Quote:
Originally Posted by 06pilot
People are a prodcut of their environment. Not a procduct of their color.
|
People's environments can not be separated from the larger context.
I have seen what being raised in the black ghetto (since ghetto isn't synonymous with black) can do for many whites. And poor whites have historically excelled faster than poor and even middle class blacks. Listening to rap music and wearing baggy clothes is just a matter of culture. Opportunities trump culture, though.
The biggest measure of how a person's environment matches with the larger societal context is to compare people of different races from the same environment. Research has indicated that poor whites receive more opportunities than poor blacks and middle class whites receive more opportunities than middle class blacks. This is on a societal level, which also accounts for whatever exceptions people may see fit to type about. Except it isn't called "race." People who discriminate will use any excuse BUT race--such as "he dresses better" or "speaks better." How is that really possible for millions of people who supposedly have the same "environment?"
You can also talk to millions of middle and upper class blacks and find that they are treated a certain way by their white neighbors (who accept them as long as there aren't too many black families in the neighborhood). Realtors intentionally keep a well documented "racial tipping point" and white neighbors make an effort to keep track of their black neighbors' activites. Their excuse is that they want to protect the neighborhood from "riff raff" and from reducing the property value. As if black is synonymous with deterioration regardless of the social class of the people involved. So is that about race or "environment?"