Are there any cities where minorities are more politically conservative than whites?

[yaletown_fella]

In my experience , millenial northern european and WASP transplants from small towns are almost always much more radically leftist than the ethnic white natives and non white immigrants in urban areas.

Cities have traditionally only been more "liberal" because heavy industry and construction is concentrated in cities. As a result unions formed and people voted liberal because it was seen as the sensible option to protect their secure union jobs. A good example of this is the Portuguese community in Toronto.

This is very different than a rich transplant "liberal" from a suburbs who is living off of hubby or daddy's money and writes part time for a left wing publication.

I should honestly stop using the word liberal because it dosent have any clear cut definition anymore.

[ssiguy]

Vancouver`s huge Chinese community is solidly more socially conservative than the white population and most other ethnicities. Many are conservative right-wing Christians are are openly homophobic, xenophobic against all other races and cultures including whites, against sex education, sexist, and exceptionally socio-economicaly classist.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

I should honestly stop using the word liberal because it dosent have any clear cut definition anymore.

Yes, you honestly should, but for very different reasons (you seem to be engaging in absurd cartoon stereotypes).

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Yes, you honestly should, but for very different reasons (you seem to be engaging in absurd cartoon stereotypes).

How? Because I think defending frontline union workers and the working poor is more important than social issues?

I think its problematic when both the alt-right, conservative, and left wing media is obsessed with social issues and ignores real issues like the threat of automation to the working poor.

Many stereotypes , such as the one about part time column writers (or offering to write columns for free) is unfortunately (for both the writers and readers) true a lot of the time.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

How? Because I think defending frontline union workers and the working poor is more important than social issues?

I think its problematic when both the alt-right, conservative, and left wing media is obsessed with social issues and ignores real issues like the threat of automation to the working poor.

Many stereotypes , such as the one about part time column writers (or offering to write columns for free) is unfortunately (for both the writers and readers) true a lot of the time.

As someone writing from Toronto, I would think that you would understand the difference between liberals and left wingers, yet you're discussing them as if they're synonymous. After all, the NDP does exist up there, and it's certainly not liberal.

[Docere]

Depends what you mean by "liberal." In the American terminology people who would be classified as "social democrats" elsewhere are still included under the liberal umbrella I think. So in that sense the NDP are "liberal" in the American sense.

[Docere]

The NDP did very well among urban social liberals in this recent Ontario election.

I live in the electoral district (we call them ridings, Brits call them constituencies) of University-Rosedale. It has the highest educational attainment of any riding and has virtually no "working class" presence at all. It swung massively to the NDP.

Canada has a multi-party system and 20 point swings between the Liberals and NDP in "progressive" core Toronto ridings aren't uncommon at all. A lot of people will just back the Liberal or NDP just depending on who looks stronger at the moment.

[Capsicum]

Why are a lot of "elite" educated people now the primary supporters of left social democrats in some cities (rather than the elite educated people being more "technocrat" libertarian etc., which would be an idea that counters "socialist" views) in some cases being the face of pro-"socialist" support even more so than the stereotypical pro-union working class?

What caused this shift?

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by eschaton

As someone writing from Toronto, I would think that you would understand the difference between liberals and left wingers, yet you're discussing them as if they're synonymous. After all, the NDP does exist up there, and it's certainly not liberal.

You just need to read their latest election platforms. As of 2018 both the provincial liberals and NDP are arguably further to the left than the federal NDP.
Both parties favor big government, bloated management , more uneffective programs (most education apart from STEM and the trades is not in demand and a lot of it is worthless) over a much more effective basic income type approach to elminating poverty.

[llamaorama]

I think immigrants are going to be conservative if they come from a place which is conservative. But of course what is conservative abroad is not what it is in Canada or America. It does seem like immigrants are more socially conservative, but not necessarily economically conservative like a North American whose culture is more individualistic. The second generation may lean liberal because their identity is so open-ended and undefined, and when you are in that situation you get to be more open minded and idealistic.

Then the next generation becomes much more liberal, and I suspect it has something to do with the flexibility of having a split cultural identity. You get to define your own values and be open minded.

Originally Posted by Capsicum

Why are a lot of "elite" educated people now the primary supporters of left social democrats in some cities (rather than the elite educated people being more "technocrat" libertarian etc., which would be an idea that counters "socialist" views) in some cases being the face of pro-"socialist" support even more so than the stereotypical pro-union working class?

What caused this shift?

More awareness and knowledge of the world, and also being humbled the pressure of getting to that level in life?

My impression of conservatives is that they are big fish, small pond. Valuing personal responsibility and agency to a point of judging others for it harshly is a mentality you'd develop if you were driven but always surrounded by feckless people. There's always the guy who grew up in the hood, now he's are a doctor, everyone else is lazy and weak but me. Or more typically, the white guy from a small town whose life is stable and everything always went to plan and thus he is clearly superior to everyone else.

Liberals seem like small fish in big pond people. You do what you are supposed to, but you know you aren't special because you've experienced failure. It makes sense an upper middle class professional is more liberal, because they probably were really challenged when they went to college to study a difficult but well remunerated subject and found a job in a competitive workplace.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Miami is the obvious answer here, considering the historically right wing politics of the Cubans, and whites in Miami being generally left of center.

Of course, Miami Cubans are mostly pretty effing white. And as Miami's Latino population has diversified, it's become less right wing. The Cuban Republican base is more in the suburbs than Little Havana these days.

Miami Cubans are generally Republican... though not terribly "right wing" in the silly idiotic sense. It's mainly summed up by this: Cuban American exiles hate Castro. Castro = Leftist. American Democratic Party = Left. American Republican Party = Right. Right is the opposite of Left. Therefore Republican is the opposite of Castro. Therefore Cuban Americans vote Republican.

But this is dramatically changing with younger American-born generations of Cuban descent heading to the Democratic side.

Originally Posted by bobdreamz

Miami Cubans aren't really right wingers except for the fact that Reagan upon a visit to Little Havana in 1983 said "Cuba Si, Castro No" and his hate for communism & Castro at the time.

• Video Link

Right... this strongly solidified the Cuban Exile-Reagan Republican Alliance.

Originally Posted by eschaton

I just meant skin tone basically.

Cuba received a lot of migration directly from Spain in the 19th century which significantly "whitened" the island, making it by far the most European-dominated Spanish-speaking country in the Americas north of the Southern Cone. Although not as hard and fast as in the U.S., there was a color line as well, with Cubans of the ruling class mostly or entirely of European heritage.

Cuban exiles who came to the U.S. - particularly the first wave who were associated with the Batista regime - were part of this very, very white ruling class. The Cuban community diversified a bit later after the Mariel boatlift, but it's still generally true that Cubans in the U.S. are much whiter today than Cubans in Cuba.

It is probably the case that most white Cubans fail to be white under "one-droppism" - they probably have something like 10% nonwhite ancestry - mostly black. But they don't fit the typical "look" people have when they think of Latinos. In the U.S. they would be socially accepted as white, hence they have white privilege.

Also because of the fact that Cuba is an island... which made it much easier for the Spanish to exterminate pretty much all of the Taino-Arawak natives on it. Spared the hottest females, of course... that's the Spanish Conquistador way... and the reason that there exists a relatively small mestizo population in Cuba.

[KB0679]

Originally Posted by Capsicum

Do predominantly non-immigrant minorities like say, Black Americans and native-born Hispanic or Asian Americans hear anti-immigrant rhetoric and think "we're not immigrants (or are no longer immigrants)" and feel unaffected, or do they think "solidarity with them"?

For Black Americans, it leans towards solidarity which is somewhat ironic because 1) a good bit of immigrants actually voted for 45 and 2) the support is often unreciprocated.