top
East Bay
East Bay
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Hip-Hop Predicted Liquor Store Trashings Long Ago

by New America Media, Adisa Banjoko (reposted)
Hip hop musicians have long addressed -- and frequently profited from -- liquor sales in impoverished black neighborhoods. PNS contributor Adisa Banjoko is a lecturer and author of the upcoming book "Lyrical Swords Vol. 2: Westside Rebellion." For more information visit http://www.lyricalswords.com.
SAN JOSE, Calif.--When black men in bow ties tore apart two liquor stores in Oakland, Calif., the night before Thanksgiving, the security-camera footage was all over the news. Today, two members of an Oakland black Muslim group were charged with hate crimes and false imprisonment in the incidents. Police are investigating whether the alleged vandalism is connected to an arson fire earlier this week that destroyed another market, and the kidnapping of the store's owner.

To much of mainstream America this issue is new. But African Americans coast to coast have a longstanding issue with the infestation of corner liquor stores that they believe peddle poor-quality foods and dangerous alcohol. They believe that these stores devalue not only the surrounding property but also the lives of those who live near them.

Proof that this is not a new issue can be found in numerous rap songs over the years. The early 1990s were full of racial tension between the black community and liquor stores. On Public Enemy's song "1 Million Bottle Bags," Chuck D proclaims, "They drink it thinkin' it's good/ But they don't sell the s*** in the white neighborhood!"

Earlier, in his now highly-famous song "Black Korea," Ice Cube hit L.A.'s Asian community with a mountain of racial slurs in rhyme form, closing with the now-prophetic line, "So pay respect to the black fist/Or we'll burn your store right down to a crisp."

The ugly clash between Korean Americans and African Americans over the liquor store issue is covered in excruciating detail in Jeff Chang's book "Can't Stop Won't Stop." The recent violence in Oakland reveals similar animosity toward store owners who are often Arab and sometimes Muslim.

An ironic twist is the role rappers themselves have played in the promotion of alcohol consumption in the hood. On the same album in which Ice Cube attacked the Koreans, he endorsed St. Ides Malt Liquor. Dr. Dre, Yo-Yo, Wu-Tang, King Tee, EPMD, Scarface, Snoop Dogg and even Rakim have all promoted St. Ides. This is not to mention Run DMC's countless mentions of drinking "8-Ball" (Olde English 800) or the Beastie Boys' world famous "Brass Monkey." Clearly the Hip Hop community has played both sides on this issue.

I grew up in the 1980s in the suburbs outside San Francisco. If my friends and I wanted alcohol, we went to Bay View /Hunters Point, because we knew an Arab shopkeeper who was always willing to sell to under-age kids. There was no such supplier in the area where I was raised. I knew at 15 that if I wanted to buy alcohol, I had to go to the ghetto.

In the rap song "Refuse to Lose," the MC's of Non-Phixion, lament this phenomenon: "When I was 10 I used to buy liquor with no I.D./ Thinkin' back subliminally, the store clerk was tryin' to kill me."

This anger at being devalued is at the center of the destruction of the Oakland liquor store. It does not excuse it, but it explains it. Many African Americans and other ghetto citizens feel they are being targeted for a slow death by liquor store owners. The group most active in opposing the liquor stores is often black Muslims. They do this because in the Qu'ran it states, "And obey Allah and the Messenger Muhammad and beware of even coming near to drinking or gambling and fear Allah." This situation gives rise to an intricate tension that involves race and class as much as it does faith.

Read More
Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
Prevention Research Center, Berkeley, California 94704, USA. rlipton [at] prev.org

OBJECTIVE: This study examines whether the association between violence and population density is moderated by the presence of alcohol outlets, both within a target geographical area and in adjacent geographical areas. The effect of sociodemographic variables on violence is also examined controlling for spatial confounding. METHOD: Zip code areas (N = 766) in California from four distinct areas (three urban and one rural) were examined for rates of violence, taking into consideration population characteristics of persons living in those areas and the potential interaction effects of alcohol outlets on violence rates. Population characteristics were assessed using Census data: outlet densities were obtained from the California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control; and violence rates were abstracted from hospital discharge data. A spatial population model of the production of violence was used to examine the relationships of population characteristics of target and surrounding areas to violence rates. RESULTS: The density of bars was found to be strongly associated with greater rates of assault, while density of restaurants was associated with less violence. Both appeared to have greatest effect in densely populated areas. Local and nearby population characteristics were also found to be related to greater rates of violence. CONCLUSIONS: While limited to cross-sectional data, the current study suggests that alcohol outlets, in the presence of socioeconomic measures, moderate the occurrence of violence in urban areas.

Linda Hill

New geo-spatial research methods are improving our understanding of how local environments shape the level of alcohol-related problems experienced by communities. A growing body of research shows a relationship between alcohol outlet density, drinking and harm that is most marked at the neighbourhood level. The research literature reviewed below suggests that reducing the number and density of alcohol outlets can reduce heavy drinking and local alcohol-related harm, such as violent crime.

Studies in the USA in the 1980s and early 1990s showed a relationship between alcohol outlet density and alcohol consumption levels that was mutually reinforcing over time. This was followed by research in medium-sized US cities that linked alcohol outlet density to specific measures of alcoholrelated harm such as drinkdriving and violence. Findings from city-level data do vary between different parts of the USA, but analysis of neighbourhood level data consistently shows a significant link between outlet density and harm after controlling for sociodemographic and other relevant factors. These findings can inform policing and licensing decisions, as well as the wider policies of local and central government.

One of the earliest studies, of 213 California cities, showed that a 1 per cent increase in beer bars resulted in more than 1 per cent increase in public drunkenness and drink driving. Other Californian research linked high outlet density to high numbers of night-time traffic crashes and pedestrian injuries in the neighbourhoods studied, with some spill-over effects into neighbouring areas.

Research in Newark, New Jersey, showed that alcohol outlet density was the single greatest predictor of violent crime at the suburb and neighbourhood level (census tracts and census blocks). This link with harm levels holds good whether density is measured per head of population or per square kilometre. California studies linked the density of off-licensed outlets to violent assault, including violence involving young people. In an average city in Los Angeles County, each additional outlet was associated with a 0.62 per cent increase in violent offences. In New Jersey, alcohol outlets, along with bus stations and all-night businesses, appeared to become crime ‘hotspots’. The effect of high outlet density on crime was specific to the area, however, with little of spill-over into neighbouring areas that occurs with alcoholrelated driving offences.

One New Orleans study of outlet density is relevant to the debates about personal choice versus community responsibility that often come up when intervention in the alcohol market is proposed. It shows how the link between outlet density, drinking and harm works through the social norms that are created within communities. Rather than affecting individual behaviour directly, the density of alcohol outlets in a community has a structural effect on alcohol attitudes and drinking patterns across that community that then influences the attitude and drinking pattern of individuals.

In this study, urban residential census areas were randomly selected to provid three examples each for hig and low outlet density and four different levels on the socioeconomi deprivation index 24 areas in all. A random telephone survey of 2,604 adults in these areas asked abou personal drinking and attitudes to alcohol including social acceptability and perceived norms for friends, and distance from an off-licence (as a proxy for density), as well as sociodemographic information. The analysis looked at drinking and attitudinal differences between individuals and also between averages for each area. For individuals, all the variables except density were strongly linked to drinking norms; male sex and higher education were more likely to mean heavier drinking; black ethnicity and increasing age were associated with drinking less. Distance from home to the closest offlicence made no difference. However, 16 percent of the variation between individuals on perceived drinking norms and 11.5 percent of variation in selfreported drinking related to where the individual lived. When the data was analysed by neighbourhood, the average distance to nearest outlet for each neighbourhood was the only variable that linked to averages on attitudinal and drinking measures. That is, in neighbourhoods with low distances on average to the nearest off-licence, there were heavier drinking norms.

In the researchers’ view, this finding indicated that in a high outlet density area, whether you live next door to a liquor store or a kilometre away, everyone’s drinking norms are affected to some degree by the neighbourhood environment. This is consistent with social learning theory and with research from other countries that shows individual drinking behaviour is influenced by the drinking behaviour of one’s social network. For example, research links heavier drinking among 10-17 year olds and among university students to perceptions about drinking by friends that overestimate their actual consumption.

A high density of alcohol outlets increases the visual presence of alcohol in a neighbourhood, and may have similar effects on attitudes and norms as high exposure to television, print and billboard advertising for alcohol. The presence of alcohol outlets, including signage and empty bottles or intoxicated patrons in the street, may also have a ‘broken window’ effect, suggesting that ‘no one cares’ in this neighbourhood. Concentrations of bars and bottle stores can act as ‘attractors’ of socially disinhibited people and help create the conditions for nonnormative activities such as drug use and prostitution. This, as well as the effects of increased drinking in the neighbourhood, may contribute to the link between outlet density and violence.

The type of outlet linked to increases in harm varies between the US studies. Differences appear to be related to local patterns of drinking and risk and reflect licensing system differences between US states. In New Orleans it was the density of off-licensed premises that made a difference, with researchers pointing out that the data for on-licensed premises would include many serving the tourist industry rather than the local population. No such distinction could be made in the New Jersey study, where licensed premises usually have both on and off sales. In Californian studies, the density of licensed restaurants affected alcohol-related crash rates, as alcohol was twice as likely to be consumed in restaurants than in bars , but bar density was linked to higher assault rates. Research on different types of licensed premises in Perth, Western Australia, did not consider density but linked intoxication levels, drink-driving, alcohol related crashes and violence to late-closing hotels (pubs), particularly those with high volume alcohol sales.

High local crime rates are better explained by alcohol availability and outlet density than by the socio-demographic characteristics of the neighbourhood – although those characteristics may contribute to the level of community organisation and control over what happens in a neighbourhood. In the USA, whites and those with higher incomes are most likely to drink frequently and heavily. Yet in Chicago, areas with high African American population had six times as many offlicensed outlets as areas with mainly white populations. The concentration of alcohol outlets, particularly off-licences, was a major predictor of homicide levels, after controlling for other neighbourhood factors. That is, higher ratios of blacks or young males in a neighbourhood did not explain a higher crime rate. The California and Los Angeles studies also showed that alcohol availability and outlet density in communities were stronger predictors of the level of violence than race or ethnicity. Researchers go so far as to suggest that the overrepresentation of African-Americans in US violence statistics may result from neighbourhood-level risk factors rather than from personal or cultural characteristics. A review of crime in the USA attributed a decline of homicide to falling alcohol consumption, and presented evidence that tighter regulation of alcohol availability could help reduce violence.

These studies link density to harm statistics, which are most readily available for drinkingdriving and violent crime. The Chicago study, which reports community action in lower income Chicago neighbourhoods, describes other negative effects of high liquor store density:

Typical complaints include the serving of minors, littering, loitering, harassment and intimidation of pedestrians and customers, public urination, drug dealing, prostitution, assault and even murder. These specific grievances represent more general quality-of-life, public health and safety problems that feed into the economic and social deterioration of an area. For example, safety issues, like drug dealing and stealing, raise local business operating expenses and create a poor business environment.

Increased competition between many bars and bottle stores in an area may encourage cost-cutting and irresponsible management. This study showed that customer visits to liquor stores or bars often did not involve other retail shopping or consumer activity. High numbers of alcohol outlets may be displacing a retail mix that would benefit other businesses.

Many councils want to develop vibrant entertainment areas that attract tourists as well as local residents. Restaurants, bars and bottle stores provide jobs and other economic benefits, and increasing numbers of licensed premises may be thought desirable for the community. Concentrating alcohol-related problems in one area – but away from residential zones – may even seem to be a good idea from a policing perspective.

This review of research shows that concentrations of alcohol outlets can in fact increase the local problems to be dealt with. Local governments may wish to give careful consideration to the location and density of bars and bottle stores and to the role that these kinds of business play in the retail mix of their city centres.

References
Gruenewald, P.J., L. Remer and R.Lipton (2002) Evaluating the alcohol environment: Community geography and alcohol problems. Alcohol Research and Health 26(1): 42-48.

Reynolds, R.I., H.D. Holder and P.J.Gruenewald (1997) Community prevention and alcohol retail access. Addiction 92: S261-S269.

Watts and Rabow cited in Alaniz, ML. (1998) Alcohol availability and targeted advertising in racial/ethnic minority communities. Alcohol Health and Research World. 22(4): 286-289.

Gruenewald, P.J., A.B. Millar and P. Roeper (1996) Access to alcohol. Alcohol Health and Research World 20(4): 244-251.

Gorman, D.M., P.W. Speer, P.J.Gruenewald and E.W. Labouvie (2001) Spatial dynamics of alcohol availability, neighborhood structure and violent crime. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62(5): 628-637.

Scribner, R., D. Cohen, S. Kaplanand S.H. Allen (1999) Alcohol availability and homicide in New Orleans: Conceptual considerations for small area analysis of the effect of alcohol outlet density. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 60(3): 310-317.

Scribner, R.A., D.P. MacKinnon andJ.H. Dwyer (1995) The risk of assaultive violence and alcohol availability in Los Angeles County. American Journal of Public Health. 85(3): 335-340; Gruenewald, Millarand Roeper (1996); Alaniz (1998). Gorman et al. (2001).

Scribner, R., D. Cohen and W. Fisher (2000) Evidence of a structural effect for alcohol outlet density: A multilevel analysis. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. 24(2): 188- 195.

Scribner, Cohen and Fisher (2000).Skog, O-J. (1985) The collectivity of drinking culture: A theory of the distribution of alcohol consumption. British Journal of Addiction 80: 83-99; Paton-Simpson, G. (2001) Socially obligatory drinking: A sociological analysis of norms governing minimum drinking levels. Contemporary Drug Problems 28: 133-177.

Wyllie (1997) Love the ads, love thebeer: Young people’s responses to televised alcohol advertising. Doctoral thesis, Department of Community Health, University of Auckland; Kipri,K. 2002. Tertiary student harzardous drinking: Epidemiology and development of a brief intervention trial. PhD theses. University of Otago.

Babor, T. et al. (eds) (2003) Alcohol: No Ordinary Commodity. Research and Public Health. Oxford University Press/World Health Organization, Geneva. August. Chapter 10; Alaniz (1998).

Gorman et al. (2001).

Parker, R. Nash and R.S. Cartmill (1998) Alcohol and homicide in the US: Or one reason why US rates of violence may be going down. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 88(4): 1369-1398.

Schribner, Cohen, Kaplan and Allen (1999).

Gruenewald, Millar and Roeper (1996) Lipton, R. and P. Gruenewald (2001) The spatial dynamics of violence and alcohol outlets. Journal of Studies in Alcohol 63: 187-195.

Chikritzhs, T. and T. Stockwell (2002) The impact of later trading hours for Australian public houses (hotels) on levels of violence. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63(5): 591-600; Stockwell, T. (1997) Liquor outlets and prevention policy: The need for light in dark corners. Addiction 92(8): 925- 930; Stockwell, T., P. Somerford and E. Lang (1992) The relationship between licence type and alcohol related problems attributed to licensed premises in Perth, Western Australia. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 53: 495-498.

Maxwell, A. and D. Immergluck (1997) Liquorlining: Liquor store concentration and community development in lower-income Cook County neighborhoods. Woodstock Institute, Chicago.

Schribner, Cohen, Kaplan and Allen (1999); Alaniz (1998).

Parker and Cartmill (1998).

Maxwell and Immergluck (1997)

Note: The work on which these articles are based was funded by the New Zealand Ministry of Health as part of a project on Planning for the Sale of Alcohol. A research and policy review and an issues paper from this project are available on http://www.ndp.govt.nz under Alcohol.

http://www.ias.org.uk/publications/alert/04issue2/alert0402_p19.html
by off topic and irrelevant
The issue here is not alcohol or where its sold. The issue is the use of force to cram religious practices down the throats of the unwilling. What these wannabe mutaeen did is *no* different than a bunch of anti-abortionists trashing a clinic. That they happen to be Black makes no difference whatsoever. That some people think it does makes them racists.
by no heroes save ourselves
I think what many of us are trying to say (and proving, by the way) is that this is a larger issue than just what happened with the store. Most of the people in this discussion are not saying that the attacks on the stores were right. Listen, OK? Your privilege is showing...
by Mohammed
No one is forcing you to buy or drink liquor. The liquor stores are there because there is a demand for them in the 'hood. If no one bought liquor, the store wouldn't be there. Please...if you don't agree with the store owner being in the 'hood, don't frequent it. The store owner has a right to try to make a living. It ain't easy when they constantly being robbed and harrassed and worse yet, assaulted and vandalized. Maybe I don't believe there should be a muslim bakery in my 'hood, perhaps I should burn it down? Who's the real racist here?
by not so fast
"The liquor stores are there because there is a demand for them"

the liquor stores are there because there is nothing else. there is certainly strong pent-up "demand" for things other than liquor stores, but you don't see those popping up all over the place. "demand" does not explain what is going on.

it's not simply about market forces. as poor as people might be there, they still have money to spend on food on so forth, but there is no where close to spend it. only liquor stores. west oakland does not need 1 liquor store for every 300 residents. it needs real resources. it does not need the feds giving loans to prop up more liquor stores.

http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/11/1786569.php

it needs city and other government officials, business interests (beyond liquor store associations), and residents to work together, adamantly, to find ways to get healthier resources into the community

it needs this badly, or more events like recent store trashings and arson will continue to flare up from time to time out of the frustration of neighborhood folkers tired of doing without
by stop scapegoating
that's a separate issue, and not germane to the issue at hand. The lack of, oh say, organic vegetable buyers coops, or even of Safeways, is not caused by presence of liquor stores. There is no causal relationship whatsoever.



>west oakland does not need 1 liquor store for every 300 residents.

West Oakland doesn't "need" any liquor stores. Need is not the deciding factor. Want is the deciding factor. Obviously enough people in West Oakland want those stores to be there. Otherwise, the stores wouldn't be able to afford to stay in business. These stores are supported, literally, by their customers. our attack on these stores is really an attack on their customers. You are saying that people in West Oakland should not be able to purchase alcohol with the same degree of convenience as do people in, oh say, the Diamond district, or Piedmont. At best, that's classist, if not outright racist.

In any event, the number of liquor stores had no bearing whatsoever on the deplorable aggression by these racist, religious fanatics. They didn't do it because they want fewer liquor stores in West Oakland. They don't want *any* alcohol sold to Black people. That's what they said. That's how they acted. We'd be fools not to believe them.



>get healthier resources into the community

This can be done without effecting the number of liquor sales or their convenience.


>t needs this badly, or more events like recent store trashings and arson will continue to flare up from time to time out of the frustration of neighborhood folkers tired of doing without


It is both irrational and immoral to scapegoat convenience stores for failure of Safeway, or for that matter Rainbow Grocery, to open a store in West Oakland. It's not their fault.
by yep
"West Oakland doesn't "need" any liquor stores. Need is not the deciding factor. Want is the deciding factor. Obviously enough people in West Oakland want those stores to be there. Otherwise, the stores wouldn't be able to afford to stay in business."

You could say the same thing about Walmart but its not true. Many people frequent businesses that they dont like since its easier than going elsewhere. Part of the issue with liquor stores (and with Walmarts) is that the shopers at the stores often come into the communities and wouldnt want the businesses in their own communities. With an addictive product like alcohol or tobacco its also not truthful to equate buyinsg a aproduct with any level of moral agreement with the selling of the product.
by anon
I'm not sure why indybay censored my comments here but I'll repeat them.

This article was bad. It didn't address a main issue of who the culprits were. The author framed this as pissed off black muslims striking out about social conditions in the hood. Sorry. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.


This is about a racist cult with a history of violence, who apparently seem to to be in meltdown. That's why two of its members have been recently killed and another shot. The trashing of the liquor is part of this downward cycle that's been happening since the head of their cult died.


by aaron
<<West Oakland doesn't "need" any liquor stores. Need is not the deciding factor. Want is the deciding factor.>>

According to this logic, West Oaklanders also "want" run-down housing.

Conversely, this logic also reveals that they have no interest in a vital commercial district with a wide range of enterprises serving their cultural, aesthetic, and culinary desires.

One needn't coddle the wannabe taliban to see that Nessie's logic is failing him.

This is an invalid analogy. Liquor is not housing, nor do they equate in any way except for both being commodities. People who live in run down housing do so, not because it is run down, but because it is affordable. Given a choice between equally affordable housing situation, one run down, the other fixed up, very, very few people would choose to live in the one that was run down.

Liquor is quite a different thing. The people who by liquor at the most convenient location could just as easily, if they didn't want that store in their neighborhood, run it out of business by either not drinking at all, or by taking a bus to a different neighborhood to shop. They don't. They shop at the most convenient place.

I say this as a guy who himself lives in run down housing, precisely because it is so cheap, and shops at the place on the corner precisely because it is so convenient. So, yeah, I do know what I'm talking about. When I was in West Oakland, I felt exactly the same way.

Neither phenomenon are limited to West Oakland or to any single ethnic demographic. Were a pack of wannabe mutaween to burn down the store where I shop, I would be inconvenienced, and I would resent it. So would everyone who shops there. Like most shoppers, we prefer not to be inconvenienced. I refuse to believe that the shoppers of West Oakland would prefer to be inconvenienced, just because they are predominantly Black and Latino. If you believe that they would be, or worse, that they should be, your analysis is racist, and as such, shameful.

Has it not occurred to you how much your plan to inconvenience these West Oakland shoppers would also be resented? Don't you care about the customers at all? Do you actually *want* them to be inconvenienced? If so why? If not, why are you pushing for fewer convenience stores? Do you honestly believe that there needs to be fewer convenience stores for there to be more stores of other kinds? How do you rationalize such a belief? Where is the evidence?

by fadsf
"I say this as a guy who himself lives in run down housing, precisely because it is so cheap, and shops at the place on the corner precisely because it is so convenient."

There is a store that looks like a liquor store near where I live but they just sell soda, cigarettes and some groceries. They seem to be doing ok. Not every corner store is a liquor store and I doubt anyone who has a problem with liquor stores has the same problem with just having a lot of corner stores around as long as only a small number sell liquor. Liquor stores may not increase the overall level of violence in a community (despite the studies) but they definitely draw people who need alcohol to them and unlike many other illegal drugs alcohol makes many people violent. Sport stadiums make people violent too and anyone living next to such a stadium knows the danger of hyped up fans after games. Opposition to the construction of a stadium near ones home is similar to opposition to liquor store concentration. Businesses have effects that extend beyond Libertarian ideas of personal freedom; you have a right to smoke tobacco but I have a right to use basic public services without being exposed to tobacco if I have severe reactions to tobacco smoke. You have a right to drink and people even have a right to get smashed and vomit on the street but if a bar proposed opening next to my house, opposition to it would mean that I would oppose alcohol drinking in general or even the right of people to get smashed and vomit somewhere else. Liquor stores have public effects that extend beyond a right for people to buy liquor; stores themselves know this and thats why there are many fights between the peopel drinking alchol in front of liquor stores and those working in the stores (much more violence against liquor stores exists by drunk customers than will ever exist by weird cults that want media attention)
by kennedys

Give Me Convenience or Give Me Death

-dead kennedys


it's the american way. poverty ain't shit if you got a store, any old store, nearby
That's a straw man. Nobody here claimed any such thing, neither is it relevant. Convenience stores do not cause poverty. Au contrair, they alleviate at least one of its symptoms, lack of a car to drive to a store out of the neighborhood.

>peopel drinking alchol in front of liquor stores

How dare they hang out on the public sidewalk!?! Why aren't they hanging out at the country club, or the private pilot's lounge at the airport, on even on their yachts?

Oh wait. Now I remember.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$110.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network