question about race riots

[freepcrusher]

when learning about the race riots of the 1960s, I realized that none of them were really in the south. How come none of them were in the south? Geographically, I guess you could consider L.A. the south as it as far south as Atlanta, but culturally it isn't. Anyways all the riots were in non-southern areas like LA, Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, DC etc.

Why is that? Sure there was some racism outside the south but they didn't have it nearly as bad in the aformentioned cities as they did in the south. I'm surprised there weren't riots in New Orleans, Miami, Atlanta, or Houston.

[freepcrusher]

Also, you had more "ghettoization" outside of the South, ironically.  There was little or no de jure segregation outside the South, but a huge about of de facto segregation.

It was not uncommon, in many southern locations, for a small shotgun house owned or rented by a black family to be within sight of, or even next to, a mansion of a white person.

Hence, a friend of mine, who is black, had a 5th great grandfather who was literally the next door neighbor of John Tyler.  (Tyler, while a Senator, helped the ancestor get a pension for service in the American Revolution.)

Yeah its interesting. When the black caucus was first founded, none of them were from a state of the old confederacy. They were from:

Oakland (Dellums)
South Central LA (Hawkins)
St Louis (Clay)
South Chicago (Metcalf)
Detroit (Diggs and Conyers)
Cleveland (Stokes)
Baltimore (Mitchell)
Philly (Nix)
Big Apple (Rangel and Chisholm)