Prominent cities where Black Culture has evolved into its distinct, unique culture.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

Imagine if I stated that Houston has more Swedish immigrants than any other American city, "and people wonder why I prefer Houston to San Antonio."

I would assume that you have a predilection for teak furniture and little meatballs.

[Jawnadelphia]

First post - says NYC was the origin of modern graffiti or street art, that is incorrect, it was Philadelphia. And Philly has so much black history I don't even know where to begin. But if you want to talk more modern, and popular music--Philly soul, The Sound of Philadelphia, the team of Kenny Gamble and Leon Huff produced more top 100 R&B, soul, disco hits than just about any outfit to ever walk planet Earth.

[Segun]

Also Gangsta Rap with Schooly D.

What would you say is something that Black people do currently in Philly that they don’t do elsewhere?

Slang (jawn)?
The beards?
Motorcycle and ATV drag racing?

With over a million Black ppl, I imagine there’s something.

[L41A]

Originally Posted by Segun

What cities are capitals of Black culture and history? I’m thinking of places with it’s own distinguished traditions, legacy, art, and history that stands on its own as a unique or history defining Black experience.

In the US:


Atlanta: Civil rights history, Trap, unofficial center of Black Church culture, capitol of Black wealth excess, an efficiently run Black metropolis. The only city in America (that isn’t losing population) where Black people are not only prominent, but dominant in every aspect of life.

I agree.
The civic leadership of the city of Atlanta has been solid and overall good in the 5 decades that Black mayors have been in office. The city has progressed in many ways since the 1970s when Maynard Jackson became the mayor followed by Andrew Young through Shirley Franklin until today with Keisha Lance Bottoms.

The city owned, operated, and managed airport is probably the crown jewel of Atlanta civic leadership under the Black mayors. The expansion and the amount of coordination has been impressive and incredible. This work was led by the city working mainly with the federal government and the airlines. (the state government had little to do with it)

Although in the 1970s-80s, the city itself lost population (like many big cities in the US during that time) - businesses and corporations did not leave. Instead corporations solidified or expanded their presence inside the central city like Coca-Cola, BellSouth, Georgia Pacific etc. Also, MARTA rail service began in 1979.

In the 1990s people started trickling back to the city to live and the Olympics was hosted. Since the 2000s, the amount of people moving back inside the city has increased accompanied by the increased development.

In general, Atlanta's civic leadership has been good. Before the string of Black mayors, Ivan Allen was quite effective during the 1960s and the civil rights movement. And William B Hartsfield had the foresight to see the importance of ATL airport. Atlanta in many ways has been blessed in its civic leadership especially when compared with some other places.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by Jawnadelphia

First post - says NYC was the origin of modern graffiti or street art, that is incorrect, it was Philadelphia.

Could you recommend some reading or videos on that? I know Cornbread wrote his way into history but I'd like to know more about what went on in general that made Philly stand out.

[hauntedheadnc]

Originally Posted by L41A

I agree.
The civic leadership of the city of Atlanta has been solid and overall good in the 5 decades that Black mayors have been in office. The city has progressed in many ways since the 1970s when Maynard Jackson became the mayor followed by Andrew Young through Shirley Franklin until today with Keisha Lance Bottoms.

Does it ever piss you off though, to think of how much greater Atlanta could have been were it not swamped in the middle of 10,000 tiny, squabbling county and municipal entities who all hate each other and Atlanta, and work against each other and Atlanta? I don't even particularly care for Atlanta that much, but to think about what could have been with some decent regional planning irritates the hell out of me. A lot of places in the South could have been better, and better places offering more opportunity to more people of every race, with easier annexation and better cooperation between cities, their counties, their states, and all their municipal neighbors.

[L41A]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

Does it ever piss you off though, to think of how much greater Atlanta could have been were it not swamped in the middle of 10,000 tiny, squabbling county and municipal entities who all hate each other and Atlanta, and work against each other and Atlanta? I don't even particularly care for Atlanta that much, but to think about what could have been with some decent regional planning irritates the hell out of me. A lot of places in the South could have been better, and better places offering more opportunity to more people of every race, with easier annexation and better cooperation between cities, their counties, their states, and all their municipal neighbors.

No, it doesn't piss me off that metro Atlanta (and Georgia in general) is very compartmentalized. I may be bothered sometimes with differing sales tax, bar closing times, paper/plastic bag ordinances, etc. across adjacent jurisdictions but it doesn't piss me off. If politics is what you referring to when speak of hate and squabbling, that political division would be there whether it was one county of 1,600 sq.mi versus the current 5 core counties (Fulton, DeKalb, Cobb, Clayton, Gwinnett).

I think what you described is exaggerated. The city of Atlanta and DeKalb County is practically joined at the hip. Before the creation of Fulton County in the mid 1800s, Atlanta (current central part of Fulton County) was in DeKalb County. These two jurisdictions has historically cooperated in the public sphere in housing, medical, and transportation - notably Grady Hospital and MARTA comes to mind.

Also the city of Atlanta and Clayton County has had notable cooperation - most of ATL airport is in Clayton County. And the ATL airport is not even adjacent to city limits of Atlanta. The cities of East Point and College Park are between city of Atlanta and the Atlanta-owned ATL airport with the cities of Riverdale and Forest Park on the other side of it.

The one thing that comes even close to what you described is public transportation and MARTA. But even that has slowly improved. Clayton County has joined MARTA. Cobb and Gwinnett operates their own bus system but uses MARTA fare system to collect it fares and integrate transfers. If the creation of MARTA in the late 1960s/70s was dependent upon one county comprising the current 5 core counties, MARTA probably would not have been created at all. Furthermore, the counties (Fulton DeKalb) that joined MARTA was by far the most dominant counties in the region during that time.

But I would suggest Georgia doesn't need another county or city in metro Atlanta.

[hauntedheadnc]

Edit: NVM. Not feeling it today.

[jayden]

Atlanta has evolved as the cultural center or nucleus for black prosperity. You have Blacks from all over the country moving to Atlanta due to its reputation as the nucleus for successful black people to thrive.

[edale]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

Does it ever piss you off though, to think of how much greater Atlanta could have been were it not swamped in the middle of 10,000 tiny, squabbling county and municipal entities who all hate each other and Atlanta, and work against each other and Atlanta? I don't even particularly care for Atlanta that much, but to think about what could have been with some decent regional planning irritates the hell out of me. A lot of places in the South could have been better, and better places offering more opportunity to more people of every race, with easier annexation and better cooperation between cities, their counties, their states, and all their municipal neighbors.

This is a pretty common complaint that I hear about cities all over the country. I've definitely heard the argument for consolidation of smaller municipalities in greater Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh...even somewhat in the SE portion of LA County. In theory, I support the merging of smaller burgs, as it can reduce waste, streamline services, etc. But it's not always the no-brainer you might think, and a large reason why actually relates to what has been praised in this thread (and what makes your post seem a bit tone deaf tbh).

It's not always the case, but often when you consolidate municipalities, or go with a unigov approach, where the County and City essentially become one, you can really dilute minority political power and influence. When the idea has been floated in Cincinnati, it's not just rejected by the small city mayors/boosters, whose opposition is obvious, but also by prominent black organizations in the City. Cincinnati city (~300,000) is about 45% black, but Hamilton County (~820,000) is only about 25% black. City Council is normally well represented by African Americans, and there have been several black mayors.

Hamilton County's political leadership has traditionally skewed white and republican-- although this is changing, as the County Commission has been in Democratic control for a few years, and as of the 2020 election 2 of the 3 commissioners are black. But the overall sentiment remains, which is that the smaller city allows for the elevation of black voices and political opportunity that would not exist if it was merged with the county.

Now, I know the demographics of Atlanta and Cincinnati are not similar, and the balkanization of the political landscape could have nothing to do with race. It just struck me as odd to see the praise of Atlanta's black mayors and leadership, and rightfully citing that as a point of pride for black Americans, followed by your post that critiques the very thing that might have contributed to the creation of that power structure.

[hauntedheadnc]

Originally Posted by edale

Now, I know the demographics of Atlanta and Cincinnati are not similar, and the balkanization of the political landscape could have nothing to do with race. It just struck me as odd to see the praise of Atlanta's black mayors and leadership, and rightfully citing that as a point of pride for black Americans, followed by your post that critiques the very thing that might have contributed to the creation of that power structure.

To be honest, I wasn't thinking about how fragmentation could have elevated Black leadership, especially when Atlanta was as rigorously segregated as anywhere else in the South. I was more thinking of how well any region can work when it sprawls across more than thirty counties, all of which have multiple municipalities within their borders, a state government hostile to urbanity in general and Atlanta in particular, and counties within that metro area that used to specifically cite Atlanta's Black population as reasons why not to expand MARTA.

But you're right... White flight probably would have contributed to the rise of Black civic leadership, especially when whites didn't have to fly far to find themselves in another jurisdiction where they couldn't interfere. Things might have been different had 1950s whites still been in Atlanta even after moving ten miles out.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Segun

Atlanta: Civil rights history, Trap, unofficial center of Black Church culture, capitol of Black wealth excess, an efficiently run Black metropolis. The only city in America (that isn’t losing population) where Black people are not only prominent, but dominant in every aspect of life.

How does this not also apply to D.C.? The D.C. area has a more affluent black population than Atlanta. I'm pretty sure that until recently, Chicago, Detroit, and D.C. were homes to the most affluent black communities in the U.S.

[bossabreezes]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

How does this not also apply to D.C.? The D.C. area has a more affluent black population than Atlanta. I'm pretty sure that until recently, Chicago, Detroit, and D.C. were homes to the most affluent black communities in the U.S.

Atlanta is the black Beverly Hills and therefore attracts way more people looking for that kind of lifestyle.

DC is outrageously successful but is not flashy like ATL, which is probably why it goes unnoticed.

[badrunner]

Atlanta probably has more black wealth in aggregate than any other city, but it usually doesn't make it on the various "wealthiest black neighborhoods in the US" lists like this one https://www.bet.com/style/2017/07/07...er-review.html while a bunch of LA, NYC and DC hoods make the list. I don't know if I'd call Atlanta the black Beverly Hills.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by bossabreezes

Atlanta is the black Beverly Hills and therefore attracts way more people looking for that kind of lifestyle.

DC is outrageously successful but is not flashy like ATL, which is probably why it goes unnoticed.

I might be alone here, but I don't really associate Atlanta with rich black people. Tyler Perry is the only really rich black person that I can think of from Atlanta, and he was only recently minted a billionaire. D.C. produced a billionaire over two decades ago (Bob Johnson), and Chicago has produced at least two black billionaires (Oprah, Jordan). I bet there are more black millionaires living in L.A. than Atlanta.

Originally Posted by badrunner

Atlanta probably has more black wealth in aggregate than any other city, but it usually doesn't make it on the various "wealthiest black neighborhoods in the US" lists like this one https://www.bet.com/style/2017/07/07...er-review.html while a bunch of LA, NYC and DC hoods make the list. I don't know if I'd call Atlanta the black Beverly Hills.

You should know that Ladera Heights is "the black Beverly Hills", lol.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Chicago has produced at least two black billionaires (Oprah, Jordan).

but tellingly, neither of them reside in chicago anymore.

kanye west is also stupid rich with chicago roots, but he doesn't live here anymore either.



related article about wealthy black chicagoans not in the billionaire class also leaving town:

Many Of Chicago's Wealthy African-Americans Are Moving To The South: Report



even middle class black chicago is leaving:

Chicago is losing its black middle class. Can it get it back?



chicago can't hide from its egregiously racist history. many black chicagoans who have the means to leave are voting with their feet.

[Camelback]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

but tellingly, neither of them reside in chicago anymore.

Not that it matters, but both Jordan and Oprah weren't born and raised in Chicago either.

Jordan - NC
Oprah - MS

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

but tellingly, neither of them reside in chicago anymore.

kanye west is also stupid rich with chicago roots, but he doesn't live here anymore either.

Well, Jordan retired, and Oprah is quasi-retired. But both of them spent all of their productive years in Chicago. Before them, Chicago was home to the Johnson family, which was very likely the richest black family in America at one point (and they were in-laws with Detroit based multi-millionaire Mel Farr). I don't think it's a coincidence that the country's first black president came from Chicago.

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

related article about wealthy black chicagoans not in the billionaire class also leaving town:

Many Of Chicago's Wealthy African-Americans Are Moving To The South: Report


even middle class black chicago is leaving:

Chicago is losing its black middle class. Can it get it back?

Yeah. As the first article mentioned, Chicago and Detroit are in the same boat in that regard.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Camelback

Not that it matters, but both Jordan and Oprah weren't born and raised in Chicago either.

Jordan - NC
Oprah - MS

Oprah was raised in Milwaukee and Tennessee.

[L41A]

Originally Posted by bossabreezes

Atlanta is the black Beverly Hills and therefore attracts way more people looking for that kind of lifestyle.

DC is outrageously successful but is not flashy like ATL, which is probably why it goes unnoticed.

I noticed that too. I said the same thing when I used to regularly party in both places in the 1990s. DC is more buttoned-down. ATL is more flamboyant, flashy. I like many other places and can appreciate all but ATL and DC are my favorite large metros.