Davis. But I mostly refer to everyday interpersonal interactions when I say “socially.”
I agree with H Jackson that Davis (and other areas that Charles Murray calls “super zips” where a much higher than than average number of people have advanced degrees) “is socially not very welcoming to adults who don’t have a college education”. As a guy with an undergraduate degree from a “lesser” (not in the top 100) school I have noticed that many in Davis seem to socialize with not just people that “have a college education” but “have an undergrad degree and graduate degree from the same 50 schools”. My wife has an undergraduate degree from an Ivy League school that is ranked #1 in America more often than not and graduate degrees from two schools that are on most “top 10” lists. At most social events we attend in Davis I will be the only adult in the room with “just” an undergraduate degree. At a recent kids birthday party at our house I discovered that my son has two friends where “both” parents are MDs and three friends where “both” parents have JDs (of these five couples only one is “both” white). I know my wife does not tell my kids to “avoid the classmates with parents who went to Chico or Sac State” but it is weird how even my kids seem to be socially attracted to the kids with parents who attended the same 50 schools that most of my wife’s Bay Area friends attended…
P.S. When we moved to Davis our Hispanic gardener and Hispanic cleaning lady (who are not related) were both renting (different homes) in Davis and now both own homes in Woodland (and many of the couples of many races who both had advanced degrees that owned near us in Old East Davis now own bigger homes in Lake Alhambra or Oakshade in South Davis (almost any family with two decent incomes can afford to buy in Woodland, but the incomes need to be a lot higher to buy in Davis)…
Funny… there are advanced degrees, and there is actual knowledge/performance/competence… not the same…
I “only” have a BS, yet have two CA licenses in professional fields, that few PhD’s would qualify for. Spouse has a BS, ‘clear’ teaching credential and was a competent teacher for many years… most MS, PhD’s cannot say the same… [BTW, as I understand it, UCD/other college profs have no teaching credential]
Ken, your observations I do not question, here… this matter…
This all rings very accurate to me too.
I think what Murray’s work points out is a social change related to a shift from a manufacturing and building economy to a tech, service and information economy. It used to be that the A student with the advanced degrees would fume about his classmate that was a B student captain of the Lacrosse team ending up with greater income. Today that A student seems to revel in his position of economic success relative to the decline in what that B student used to have in economic opportunity. The B student voted for Trump and is fuming because it was a lot of this cohort of A students with an Ivy League education that worked in the government administrations that gave away American industry and manufacturing to China, while also supported the floodgates of immigration to drive down working-class wages and opportunity. The A student nerds also kept coming up with technology that disrupted and destroyed entire industries. The final straw has been the religion of global warming for yet more killing of industry where the B student might otherwise find a path to economic self-sufficiency.
Sternburg wrote the book “Successful Intelligence”.
In 1983 psychologist Howard Gardner came up with a way to measure and access nine different types of intelligence. https://blog.adioma.com/9-types-of-intelligence-infographic/
Naturalist (nature smart)
Musical (sound smart)
Logical-mathematical (number/reasoning smart)
Existential (life smart)
Interpersonal (people smart)
Bodily-kinesthetic (body smart)
Linguistic (word smart)
Intra-personal (self smart)
Spatial (picture smart)
What I have seen over the last 40 years is an education system and economy that has narrowed what types of intelligence we test and value to focus primarily on logical-mathematical and linguistic intelligence. In my professional experience, it is often the other types of intelligence that results in a more valuable hire. And the best people are generally those that are balanced in all.
I think one reason that people from the outside of Davis see it as a place filled with people that are not really that great to be around, is the nerd factor combined with an air of academic superiority that is blind to the copious gaps in these other forms of intelligence that make for a more REAL diverse community (not the artificial crap tied to some identity politics narrative).
This article in the SF Chronicle is relevant to this point:
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Housing-prices-are-re-segregating-the-Bay-Area-13239870.php
Why do folk describe some folk as “white”, “black”, “brown” (“red” and “yellow” are banned terms!!!), and others as Hispanic, Latino, Native American (which, technically, they are not… just immigrated here, first)?
From someone who is basically color-blind… am I “green” because my direct ancestor was born in Mars?
Since we’re talking about geographic ancestry, the appropriate terms are European- (which I’ve switched to), African-, Asian-, and Native American are the appropriate terms. The tricky one is the Latino/Hispanic population because it is a varied mix of European and Native American ancestry.
Don’t forget all the Latinos with roots in the Middle East… My Uncle’s Dad is Lebanese and his Mom is Mexican and said he was surprised on a trip to Mexico City years to find “a whole church full of people that looked like him” (where it turns almost everyone in the parish is part Lebanese) Billionaire Carlos Slim is not the only “Latino” with roots in the Middle East…
edited