Another key point, Sugrue says, is the “transformation of patterns of housing and residence in the metro area,” which also begins well before 1967 or the election of Coleman Young. “The story of the 20th century is the story of the division of the metropolitan area into racialized” sectors.
That Detroit has “black neighborhoods” and “white neighborhoods” isn’t an accident, he says.
“The story of the real estate industry is not just one of white flight but also one of directing choice, limiting choice, for minorities in the metropolitan area,” Sugrue said.
Post-war, the federal government instituted policies to encourage homeownership, he says.
“It made possible large-scale homeownership, even among blue-collar workers who could not previously afford a home,” he says.
These programs raised homeownership from 30 percent to 60 percent, but African-Americans were often excluded from programs because of systemic discrimination. African-American neighborhoods were not deemed suitable for home loans by governmental criteria.
And white homeowners passionately and often violently resisted black “encroachment” into white neighborhoods. When they couldn’t drive new black residents out, whites left, en masse, becoming absentee landlords, or abandoning property outright…
The ultimate result? The disinvestment we see now in many Detroit neighborhoods, and perception of a lack of common interest between suburban metro Detroiters and city dwellers.
Sugrue says that when he takes white folks who grew up in the city back to the old neighborhood, the most common reaction isn’t sadness about the policies that led to instutionalized discrimination, or the disappearance of jobs that led to economic equality. Rather, he said, whites often say, “look what ‘they’ve’ done to ‘our’ neighborhood.”
SMH, y’all. SMH.
Close
