Racially diverse neighborhoods in diverse areas are linked to lower crime rates In a new research, Young-An Kim (Asst Professor of Criminology) and James C. Wo ( Asst Professor of Sociology) look at the implications of increasing racial and ethnic diversity in America’s communities on crime. Using evidence from Southern California, they tested the effects of racial diversity on neighborhood crime rates, finding that there were fewer violent and property crimes in neighborhood blocks which were more diverse, and especially those in more diverse areas. They attribute this to the greater opportunities created by diverse communities to overcome bias and create social ties and trust across different groups. take the case of 2 affluent suburbs in SoCal who border each other; Irvine and Newport Beach. over the past 4-decades, Irvine's population has become increasingly diverse to where Anglos make up < 40% of the whole; Newport Beach's has been hovering around the 70 - 80% range. while both affluent suburbs enjoy a very low crime rate, relative to other CA cities, Irvine's is noticeably lower than Newport's.
But there are people who'd put an intellectually dishonest spin on this roflmao, the intellectually dishonest one is lumping Asians and whites as one group. for the education of Moniker, Westminster, CA (home of many Asian gangs) has many Asians, it's crime rate is relatively high
While this is a nice sentiment and may well be true eventually it isn’t reflective of what I have seen in places like Chicago. The exception being areas that are so wealthy that literally wealthy people from around the earth move there (Gold Coast). If you go to areas in California candy Chicago and NY that are uber rich, you will see Asians and others from around the globe with enormous finances living in harmony.
Less poor people, less crime. More Asians, less crime. I believe in diversity but this is not a good argument for it. I grew in Alief in the 80's which was one of the most diverse parts of Houston. There was a **** ton of crime there. I did enjoy my childhood. Had friends from all different races. Not so much living in the burbs in Austin. Mostly white with a few Asians. It's like college station.
I agree that money and education are the biggest indicators. We live in a rapidly changing country, but still one where there are inherent advantages to being white and then an unspoken pecking order of minorities after that. Areas where the wealthiest can self select are not surprisingly lower on crime and that includes wealthy minorities. Areas that are mostly white in rural areas or poor areas have crime as well, so it isn’t that one racial group is superior- it comes down to opportunity. I have lived in areas without a lot of diversity in Europe and they were not as interesting or as fulfilling as areas in the USA where there is more diversity. I find there are a lot of advantages to diversity but I would not assume crime rates are necessarily one of them.
Other than money and eduction, I really think it comes down to culture and opportunity. Asians think of crime as a way to pretty much screw yourself for life. Even if you grow up in a poor Asian neighborhood like chinatown, you grow up thinking you go to jail, you can't get a good job, you are screwed. While in many poor black neighborhoods, people think that they are going to get screwed by the system and the man anyway, might as well steal from each other because it's better than not having anything. I think other races are somewhere in between. I don't know how to break the cultural cycle other than expose poor kids to people that have gotten ahead from nothing. People they can relate to. I don't know if I see enough successful black people go to poor black neighborhoods to be a role model.
concur; this thread was created to counter the convenient baseless claims by S Monitor in the US Blacks and Hispanics, have significantly lower income you intentionally ommitted to mention that Stockton has a relatively poor populace, w 78% of it are "people of color" as if income level of the populace is not a factor
Hmmm. Figure 1 seems to show that racial diversity has a mostly crime-enhancing effect at larger granularity (1/4th square mile areas) except that once you reach very high levels of heterogeneity the trend starts to reverse (a little bit). The article says: This result implies that racial diversity in broader areas mainly exhibits a crime-producing effect because social cohesion and informal social control among residents in different racial groups is likely reduced. However, as racial diversity increases even further, there may be a sufficiently large amount of each racial group, which provides more opportunities to develop interpersonal contacts and social ties and cohesion with each other and thus reduced amount of crime. Yet, such crime-reducing part of the pattern seems relatively small in magnitude, in general.
my neighborhood is very diverse, and I love it that way I like being around and associating with all types of different people, not just 1 group
I don't know what S Monitor is, but baseless claims should not be made. Baseless claims like more diverse cities have less crime, for example. While this is true, taking it into account does not make your claim that more diverse cities have lower crime any more accurate. Whatever the reason behind it, crime rates vary significantly by race. Having more of groups that have higher crime rates and fewer of people that have lower crime rates does not lead to less crime. I also didn't mention the average monthly temperature or rainfall or what industry is the largest employer. None of that information was necessary to put the lie to your claim that more diverse cities have lower crime rates. You made a claim with two variables, diversity and crime rates. I gave you an example that disproved your claim and provided the two data points that your claim was about, diversity and crime rate. I think everyone would agree having fewer poor people in a city reduces crime as well, but you didn't make a claim about number of poor people as it relates to crime.
why are you continuing to divert attention away from the topic of discussion, which is on diversity and crime.
I guess I still hold to the instinctual wisdom that homogeny and diversity might matter less than autonomous, organic settlement or social quarantine by external forces. Homogenous black neighborhoods are largely the product of Gilded Age whites freaking out and creating "wards" when the backs and receivers checked in for training camp and Elvis's backup singers drove to the civic center for sound check.
LOL. I specifically redirected you to the topic of diversity and crime. It is you that is trying to divert attention by mentioning economics. In fact, your specific complaint was that I only referenced race and crime rate and didn't mention economic factors. I don't believe that you are unaware of this. You must be pretending.
Different situation here ,in my neighbourhood (White Rock), few Whites remains..mostly old timer retiree, the rest are punjabi or Chinese who can afford it, quite safe. My brother who lives in SF moved to an area with similar demographic composition aiming to have better school system for his kids as well
You can't compare areas with immigration status as an outlier, legal immigrants will commit crimes at lower rates than domestic populations, as they've already been selected for lack of criminality as part of their immigration process..... If i could put "have you ever committed a crime" to 30 yo people as a neighborhood application, my neighborhood would have very low crime too.
