This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Assuming that you've accurately represented Hanania's viewpoint here, he doesn't appear to fully understand the situation. On a county level, people move towards whiteness and away from blackness.
Sure, South Carolina has a lot of black people. But conservatives moving from California to South Carolina aren't going to be anywhere near them. They will be in a nice safe street somewhere else.
But even on a state level, Idaho is the second fastest growing state since 2010 after Mormon (and lily white) Utah.
At the same time, Taylor is still wrong. Because it's not about "being near your own people". It's about being near white people. Black and Hispanic people also migrate towards white areas. High trust societies rock.
I think it's not so much about being near white people, it's about being near people who create thriving economies and do little violent crime or property crime. Few people of any race want to live around methed-out white gangsters in a backwater town. And then the secondary consideration is being around your own race. So, for example, a white person will probably on average prefer to live around affluent peaceful white people than around affluent peaceful Asian people, (of course there are many exceptions - some people of every race enjoy living around people of a foreign culture and so on. I just mean on average), but would rather live around affluent peaceful Asian people than around violent white people in a place with a really bad economy.
More options
Context Copy link
Conservative Muslims in Europe, for example, prove Hanania's point that people move for economic reasons and not just purely identarian ones,sure.
But do these groups mainly move to live amongst white people or do they live amongst their own? You can have all of the benefits of a Western society while making it more like yours if you can have your own neighborhood/community embedded in a high development country.
More options
Context Copy link
I don’t think this is true. It is about getting away from blacks, but most whites appear to have few if any qualms about moving to places like the Bay Area which have heavily Latino and Asian populations, but few blacks.
Exactly. Here's a great blog article on the subject: https://arctotherium.substack.com/p/fleeing-opportunity
Diversity has killed growth because talented people are leaving the most productive areas. Throughout most of history, the opposite was true, with young dreamers coming to Rome, Paris, London, or New York to make their fortune. They still do, of course, but in much smaller numbers.
How bad is it? California has lost millions of citizens to domestic migration despite having by far the best climate and great economic opportunities. Imagine how bad things would be if they didn't have beaches, Hollywood, and Silicon Valley.
It's not all bad news though. Cities are IQ shedders, so in the long run, it's probably better if our best people leave the cities. Bad for economic growth, but good for demographics.
Racial diversity is not even close to the primary reason why most people flee California. The extremely high cost of living, the massive homeless problem, the crumbling infrastructure, the punishing taxation, the piss-poor governance — all of these are far more salient than the number of Mexicans. (And California has a far lower black percentage than nearly any of the states — Texas, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina — to which Californians are mostly fleeing.)
Again, people are not moving to the black areas of those states.
Most blacks in Texas live in the same major cities everyone else does, and these are the ones people are moving to.
More options
Context Copy link
You’re aware that black people can move around outside “their neighborhoods”, right? The neighborhood where I live isn’t heavily black in terms of the people who occupy houses here, but there are plenty of black people when I go to the grocery store, or to various public places. If a school district practices busing or has magnet schools, my children can have black students in their classes, even if we don’t live in a “black area”. Thus, the black percentage of the population is still relevant even if you feel like you can just move to “a white area”.
Yes, of course. People living in majority black neighborhoods move out a lot. It's a good idea for them to do so.
But majority black areas still exist, even if they bleed residents every year. Also, new majority black areas are constantly created as other groups leave.
I’m not even talking about “moving out”. I’m saying that black people, like anyone else, can do all sorts of things outside the neighborhoods where they live. Even ones who don’t move out of their neighborhoods can still cause problems and discomfort for people living in other neighborhoods.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Cost of living increases are directly related to more migrants and illegal immigrants providing competition for many of the individual costs that go into living (food, energy, housing).
Directly related to the above as well. If the cost of living and competition/pressure on wages wasn't artificially pumped up by immigration, the homeless situation wouldn't be so bad.
i.e. infrastructure that can't support the inflated number of people it is expected to support - once again you can blame migration.
And a lot of that is due to illegal immigration as well.
Directly enabled by immigration. There's no viable right wing path to victory, so there's nothing that cleans out dead weight on the left side of politics. When you don't even have to try to win elections, the selection pressures for leadership consist entirely of pleasing donors and party insiders - as opposed to solving the problems your citizens are facing.
You're right when you say that racial diversity isn't the cause - but you're not really giving a complete picture, either. The costs of massive immigration, which is one of the manifestations of the drive for racial diversity, are all directly related to the list of reasons you gave for people fleeing. You're looking at people fleeing from a burning house and saying "They're not running from the fire, they're running from the heat and the smoke! Look, they're even taking shelter in a building with a fireplace, so it clearly isn't the fire that's making them run."
Texas has very similar demographics and high immigration inflows, with at the very least fewer of these problems than California does. Poor governance is the main reason.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Not really. Palo Alto gained almost no residents from 2010 to 2020 and is 48% non Hispanic white. Dublin is one of the fastest growing cities in the state and is 28 percent non Hispanic white.
They don't. That's what I'm telling you. Palo Alto, comparatively white, is practically not growing. Almost nobody is moving there. Dublin, comparatively nonwhite, is among the fastest growing cities in the state.
My argument is that your claim has no correspondence to reality and contradicts the data. Do you have any evidence for your claim?
Your claim:
This is a claim about where people move to. The cities growing fastest (i.e. the cities that have the most people moving into them) are rather nonwhite. How does this not, at least to a first approximation, disprove your claim? Perhaps you can argue that all the growth seen in e.g. Dublin and Emeryville is Asians, but you haven't shown that.
So again, do you have any evidence that white people tend to move to white towns? Or is your argument not actually supported by evidence of where people are moving?
https://belonging.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/bayarea_whites_2017_0-0.png
Doesn't really look like that to me. Looks to me that white people avoid the very shittiest parts of the bay, which makes sense since white people have the resources to do this more often than Hispanics or blacks. White people also more frequently live in old money towns like Atherton, but that's clearly not due to whites overwhelmingly moving there, for the simple reason that nobody is overwhelmingly moving to Atherton. And finally white people are more likely to live in rural areas, but again, hardly anyone is moving there.
More options
Context Copy link
It is very low non-white Hispanic and black through, which is probably what he means. (10% and 3% respectively iirc! There goes 47% of all the murders!)
Yeah you can probably count Asians as white for the purpose of this discussion. They do make things miserable for by importing lots of zero-sum grinding (at least in high school), but obviously that pales in comparison to worse things.
It's not Bay Area, but Irvine (Orange County) is an interesting city.
Originally an orange plantation, it's grown from essentially zero in 1970 to over 300,000 today. It's 45% Asian, 35% white, 12% Hispanic, and only 2% black. They have the lowest murder rate of any city their size in the U.S. Some years they have no murders at all.
Is it any wonder it has grown so quickly?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
53% Asian in Dublin? That's crazy, I don't remember it being anything like that much.
It's even 42-42 white-Asian in Pleasanton too. Guess I was in a bit of a racial bubble.
When was the last time you visited Dublin? There's been a lot of Asians in the tri valley area for some time, and the trends have continued.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link