Historians say crime was rife due to the Tulsa oil field discovery bringing lots of money and opportunity in. The "favella" nature of it is noted.
Then cite it. Maybe you deal with too much motivated reasoning, but I don't. Show me the evidence, because that is what will adjust my opinion. Just because there is a natural resource, it doesn't mean there's going to be high crime.
In this environment, Greenwood had about 200 business to 10,000 people.
Businesses to people doesn't make a lot of sense. That might include plenty of people who are not going to be working like children, women, and the elderly. Additionally, businesses are not 1:1. In places like this, you'd be looking at a major corporation employing a bulk of people. Then additional business aroudn the periphery suppying logistics, equipment, amenities, repair services, transportation, medicine, ect. As the town grows, you'll get more advanced white-collar services like finance, insurance, administration, as well as additional work involving family building like education, training, entertainment, etc.
Business to people might be quaint for me and my Austrian Economics fetish, demanding more sole proprietorships; but it doesn't actually tell me anything about crime or even unemployment.
I don't give a shit about a black "man". Individuals should be judged individually, and the majority are fine of any race.
And how, exactly, do you think I'm supposed to believe that with most of the shit that you say? If it's "most people are fine", then there isn't really a discussion that needs to be had. It would be like whining about the amount of Jews who've won the nobel price for mathematics.
You constantly shit on entire races of people, including the vast and sweeping majority of individuals.
You don't have to pretend to be a moderate with me. The normies aren't here and "hiding your power level" is just annoying.
Genetics explain a lot more than culture.
Culture explains the vast and sweeping majority of the differences both between and within races and ethnic groups.
“There were people who did quite well, who lived in nice two-story homes with pianos and chandeliers and nice furniture,” Ellsworth said. “(But) it’s important to remember though that the vast majority of people who lived in Greenwood were poor, and they lived in shanties and shacks.” Only months before the massacre, the National Association of Social Workers had a meeting in Tulsa and found that about 90% of the African American population lived without indoor plumbing.
There's the reality. Not your idealized notion that fits your personal beliefs.
Hell, you have to look to 250k+ annual income communities to find a "middle class" black area that conforms to your worldview.
Businesses to people doesn't make a lot of sense. That might include plenty of people who are not going to be working like children, women, and the elderly. Additionally, businesses are not 1:1. In places like this, you'd be looking at a major corporation employing a bulk of people.
The largest employer you're probably going to find in Greenwood would have been the Stradford Hotel. Most of the businesses were mom and pop shops.
Most of the population were Tulsa service industry workers. NYT lists them all with a nifty 3d map, if you want to find something bigger. Seems the biggest, though. Try not to be so pedantic.
If it's "most people are fine", then there isn't really a discussion that needs to be had.
"Most people" aren't the problem. It's the few shitty ones that come disproportionately from certain demographics. Western society can handle some shit, but it doesn't take much to overload our processing ability. I don't pretend to be moderate, because I'm not, but I always judge individuals individually.
Culture explains the vast and sweeping majority of the differences both between and within races and ethnic groups.
It doesn't. Black British culture has the same disproportion of homicide we see in the US. The only difference is the smaller size of the Black British population relative to other demographic groups. The black population of the US has always been disproportionately criminal, for as long as we have records on it. Even Jefferson remarked on it, though he thought they could be taught morality some day. Is your working theory that Black British and African American culture are the same? Is it that African American culture has always been awful, and therefore conducive to this sort of behavior? Do you have more than excuses?
Low functioning MAOA makes more sense. We're still only talking about ~5% of the US black population, but it's plenty to cause issues.
However, Tulsa was also a deeply troubled town. Crime rates were extremely high, and the city had been plagued by vigilantism, including the August 1920 lynching, by a white mob, of a white teenager accused of murder. Newspaper reports confirmed that the Tulsa police had done little to protect the lynching victim, who had been taken from his jail cell at the county courthouse.
You're source isn't very good: “It looked like Hiroshima or Nagasaki afterwards.” But I'm prepared to take the word of one of the business owners.
What was the level of indoor plumbing of everyone else in Tulsa? And this part doesn't tell us about crime, but you have more on that later.
Hell, you have to look to 250k+ annual income communities to find a "middle class" black area that conforms to your worldview.
That example was to counter that NO black community exists with a low violent crime rate, so I started with the most extremely obvious conditions I could: High wealth, high home price, majority black. Low and behold, I found several. Particularly among legal African Immigrants.
That matched my expectation because my expectation is reinforced by data. High wealth corresponds to very little direct violence. Think of the last time you heard of someone robbing a 7-11 at gun point while making over 250k a year.
Violence is a poor return on investment unless you're pushing organized crime, and Organized Crime actually reduces overall violence because it monopolizes it.
The largest employer you're probably going to find in Greenwood would have been the Stradford Hotel. Most of the businesses were mom and pop shops. Most of the population were Tulsa service industry workers. NYT lists them all with a nifty 3d map, if you want to find something bigger. Seems the biggest, though. Try not to be so pedantic.
I'll take the map. And this seems like a problem for what you were saying earlier. I thought you said that these people were working in some sort of oil industry? Is that not the case?
I don't pretend to be moderate, because I'm not, but I always judge individuals individually.
From the shit you say? I don't believe you.
Even Jefferson remarked on it, though he thought they could be taught morality some day. Is your working theory that Black British and African American culture are the same?
I don't know, do you see a massive welfare state and chanting about George Floyd? American Cultural Imperialism appears to be very real, and particularly awful.
Is it that African American culture has always been awful, and therefore conducive to this sort of behavior?
Yes! Including the Ulster-Scott southern culture they were around that influenced them. Especially when you consider that slavery and share-cropping were still a form of welfare dependency (and it's why plantation owners claimed that they were civilizing blacks with slavery).
Forgot to address the crime rate.
I mean, that is a source, but there's basically no information in it. Hell, I don't even know if they are associating the high crime as the vigilantism.
From the outset, I told you data from the era sucked, and I'm not digging through microfilm archives to convince you that Greenwoods 200 businesses and 6 paved roads weren't a massive civilization achievement (that they rebuilt in about 4 years).
I never said these people worked in the oil fields. I said Tusla was a boomtown, which brings a criminal element. Grifters, shysters and thugs, trying to get in on some of the wealth that's flowing. It happens everywhere a town booms. This made it a high crime area (again, find your own microfilm), but also a place where people needed and could afford servants and shoeshines. Most of the black population of Greenwood served as menial labor in Tulsa. Those 200 businesses probably didn't even employ 10% of Greenwoods 10,000 inhabitants, but I'm just basing that on the fact that hardly any of the businesses would have likely had more than 2-3 workers. The Stradford is exceptional in that, and I don't see many other exceptions.
If it were just Black British and African Americans, I might be inclined to give it some credence, but violence seems universal to black populations anywhere on the globe. Maybe you actually believe Ghana's reported homicide rate, but that's on you. Same as your belief in a Wakandan Greenwood.
As to the end, they're referencing both the high crime and vigilantism. When a town booms and crime rises, inadequate legal institutions fail, and people tend to take matters into their own hands. That's not really a Tulsa thing, just a pattern that often played out across the US.
E: Let's go back a little bit, here.
It was prosperous by all the data I've seen
What data have you seen that suggested this? I think the only thing I've come across that would even come close to such an appraisal is an Ebony article.
From the outset, I told you data from the era sucked, and I'm not digging through microfilm archives to convince you that Greenwoods 200 businesses and 6 paved roads weren't a massive civilization achievement (that they rebuilt in about 4 years).
I'm not telling you to, I'm saying you don't have evidence for your assertion that it was absolutely crime ridden.
That's really what the problem is here. I'm willing to be convinced by data, but we don't fucking have any. I don't think it's fair to just assert high crime because of the race of the inhabitants, which despite your best efforts of back-rationalizing, you were ascribing to race. Which was stupid.
Then cite it. Maybe you deal with too much motivated reasoning, but I don't. Show me the evidence, because that is what will adjust my opinion. Just because there is a natural resource, it doesn't mean there's going to be high crime.
Businesses to people doesn't make a lot of sense. That might include plenty of people who are not going to be working like children, women, and the elderly. Additionally, businesses are not 1:1. In places like this, you'd be looking at a major corporation employing a bulk of people. Then additional business aroudn the periphery suppying logistics, equipment, amenities, repair services, transportation, medicine, ect. As the town grows, you'll get more advanced white-collar services like finance, insurance, administration, as well as additional work involving family building like education, training, entertainment, etc.
Business to people might be quaint for me and my Austrian Economics fetish, demanding more sole proprietorships; but it doesn't actually tell me anything about crime or even unemployment.
And how, exactly, do you think I'm supposed to believe that with most of the shit that you say? If it's "most people are fine", then there isn't really a discussion that needs to be had. It would be like whining about the amount of Jews who've won the nobel price for mathematics.
You constantly shit on entire races of people, including the vast and sweeping majority of individuals.
You don't have to pretend to be a moderate with me. The normies aren't here and "hiding your power level" is just annoying.
Culture explains the vast and sweeping majority of the differences both between and within races and ethnic groups.
https://archive.is/91q2s
There's the reality. Not your idealized notion that fits your personal beliefs.
Hell, you have to look to 250k+ annual income communities to find a "middle class" black area that conforms to your worldview.
The largest employer you're probably going to find in Greenwood would have been the Stradford Hotel. Most of the businesses were mom and pop shops. Most of the population were Tulsa service industry workers. NYT lists them all with a nifty 3d map, if you want to find something bigger. Seems the biggest, though. Try not to be so pedantic.
"Most people" aren't the problem. It's the few shitty ones that come disproportionately from certain demographics. Western society can handle some shit, but it doesn't take much to overload our processing ability. I don't pretend to be moderate, because I'm not, but I always judge individuals individually.
It doesn't. Black British culture has the same disproportion of homicide we see in the US. The only difference is the smaller size of the Black British population relative to other demographic groups. The black population of the US has always been disproportionately criminal, for as long as we have records on it. Even Jefferson remarked on it, though he thought they could be taught morality some day. Is your working theory that Black British and African American culture are the same? Is it that African American culture has always been awful, and therefore conducive to this sort of behavior? Do you have more than excuses?
Low functioning MAOA makes more sense. We're still only talking about ~5% of the US black population, but it's plenty to cause issues.
Edit: Forgot to address the crime rate. https://archive.is/TusdI
You're source isn't very good: “It looked like Hiroshima or Nagasaki afterwards.” But I'm prepared to take the word of one of the business owners.
What was the level of indoor plumbing of everyone else in Tulsa? And this part doesn't tell us about crime, but you have more on that later.
That example was to counter that NO black community exists with a low violent crime rate, so I started with the most extremely obvious conditions I could: High wealth, high home price, majority black. Low and behold, I found several. Particularly among legal African Immigrants.
That matched my expectation because my expectation is reinforced by data. High wealth corresponds to very little direct violence. Think of the last time you heard of someone robbing a 7-11 at gun point while making over 250k a year.
Violence is a poor return on investment unless you're pushing organized crime, and Organized Crime actually reduces overall violence because it monopolizes it.
I'll take the map. And this seems like a problem for what you were saying earlier. I thought you said that these people were working in some sort of oil industry? Is that not the case?
From the shit you say? I don't believe you.
I don't know, do you see a massive welfare state and chanting about George Floyd? American Cultural Imperialism appears to be very real, and particularly awful.
Yes! Including the Ulster-Scott southern culture they were around that influenced them. Especially when you consider that slavery and share-cropping were still a form of welfare dependency (and it's why plantation owners claimed that they were civilizing blacks with slavery).
I mean, that is a source, but there's basically no information in it. Hell, I don't even know if they are associating the high crime as the vigilantism.
From the outset, I told you data from the era sucked, and I'm not digging through microfilm archives to convince you that Greenwoods 200 businesses and 6 paved roads weren't a massive civilization achievement (that they rebuilt in about 4 years).
I never said these people worked in the oil fields. I said Tusla was a boomtown, which brings a criminal element. Grifters, shysters and thugs, trying to get in on some of the wealth that's flowing. It happens everywhere a town booms. This made it a high crime area (again, find your own microfilm), but also a place where people needed and could afford servants and shoeshines. Most of the black population of Greenwood served as menial labor in Tulsa. Those 200 businesses probably didn't even employ 10% of Greenwoods 10,000 inhabitants, but I'm just basing that on the fact that hardly any of the businesses would have likely had more than 2-3 workers. The Stradford is exceptional in that, and I don't see many other exceptions.
If it were just Black British and African Americans, I might be inclined to give it some credence, but violence seems universal to black populations anywhere on the globe. Maybe you actually believe Ghana's reported homicide rate, but that's on you. Same as your belief in a Wakandan Greenwood.
As to the end, they're referencing both the high crime and vigilantism. When a town booms and crime rises, inadequate legal institutions fail, and people tend to take matters into their own hands. That's not really a Tulsa thing, just a pattern that often played out across the US.
E: Let's go back a little bit, here.
What data have you seen that suggested this? I think the only thing I've come across that would even come close to such an appraisal is an Ebony article.
I'm not telling you to, I'm saying you don't have evidence for your assertion that it was absolutely crime ridden.
That's really what the problem is here. I'm willing to be convinced by data, but we don't fucking have any. I don't think it's fair to just assert high crime because of the race of the inhabitants, which despite your best efforts of back-rationalizing, you were ascribing to race. Which was stupid.