BoxRec

It's reality unless you put more stock in a Marxist professor who conducted a so called study. I don't need studies I lived it.

Seamus wrote: ↑23 May 2026, 20:38 It's reality unless you put more stock in a Marxist professor who conducted a so called study. I don't need studies I lived it.

You lived through white flight in 1950s America? You must be old as f*ck.

Crime is a secondary knock-on effect. People who commit street crimes are poor, they can't buy into middle-class neighborhoods. White flight happened when the original inhabitants started selling their homes because they didn't like the changing racial demographics, and then falling property values and lost tax revenue followed, along with crime.

No between 67-77, Lived through it twice in 2 different neighborhoods. Saw it happen to relatives in other neighborhoods as well. People left because they had a break in, then someone they knew got mugged, a kid got jumped on the way home from school, a girl got raped, it became epidemic. People sometimes moved half a mile away to escape. You had to watch your back constantly when you went out. But yeah, we're the bad guys.

Seamus wrote: ↑24 May 2026, 10:59 No between 67-77, Lived through it twice in 2 different neighborhoods. Saw it happen to relatives in other neighborhoods as well. People left because they had a break in, then someone they knew got mugged, a kid got jumped on the way home from school, a girl got raped, it became epidemic. People sometimes moved half a mile away to escape. You had to watch your back constantly when you went out. But yeah, we're the bad guys.

You're conflating issues here, I'm explaining a term that largely refers to a phenomena in a specific place and time, and you're making it about yourself.

Can't be about me when it happened in dozens of cities across the country. Even a big leftist like Amanda Seligman shows some honesty in her book Block by Block :Neighborhoods and Public Policy on Chicago’s West Side when she illustrates how many people fleeing racial change did so because their neighborhoods were becoming very dangerous.

Seamus wrote: ↑24 May 2026, 18:00 Can't be about me when it happened in dozens of cities across the country. Even a big leftist like Amanda Seligman shows some honesty in her book Block by Block :Neighborhoods and Public Policy on Chicago’s West Side when she illustrates how many people fleeing racial change did so because their neighborhoods were becoming very dangerous.

I'm not familiar with her work but just from reading the Amazon page it sounds like one of her main points is that socioeconomic cracks had already formed in these neighborhoods before racial integration:

In Block by Block, Amanda I. Seligman examines the responses of whites in the West Side communities of Chicago to the racial transformation occurring in their neighborhoods in the decades following World War II. Seligman's account illuminates that deterioration in these areas in fact began long before the color of their inhabitants changed from white to black.

Again, crime being a secondary effect here, not the direct result of a new population moving into an area as you're implying.

Seamus wrote: ↑24 May 2026, 18:00 Can't be about me when it happened in dozens of cities across the country. Even a big leftist like Amanda Seligman shows some honesty in her book Block by Block :Neighborhoods and Public Policy on Chicago’s West Side when she illustrates how many people fleeing racial change did so because their neighborhoods were becoming very dangerous.

No point arguing Sean is. Yes poverty comes into it but demographics absolutely are vital. We’ve had 70 years to observe this in the cities. Some
People never learn.

Ned Stark wrote: ↑23 May 2026, 03:44

smiling assassin wrote: ↑23 May 2026, 03:27

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑23 May 2026, 02:59

So why did they fook off is the question. Just giving away their land for it to become Londonistan.

Why didn’t they stay and fight for their land to stay Britishistan?

I can’t speak for all but for lots they didnt like what was happening in the area they were living. Many moved to Essex where it was less diverse.

I know you’re taking the piss saying “why didn’t they stay and fight” but that is something our politicians should have done for its own people. It should never of come to where we are now, never.

It happens in towns and cities all over the country. Ethnic minorities move into an area and buy up. People move away as the area becomes dirtier and more run down. It’s happened for decades

“Refugees” and certain other groups clog up social housing. They’re given priority over locals. Go look at the people in social housing in zone one London.

high tower 1 wrote: ↑26 May 2026, 06:23

Ned Stark wrote: ↑23 May 2026, 03:44

smiling assassin wrote: ↑23 May 2026, 03:27
I can’t speak for all but for lots they didnt like what was happening in the area they were living. Many moved to Essex where it was less diverse.

I know you’re taking the piss saying “why didn’t they stay and fight” but that is something our politicians should have done for its own people. It should never of come to where we are now, never.

It happens in towns and cities all over the country. Ethnic minorities move into an area and buy up. People move away as the area becomes dirtier and more run down. It’s happened for decades

“Refugees” and certain other groups clog up social housing. They’re given priority over locals. Go look at the people in social housing in zone one London.

Explain this, will you?

My only point was that people who move, even if it's because they don't like-fear their new neighbors, they are committing no crimes, and if anyone thinks it was pleasant for the people in those areas throughout US cities, when they became the minority, I have to ask what planet it is you live on.

I think a big issue is when you have a transient population in an area.

These areas are often the poorest ones, people who do well enough move on, and are replaced by more poor people.

Many folk don't do better and stay there.

In the first place, looking at the East End of London, many of the new folk moved from the countryside to work in the factories, then hugenots and Jews came, more recently it is folk from Bangladesh.

It's always been rough, the people have changed but it's still rough.

It's only in the most recent of times it has become more gentrified.

Croydon used to be posh enough, but in more recent times, because it is cheaper, the transient population have gone there, Romanians, Africans, Middle Easterns etc.

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑26 May 2026, 09:48

high tower 1 wrote: ↑26 May 2026, 06:23

Ned Stark wrote: ↑23 May 2026, 03:44

It happens in towns and cities all over the country. Ethnic minorities move into an area and buy up. People move away as the area becomes dirtier and more run down. It’s happened for decades

“Refugees” and certain other groups clog up social housing. They’re given priority over locals. Go look at the people in social housing in zone one London.

Explain this, will you?

On paper they are homeless so have greater priority. Have bigger families. No money. Cant speak English blah blah.

There are reports done on council housing given to foreign born tenants in London. It’s about half. Not even including second gen.

Total shit show. No wonder there’s white flight when all the council housing stock is redirected to a load of randomers.

Is that enough for you ?

"Londonistan"

Ricky wrote: ↑27 May 2026, 05:11


"Londonistan"

How a Muslim man can be mayor of London blows my mind. Diversity is not a strength it’s a massive weakness

And to have people hail it as a groundbreaking monumental achievement.

smiling assassin wrote: ↑27 May 2026, 06:59

Ricky wrote: ↑27 May 2026, 05:11


"Londonistan"

How a Muslim man can be mayor of London blows my mind. Diversity is not a strength it’s a massive weakness

Democracy, I guess.

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑27 May 2026, 09:56

smiling assassin wrote: ↑27 May 2026, 06:59

Ricky wrote: ↑27 May 2026, 05:11


"Londonistan"

How a Muslim man can be mayor of London blows my mind. Diversity is not a strength it’s a massive weakness

Democracy, I guess.

I wonder if Sadiq Khan would have become mayor without the Muslim vote.

This is the thing. Liberal democracy only works properly without sectarianism.

To many people I find liberal to a fault. I don’t want to slag him off because he’s not here to defend himself but that’s exactly how I find James.

smiling assassin wrote: ↑27 May 2026, 12:01 To many people I find liberal to a fault. I don’t want to slag him off because he’s not here to defend himself but that’s exactly how I find James.

if you dont want to do it , why even mention him

smiling assassin wrote: ↑27 May 2026, 12:01 To many people I find liberal to a fault. I don’t want to slag him off because he’s not here to defend himself but that’s exactly how I find James.

I regard hurling nasty personal insults at those who don't agree with your views and opinions as the antithesis of being liberal.

i thought that discussion had already been locked

Fair point, although it's not a discussion, it's for information. Anyway, yes, back on topic. Thank you.

As an American who has been engrained with the whole freedom of religion thing, this one is a bit of a head-scratcher for me. I looked him up on wiki, and I think it's fair to say that regardless of whether you'd vote for a Muslim or not, there are obviously far worse Muslims than this guy.

If I was a Londoner, I still likely would not have voted for him, but I'm not sure because I really haven't looked into it enough.

If his relatively moderate views help other Muslims become more moderate, that's a good thing.

Tony1244 wrote: ↑27 May 2026, 13:00 As an American who has been engrained with the whole freedom of religion thing, this one is a bit of a head-scratcher for me. I looked him up on wiki, and I think it's fair to say that regardless of whether you'd vote for a Muslim or not, there are obviously far worse Muslims than this guy.

If I was a Londoner, I still likely would not have voted for him, but I'm not sure because I really haven't looked into it enough.

If his relatively moderate views help other Muslims become more moderate, that's a good thing.

According to khan terrorist attacks by Muslims are just “part and parcel of living in a big city”.

He’s not as smooth an operator as he thinks he is.