America’s New Frontier: Detroit


Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.

No, I’m not kidding – an excellent article on the subject of Detroit and the prospects of urban innovation in such dying cities. Especially fascinating are the pictures of “de-urbanization” over the past decades: areas of Detroit once fully urbanized are now nearly vacant – and not just of people, but of buildings. As the author points out, this opens up the prospect of all sorts of urban experimentation.

There are places all over our large, decaying cities just like that – places which have become the arena for rebuilding America. Now, to be sure, lots of these places have corrupt, liberal governments addicted to taxes and regulation (its why they’re blighted, after all), but the time will come when even the most obtuse tax-and-regulate liberal will have to see that the jig is up. Right now, you can buy a house in Detroit for about 2 grand – of course, given that the place is pretty crime ridden and has a shrinking employer base, its not such a good idea at the moment. But it can be made different.

If we can provide incentives for people to start or expand businesses (land is cheap in Detroit and jobs are scarce); if we can break out of the mindset that if its urban it must stay that way (why not put a strip a half mile wide between Detroit and any neighboring community and restore it to forest and farm land?); if we genuinely think anew and act anew, we can restore our cities – not, hopefully, to the soul less, concrete megalopolis of the past, but to places where human beings can live and work.

This is a very exciting time to live in – mindset which seized upon our nation in the 30’s are at last breaking down completely, and we now have a chance to re-forge the America our grandfathers knew, and our Founders intended.

Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.




Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.


20 Responses to “America’s New Frontier: Detroit”

  1. neocon1 says:

    Mark

    Right now, you can buy a house in Detroit for about 2 grand – of course, given that the place is pretty crime ridden and has a shrinking employer base, its not such a good idea at the moment. But it can be made different.

    Im not so sure.
    The neighborhood demographics are such that if you begin to re-develop the area there will be shreeks of racism, land being “stolen” from poor minorities, blacks being frozen out of “their neighborhoods” and all the race baiting to go along with it.
    There will be demands from those with NO money, NO skills, NO viable education to “share” in this redevelopment.
    I say let the residents keep these decaying cities for them selves after all they worked hard to earn them.

  2. Mark Noonan says:

    neocon,

    Well, nothing will be able to be done until said shriekers agree to shut their traps and go away…or, at least, until the political leadership of the area learns to ignore such people. We can’t just push in to Detroit and remake it right now…but the time will come when we’ll be able to.

  3. retiredspook says:

    I say let the residents keep these decaying cities for them selves after all they worked hard to earn them.

    AND, they kept voting in the same people over and over again that made it all possible.

    Here’s an interesting photo comparison.

  4. neocon1 says:

    interesting E-mail

    Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning last November’s Presidential election:

    Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
    Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
    Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million
    Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1

    Professor Olson adds: “In aggregate, the map of the territory Republicans won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.

    Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare…”

    Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the “complacency and apathy” phase of Professor Tyler’s definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation’s population already having reached the “governmental dependency” phase.

    If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.

    If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message.

    If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that

    apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

  5. casper says:

    Neocon,
    Hate to tell you this, but your email is a hoax.

    http://www.factcheck.org/2009/01/unreported-stats/

    President-elect Barack Obama actually carried 28 states (and the District of Columbia), not 20 as claimed in the message. Sen. John McCain carried only 22 states, not 30.

    The total area of states won by Obama is actually 1,483,702 square miles, significantly more than the 580,000 stated by the e-mail. McCain’s states have an area of 2,310,315 square miles, not the 2,427,000 claimed.

    The population of counties carried by Obama is just under 183 million, not the 127 million claimed. McCain carried counties with a total population of just under 119 million, far fewer than claimed in this message.

    The murder rate for counties carried by Obama was 6.56 per 100,000 inhabitants, less than half the rate claimed in the message. The rate for counties carried by McCain was 3.60 per 100,000, much higher than claimed in the message.

  6. fr00tn00b says:

    Mark: the idea that cities are still dying is outdated. Yes, the city experienced a decline earlier in the twentieth century, but right now, they are experiencing a healthy resurgence. More people are electing to live in cities, valuing walkability and short commutes over mansion-sized houses. This is why ridership on public transportation is way up (and vice versa too some extent: the two trends drive each other) Amtrak ridership is up, New York’s, LA’s, DC’s, Seattle’s, Philly’s, San Francisco’s, and even Chicago’s populations are all growing, among others. This is also why CBD office space is increasing almost exponentially, and condos downtown sell for more than mansions in the suburbs. A younger, more diverse America sees cities as the places where it happens. Name me ten US cities with a population of more than half a million that are shrinking in size, and then you can talk about the decline of the city.

  7. neocon1 says:

    Casper

    as any good liberal would say fake but true.
    Just carrying on the legacy of the great dan blather liberal extraordinaire.

    But this is the real truth…….

    http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2008/countymapredbluer1024.png

  8. neocon1 says:

    The following cities have lost at least 20 percent of their population, from a peak of over 100,000, since 1950.
    [edit] United States
    City ↓ 1950 population ↓ 2000 population ↓ Percent decline ↓ Peak population (year) ↓
    Buffalo, New York 580,132 292,648 49.6% 580,132 (1950)

    Cleveland, Ohio 914,808
    478,403 47.7% 914,808 (1950)

    Detroit, Michigan 1,849,568 951,270 48.6% 1,849,568 (1950)

    Newark, New Jersey 438,776 273,546 37.7% 442,337 (1930)

    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 2,071,605 1,517,550 26.7% 2,071,605 (1950)

    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 676,806 334,563 50.6% 676,806 (1950)

    St. Louis, Missouri 856,796 348,189 59.4% 856,796 (1950)

    Youngstown, Ohio 168,330 82,026 51.3% 170,002 (1930)

  9. neocon1 says:

    1919 Chicago Race Riot
    27 July-2 August, 1919 Chicago, IL, USA. An African American teenager who was swimming in Lake Michigan drifted near a beach that whites considered their own. A white man on a breakwater assailed the black youth with stones and the black youth drowned. The white police officers who investigated the incident refused to arrest the assailant. The tension escalated into riots between blacks and whites. The Governor of Illinois, Frank Lowden, called in the Illinois National Guard to quell the unrest, but at least 38 people were killed and 500 injured over a period of seven days.[4][5]

    1921 Tulsa Race Riots
    31 May-1 June 1921, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA.

    1935 Harlem Riot
    19 March 1935, New York City, USA [6]

    1960s

    Rochester 1964 race riot
    24-26 July 1964[7]

    Philadelphia 1964 race riot
    28-30 August 1964, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, Allegations of police brutality sparked the Columbia Avenue race riots.[7]

    Watts Riots
    11 August 1965, Los Angeles, California, USA, The McCone Commission investigated the riots finding that causes included poverty, inequality, racial discrimination and the passage, in November 1964, of Proposition 14 on the California ballot overturning the Rumford Fair Housing Act, which established equality of opportunity for black home buyers.[8]

    Hough Riots
    18 July 1966, Cleveland, Ohio, USA, The underlying causes of the riots may found in the social conditions that exist in the ghettos of Cleveland.[9]

    Racial tension in Omaha, Nebraska
    5 July 1966, North Omaha, Nebraska, USA, More than 500 black youth gathered to protest the absence of recreation programs and jobs storm a local business district, throwing rocks and bricks at Jewish-owned businesses in the area. The National Guard is called in after three days of random violence and organized raids.[10]

    1967 Newark riots
    12 July 1967, Newark, New Jersey, USA, Factors that contributed to the Newark Riot: police brutality, political exclusion of blacks from city government, urban renewal, inadequate housing, unemployment, poverty, and rapid change in the racial composition of neighborhoods.[11]

    1967 Plainfield riots
    14 July 1967, Plainfield, New Jersey, USA

    12th Street riot
    23 July 1967, Detroit, Michigan, USA, The origins of urban unrest in Detroit were rooted in a multitude of political, economic, and social factors including police abuse, lack of affordable housing, urban renewal projects, economic inequality, black militancy, and rapid demographic change.[12]

    Minneapolis-Saint Paul
    USA, Fall 1967. Racial tensions boil over in North Minneapolis as whites continue to leave the decaying core of the inner city bound for the suburbs.

    1968 Chicago, Illinois riots
    In Chicago, violence erupted in the black ghetto on the west side, eventually consuming a 28-block stretch of West Madison Street. Looting and arson took place primarily in the corridor between Roosevelt Road on the south and Chicago Avenue on the north.

    1968 Washington, D.C. riots
    4 April 1968, Washington, D.C., USA, A report from National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders identified discrimination and poverty as the root causes of the riots that erupted in cities around the nation during the late 1960s and in Washington, DC in April 1968[13]

    Baltimore riot of 1968
    4 April 1968, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

    Glenville Shootout
    23 July 1968, Cleveland, Ohio, USA, Shootout between black militant organization led by Ahmed Evans and Cleveland Police Department attracted large and hostile black crowds that caused a 4 day long riot

    Stonewall riots
    June 1969, New York, New York, a turning point for the modern gay rights movement

    1969 North 24th Street Riots
    24 June 1969, North Omaha, Nebraska USA, An Omaha police officer fatally shoots a teenager in the back of the head during a gathering of youth in local public housing projects. Many youth and adults from the local African American community gather in the local business district, routinely burning and otherwise destroying non-Black-owned businesses.[14]

    1970s

    New York City blackout of 1977
    13 July 1977, New York City, USA, That massive blackout was viewed by some as one symptom of the city’s decline.[15]

    1980s

    Arthur McDuffie
    8 May 1980, Miami, Florida, USA, black outrage at “a double standard of justice” [17]

    [edit] 1990s

    Crown Heights Riot
    19 August 1991, New York City, USA
    1992 Los Angeles riots
    29 April 1992, Los Angeles, California, USA [21]
    2000s

    2001 Cincinnati riots
    10 April 2001, Cincinnati, Ohio, US, An Enquirer reporter, Kristina Goetz, reported that the lack of progress on perennial inner-city problems such as inadequate child and health care, failing schools, and low rates of minority home ownership was a contributing factor.[24]

    Benton Harbor riots
    16 June 2003, Benton Harbor, Michiga

    2005 Toledo Riot
    15 October 2005, Toledo, Ohio, USA, Residents at forum named poverty, above other causes, as the kindling for the riot.[26]

    St. Petersburg, Florida Riot 1996

  10. ricorun says:

    Mark, if you really believed what you said you’d be investing in Detroit real estate with reckless abandon. But apparently you’re not. Is it because of lack of funds, or something else?

    Personally, I have no interest in investing in Detroit. The prices are reasonable, but only if you consider them as a very long term investment. And in that case, to make it really pay off you’d have to accumulate numerous adjacent properties (or better, know of someone who is doing same so you can be the spoiler).

    In the mean time, considering what property is going for in Detroit, your whining about north LV seems a little disengenuous, don’t you think?

  11. fr00tn00b says:

    Mark: re your list of cities. Yes, they all lost population from 1950 to 2000. But that’s because 1950 was the previous peak of the city. Looking at short term trends, almost all of the cities you named have gained population since the last census.

    DC, for example, had 850000 at 1950, but only 568000 in 2000. Right now, though, the estimate is about 600000.

    Not that this is a political issue; I’m just very pro-city. They’re a much more efficient way to live.

  12. neocon1 says:

    froot

    They’re a much more efficient way to live.

    it is for most losers.

  13. Excellent post, Mark; it’s a pity that Neocon had to spew his racist bile all over it. Getting back to the post’s actual point, it reminds me very much of this ad, which is awesome when you watch it muted but more that a little stupid when you listen to the sound.

  14. neocon1 says:

    SA

    spew his racist bile

    facts are racist? eh moron, and bile? that is your breath.

  15. It is a fact that Jupiter’s largest moon is Callisto, but that doesn’t make it relevant. Mark posted a thread on the interesting possibilities posed by the emptying of Detroit, and you responded by spamming the thread full of stuff on race riots. That’s pretty clear cut.

  16. neocon1 says:

    SA

    It was about the demise of cities and what caused them to provide these “opportunities”
    Mark also stated they were still dangerous and not a good place to invest in at this time although cheap.

    Really kid you need to grow up…everything is not racism as your saul alynski handlers have taught you in that commie re-education camp.

    I lived through this era, lived and worked in some of the cities on the list above.
    There are cause and effects and due to limited band width im not about to give every city’s life history.But believe me there were huge effects on every large city mentioned.
    Funny I provided a list of shrinking citys yet you glossed over those with no comment.
    It must suck to be such a scared little weasel that you see the worn out and quite boring boogyman of “racism” in every statement and under every rock.

    Reat the statements and not between the lines with your marxist fogged glasses.

  17. As it happens, I am so adamant in my opposition to the Left’s blanket accusations of racism that it has all but cost me a dear friendship. You are the only right-winger I know who I would describe as racist, and even you at least admit that racism is wrong.

  18. By the way, what are Marxist glasses?

  19. neocon1 says:

    You are the only right-winger I know who I would describe as racist, and even you at least admit that racism is wrong.

    It is wrong, white racism, or black racism.
    Most tiptoe around the subject, I dont. I meet it head on and fight fire with fire.
    Like I said im from that era been there done that,
    many of the links I provide are to balance the constant cry of racism by the left against conservatives while ignoring massive racism by blacks.

    Hatred can only be eradicated when BOTH sides agree to ending it, constantly beating up one side for it while energizing the other side is insanity.

    pointing out the kkk and skin heads, etc while ignoring the black panthers, uhurus, nation of islam, etc is in it’s self racism.

    I grew up with blacks, attended school, worked, served with them. im not afraid to confront hypocrisy of only whitey being racist, believe me it is a very wide traveled 2 way street.
    I oppose traffic in both directions on this street.

    However on this blog the crys of racism are 99.99999999% directed against conservatives, so my posting the other side of the coin i appear to be racist by pointing out the little talked about other side.

    DiD I make my self clear?
    I hate typing so my posts are short and to the point, maybe I should take more time to splain lucy!

  20. The problem is that by fighting fire with fire, you keep the flame alive. You say, “Hatred can only be eradicated when BOTH sides agree to ending it.” This is true, but you must realize that as there will never be a conference where all of the blacks and all of the whites get together and work out there differences, sooner or later someone is going to have to unilaterally love. That love will not be returned, it will be met with deep skepticism. This means that the same person will have to unilaterally continue to love. Only time will demonstrate the person’s sincerity; only time will soften the hearts of the cynics.