interviews and the commission report itself don't put much stock in the influence of agitators, of black militants, that's not who people said influenced them to do what they did. i think that that argument is important. it is important to think about because it shows the divided way people thought about this violence and the divided way that people thought about the issues, the social issues that were at the center of it, to use shorthand term, right, african-americans in cities or people of particular leftist political ideas, right, radicals, activists, they said these disorders were caused by discrimination and police brutality really. in all of the instances i gave you as examples, all of them involved an altercation that involved police officers, so there is something going on about the relationship between urban black people and police officers at the center of this issue. that's one way that people

interpreted the violence, and another way was it has nothing to do with that. it has to do with agitators and militants, and this shows the divided way that people are understanding the problem. now, let me keep in mind, right, just say cities do suffer from the 1960s through the 1990s. they suffer. they tougher population loss. you have a document that shows comparisons between populations in the major american cities, the top 25 american cities, at different moments in the 20th century. when you have a moment, look at that. look at which cities experienced population decline and look at which cities experienced population increase. that's not just because tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of americans wanted to go live in arizona or live in what becomes the sunbelt, work on their tans, right?

it is population transferance from northeastern and midwestern cities to the emerging sunbelt and california, right, is a phenomenon that cities experience in the latter third of the 20th century, and it has structural reasons behind it, that you read about. cities suffer. they experience population loss. they do experience erosion of the tax base. that's not a myth. that's not -- that's a very real structural issue. they do experience tremendous poverty or increased poverty. they do experience job loss as you read in detroit. they do experience decline in services. i mean, look at some pictures of new york city's subway in the 1970s and the 1980s. it is not pretty. graffiti, delayed services, trash, all of those are reflections of decline in services, cities experience these. there is experience in decline

in housing stock and there is problems with crime, drugs and violence. those things are real. cities do suffer. cities do suffer. i will let you know, keep in mind, there are always local people in these cities, residents, activists, housing advocates, teachers, union organizers, always people in cities throughout the 20th century trying to fight against these issues. there is always people doing that even though we don't usually think about them or study them. they're there. they're there. i want you to keep that in mind, too. as you saw, right, in the article about the bay area, you saw in the article about the oakland corridor, fighting against these issues is extremely difficult. it is extremely difficult.

the forces of history that urban activists had to fight against were entrenched. they're entrenched in structures of inequality, spatial structures between where people live. they're entrenched in structures of income divides, between who has access to jobs and who comes at kind of the moments of the industrialization. they're historical structures of political divisions and who can have influence over politics and who can't, why does proposition 14 pass? 1964? why is the open housing law in california repealed? robert self shows us part of the reason it happened is a structural issue in political influence. those who wanted open housing, african-americans, mexican americans, unions, right, civil

rights active tiss, they didn't have the political power. they didn't have the clout. the real estate corporations, the lenders, the banks, the homeowners associations, they did. they had amassed it over decades. the historical structures of inequality that make it difficult to fight against these things. there is institutions, right, banking institutions, real estate institutions, political institutions, homeowners institutions, that make it very difficult to fight against these problems. there is rhetoric. there is the rhetoric of equality that robert self wrote about. what racism? we're not racists. so what there is no black people who live here and never have been and we don't want them, but we're not racists, we're

homeowners, we just want freedom. we're just individuals, just individual freedom loving people. we're not racist. we're not pot bellied red faced sheriffs. look at us. we're don draper. we're not racists. there is that rhetoric. how do you fight against that? how do you fight against historical structures of inequality? how do you fight against political inequality to influence outcome? how do you fight against a rhetoric of individualism and individual rights? how do you point out that racism exists and it affects structures and societies if people can't see or don't want to see that the racism is there? how do you do that? that's the problem that activists in the north face. again, we can use c right mills

and ask the interrelated three questions about structure, history, and who prevails. i will skip this section. just keep in mind that crisis is nothing new in cities. it is not like cities existed in human history up until the mid-20th century and all of a sudden there are crisis and some ways the function of the city is to deal with crisis and cities since ancient times bring human populations together to deal with commerce and preservation. how can we trade easier and how can we come together around at first a water source, right, so more people can stay alive? that's kind of the function of cities in some ways is to manage crisis. i had an interesting anecdote i wanted to share. in the 19th century one of the biggest crisis in new york city had to do with transportation, right, a major mode of transportation had gotten out of control and there was too many people and there were too many of these vehicles for

transportation running around the city. it is preelectricity. it is pre gasoline combustion engines, so the method of transportation that was causing problems in the city is what, can we just all say it at once so it gets to the microphone? how are people getting around cities in the 19th century? let's say it together in unison. >> horses. >> horses. horses were causing problems in cities in the mid-19th century, late 19th century because there are too many of them and what do they do when they walk around central park and you're behind them jogging or minding your own business? you don't have to answer. horse manure. it is a major problem in late 19th century in new york city. what are we going to do with all of this? doomsday scenarios saying it is going to pile 30 stories by the 1930s. no way to get rid of this

mature. they're defecating faster than we can get rid of it. what are we going to do? boom, the invention of electricity solves the problem, electrical trolley cars replace the horses and except for the people who probably owned the stakeholders that had the interests in the horse and carriage taxi system, right, most people probably didn't lose out in this solving to this problem. now, again, that's a technological solution to what was an infrastructure social problem, right? that was a technological solution. technological solutions aren't going to solve the problems associated with the urban crisis, right? in some ways he points out technological innovation makes it worse. so cities have always had crisis. they've always had all kinds. the urban crisis is not necessarily new, all right? it is and that involves a

tremendous amount of social structure coming together in a set of issues that is not going to be easily solved by the market or technology. the market and technology didn't create it. so you not ka really look to the free market or technology to solve these problems of segregation, unemployment, discrimination, poverty, right, et cetera. john mcwater makes the case in the book that you read black people should just move. why are they in the city, they're stuck in the city and not leaving because they're dependent on welfare or addicted to the ideology of welfare. that's mcworther's arguments, right? why don't they just pick up and move where the jobs are? structurally, you know, there are impediments to doing that, one of the primary ones being housing. how do you just pick up and find housing in other places where

there may be jobs? how do you pay first month's rent, last month's rent, deposit? if you're on public assistance or unemployed, where do you come up with that? there is a structural impediment to doing what i prescribes. the problems of the urban crisis are not simply going to be solved by market-based solutions or technological innovations because in some ways it is not what caused it. there is three characteristics, three histories in some ways related that i will talk about for the remainder of the class. there is the history of the so-called second ghetto, and i want you to think about the word ghetto when you use it or don't use it. i try to remind people when i do lectures that people don't live in ghettos. people live in communities.

there is a difference when you say that. there is a cognitive difference. people don't necessarily live in ghettos. people live in communities in cities. you can say that people live in racially segregated communities. the language of ghettos, i usually like to -- so much of what we read uses the language of the ghetto but ghettoiza ti on, think of it as a process, not necessarily a place although there are spatial characteristics of racial segregation, poverty, joblessness, political disempowerment. there is a spatial connotation to that. that is very important. the spatial dynamic is important, the white noose around, right, the black neck, right, the real vivid kind of

viseral image used from the title of the chapter, but we will use the language of ghetto analytically and social logically and that's not license to throw it around like as if you cross into a particular neighborhood or cross into the south side of chicago and there is a sign that says welcome to the ghetto. no. you cross 96th street in new york, welcome to the hood. it is not like that. ghettos are processes. people don't -- i would argue people don't live in ghettos, they live in communities shaped by history of ghettoiza ti om. we'll talked about what hirsch calls the second ghetto. i want to he show you maps.

the racial discrimination that shaped these communities, right, the process that shaped urban communities in american cities in the 20th century, right, they had spatial components which you can see when you use census maps, a wonderful database called social explorer. you will become very familiar with it. you have an entire assign meant you have to do. you already became familiar because you looked up the populations in your own census track. say yes collectively. yes. okay. i did my homework. i sent it to you. social explorer is a fantastic tool you will be very familiar with. let me show you maps that i created if it lets me. i didn't sign in.

see that? where are my glasses? they're on my face. i have aterribly belong password. i want to show you spatial images of what the process of ghettoi sdpl ition looks like. do the ones i prepared. let's look at detroit. let's look at so-called black detroit from 1940 to 1990. i will let it play. there is 1940, right, the shaded-in section represents the concentration of black people in detroit in 1940. i will play the maps as they go through to 1990, and you can see the spatial dynamic of segregation, what it looks like.

i will let it play one more time. let's look at white detroit. you can imagine, begun, what the map will look like, the small kind of enclave, the community that is centered in the middle of the screen in 1940, right, which had been a black population since 1900, right? that is going -- the white in there is going to expand, right, when we look at the inverse. again. let's look at we study -- let's look at chicago, black chicago.

i will let it play one more time. okay. again, you can imagine the inverse is true for white chicago. let me do two more. let me do oakland, the oakland belt that you read about in the robert self article. here is the black population in that bay area from 1940 to 1990.

again, the reason i picked these years, 1940 to 1960 is the years that hirsch points to as the emergence of the second ghetto. we'll talk about what that means. as african-american populations are concentrated in and around oakland, that's where they grow. one of the interesting things about this map, i didn't create it, but there is less pronounced kind of color difference in the map because of large spanish speaking populations that are moving into this area which you read a bit about. let's just do two more. i will look at white, white oakland, and you are getting a sense of the pattern as to what this looks like. over time, again, and robert

self makes this really, really clear, right, whites are controlling the housing markets around the city. they are regulating the housing markets around the city. they are controlling african-americans from not being able to move in. since we are going to spend quite a bit of time on the wire and on baltimore, i did baltimore. i thought i did. i didn't. i didn't do baltimore. let's do boston. why not? white boston. you can really get a sense of how the african-american enclaves around the rocksbury corridor are more concentrated

overtime and that will be apparent when we look at black boston. okay. so you get a sense, right, from looking at some of these maps, that there's a spatial component to this history. to the history of the creation of what hirsh calls the second ghetto. african-americans had lived again in cities since there were american cities, there had been populations of african-americans in cities in the 19th century. you read a little bit but not much about how those populations increase in the 1910s through the 1930s with kind of that first wave of great migration. earlier historians kind of pointed to that 1890s, 1930s

period as the creation of the ghetto. the enduring ghetto is what one historian used that language to refer to what happens to those black communities in cities that form in the early 20th century, as you saw from the maps, it's kind of those small areas, they kind of become the ground zero for the incredibly large african-american communities that come from the 1940s through the 1960s. hirsh points out there is a difference between those black communities and the second ghettos that come from them, from the 40s through one of the major differences between those two communities are the processes that it. that created them. with the early 20th century, say the 1890s to the 1930s,

african-americans were funneled into particular areas of cities like chicago, detroit, new york. and they couldn't move. the methods that people used to kind of keep african-american workers in those cities were restrictive covenants, community improvement associations and violence. the early 20th century in places like chicago and detroit is characterized by violence as a method of preventing black homeowners from moving into white neighborhoods. restrictive kovnents. what are they. in short, restrictive covenants are when a group of homeowners get together and agree not to sell their housing to a particular population, primarily in american cities in the early 20th century the main targeted groups were jewish people and african-americans. barring those two communities from moving in. through a collective agreement. through a form of regulation.

restrictive covenant. there's the kind of community improvement association, if you've seen or read raisin in the sun, there is this fantastic example of the community improvement association coming to the african-american family who is moving into an all white neighborhood and the community improvement association representative says we'd like to buy your house back from you because you know, it's always better when you live with your own people. i would encourage you to watch the version of the movie with sydney poitier, no comments on the other ones. or read the book or the play, rather. community improvement associations served as a way for white homeowners to collectively keep out undesirables. then there is good the old-fashioned violence. bombings, shootings, mobs outside of recently bought homes

recently bought by african-americans. you can read some of these cases in chicago and in detroit from the early 20th century. that's what kind of maintained the so-called -- the first ghetto. what happens because of this, because of this concentration of african-americans in these restricted areas. there's incredible strain on housing. and there's increased tensions that lead to violence. 1917 to 1919, waves of violence spread throughout cities in the united states. in places like chicago, east st. louis, illinois, washington, d.c., tulsa, oklahoma, 1921, elaine, arkansas. waves of violence. literal race riots. and hirsh talks about that a bit in the article you read. these were pitched battles between blacks and whites, very different from the so-called commodity riots of the 60s.

where black and white people aren't killing each other because hirsh shows that type of social interaction was impossible by the mid 1960s. that the second ghetto was so calcified, it was so hardened by a different set of structural processes, that you didn't have black and white people shooting each other like you did in 1919 in the red summers in the midth. it was socially impossible. so what changes? what changes about this second ghetto? the rise of the second ghetto. there is still the use ofecoven. you saw that in the article on california. homeowners corporations are still going to effectively use some sort of subterfugeundesirag in. even though that's illegal, that's unconstitutional, according to a 1948 decision. there are still restrictive covenants.

re of the federal nt is the government. and he particularly points to new deal institutions. hirsh points out the homeowners loan corporation, thusinauthori veterans administration as three key government institutions tha spatial segregation oficanfrom through the 60s. how does it work? we should even ask theuewhy. like why wouldn't you want to live next to a black person that could buy a home in your neighborhood? wh.ul like why would this cause all of the home they are making similar income as you. it's not just give the house away to any black person because black people who tried to move

into the detroit family, you know, he's a doctor, he has -- he is a middle class hardwh he a white section of detroit, they try to kill him. mobs surround the house. his brother, a family member of his shoots somebody. that person goes dr. sweet, you know, he's involved in all of this stress. he eventually moves out of the neighborhood and kind of dies from the stress. why wouldn't you want dr. sweet as your neighbor? there's a lot of reasons for it. one is you have all of these conceptions of who black people are and who they aren't. there reasons that make it so that when black people move into white neighborhoods, when neighborhoods turn, that in the eyes of lendings in loogss, real estate institutions, brokers,

banks, that this is a sign that a neighborhood is in decline. that this is a sign that a neighborhood's property values are going to go down. so, in its essence, white people don't want to live next to black people because some of them are racist, and some of them have extremely visceral fears about the loss of their property value. what does this look like? well, with something like the holc, this is a document from a book by craig steven wilder, historian at m.i.t. who wrote about brooklyn, new york, and showed the ways that racial ideology played a role in brooklyn's social history. wilder provided us with this holc map. if you can notice, can't see it too good but right in the center, right around here, right by the 1930s, this is what

becomes the black section of brooklyn. this is kind of what becomes the short-hand term of bedford stuyvesant. its holc grade is a d, a lot of these areas in northern central brooklyn which have d grades are areas where there are already african-american populations so. when the homeowners loan corporation, a government underwriting agency which makes it possible for people who are not homeowners to acquire loans to get homes, or for people who are homeowners to refinance and improve their homes, this government program downgrades predominantly black areas and prevents them from being viable investments. prevents them from being viable investments. did the holc send like ku klux klan members into bedford say to ves