3 ms·
> So we could keep out black people: https://www.kqed.org/news/11840548/the-racist-history-of-sin https://www.kqed.org/news/11840548/the-racist-history-of-sin..
by khazhoux 5y ago
> So we could keep out black people: https://www.kqed.org/news/11840548/the-racist-history-of-sin https://www.kqed.org/news/11840548/the-racist-history-of-sin...
That article hardly proves that SFH was primarily a tool for racism. It only says the first Bay Area SFH law, in Berkeley, was championed by a guy who didn't allow property to be sold to blacks. This is not compelling evidence for SFH being a channel for racism in any subsequent cases across different cities.
- ryan_lane 5y agoDue to redlining, black people generally couldn't buy houses. They rented. Having multi-family units means letting renters into your neighborhood, which means letting black people in. In many part of the US, politicians in county elections often run on "eliminating multi-tenant housing to reduce crime", which is a dog-whistle to racists. I don't think it's necessary to provide references here. The history of housing discrimination is well researched and just a quick google search away for you. I know this is HN and the culture is to require proof, but seriously, some people just need to educate themselves, because otherwise they aren't receptive to listening.
- scottlamb 5y ago> It only says the first Bay Area SFH law, in Berkeley, was championed by a guy who didn't allow property to be sold to blacks. This is not compelling evidence for SFH being a channel for racism in any subsequent cases across different cities. You're underselling it. The first US single-family zoning law, not just first in the Bay Area. Yes, maybe all of the subsequent single-family zoning laws that spread across the US were for totally different reasons than the first one. Personally I find that unlikely.