Quote:
Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel
You didn't even address my points about rural areas, the easy access to fire arms, and the tax issues that have drawn these groups to the area. They may not do things locally, but they have headquartered here. I even admitted the Aryan Nation had a huge stronghold less than 100 miles from where I live and creepily enough I met people who were involved in it because Idaho is totally inbred and small (it is more like 2 or 3 degrees of separation here, especially with the University).
Maybe the Dakotas don't have hate groups because of geography, tax laws, or something else. Sure they have the Black Hills but the wilderness out here with less people makes hiding out pretty easy. You're a lot more obvious shooting buffalo on the Plains than tracking elk in the Bitterroots. We're very much "mind your business" out in the boonies and luckily we don't condone it here, nor do most of the people of Montana (Peppy can speak for Washington, but she's on the Westside). The groups here were mostly run out by the government for tax and other issues, and moved back east (if I remember right above the Mason Dixon line) where they could operate the way they wanted to.
Also California (according to the SPLC) has "hate groups" against white Christians (the usual hate mongers when people think of hate groups), including the Nation of Islam, the Jewish Defense League, Voz de Aztlan. KSigRC is right that it has to do with population. I don't know why there are more groups in certain Southern states (I have hypotheses), but I do know why groups came to where I live and work, and why they aren't here anymore.
|
I think Idaho is remarkable because the groups deliberately moved there and have apparently been run off (good for Idaho). It's kind of in its own special category. I think in most other rural areas the hate groups are home grown and are probably harder to run off for that reason.
ETA: I don't want to spend too much time googling this, but didn't one of the really notorious groups advocate forming a white nationalist homeland in the northwest? All the demographic stuff I'm saying kind of falls apart when the crazies deliberately choose to come to you, likely because of your relative lack of diversity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
Ignoring that population is likely the reason for California's high numbers, especially given the breakdown in the southeast, while relying on the "lily white" argument seems like you're cherry picking, that's all I'm saying.
|
I didn't do the original grouping, FWIW. My point was just to respond to the southern state vs. pacific northwest comparison, which, I think, was a response to a claim about the "west" which seemed to me to include California.
I've got nothing against the pacific northwest or California.
I think that acts of racial violence or hate groups are more likely to occur in places with relatively large minority populations, poverty, relatively low levels of education. You'll get this in some big cities and you'll get this in some rural areas, depending on the demographic breakdown. Some states have the misfortune of having multiple areas with the wrong mix. And some Southern states all of my demographic predictors AND a horrible racial history.
I think to make comparative claims about regions or states without looking at fundamental differences, like the racial and ethnic make up of the regions, is probably misguided.
ETA: looking at simply the number of hate groups, other than South Carolina, isn't the populations size of the state probably the most tightly correlated variable? Then maybe population diversity?
Kind of interesting random links:
http://www.socialexplorer.com/pub/ma...Tract&themei=1
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/hatew...rtherecord.jsp
Linear Mode
