4 ms·
> The phrase "took over" has negative connotations. If you want it to, sure, it absolutely can! > It's pretty clearly saying that it is bad that people who sp
by mieseratte 7y ago
> The phrase "took over" has negative connotations.
If you want it to, sure, it absolutely can!
> It's pretty clearly saying that it is bad that people who speak foreign came into the area, not just neutrally "describing [a] demographic shift of the mall "
No, it really isn't clearly saying what you're ascribing. That's your reading into it what you want to see. No one cries racism when an article about affluent whites taking over a neighborhood. This is just a different shift.
- chapium 7y agoI grew up near Nashville and this certainly is a negative connotation.
- mieseratte 7y agoSure, you can read into it a negative connotation but that isn't enough to ascribe racist intent.
- chapium 7y agoDead wrong. Its not the same as overt racism, but it is indeed racist to make sweeping statements about the decline of "x" after such and such group showed up. In this case its more like xenophobia since being a foreigner or outsider to the community is not a race.
- helen___keller 7y ago>No one cries racism when an article about affluent whites taking over a neighborhood. People absolutely do, even when words as strong as "took over" aren't used. Whenever race is mentioned wrt gentrification, it's one of the top comments| For example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19819695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19819695 > With the passage of the Civil Rights Act, we as a society decided that racial segregation was bad, and trying to demonize people people buying homes in a certain area due to their race was wrong ... > Not okay to tell some one he ought not live somewhere because of his race. This is true regardless of what that race may be.
- mieseratte 7y agoWell I was clearly wrong to claim "no one," but that has no bearing on whether the user-submitted article referenced was written with actual racial animus as asserted, or was just ill-phrased observation.
- bregma 7y ago> No one cries racism when an article about affluent whites taking over a neighborhood. I read plenty about the racism involved with decades of "urban renewal" and "redevelopment" and "gentrification". You might not hear a lot among you white straight male friends at the golf club about things like Rochester's Inner Loop getting demolished to restore the neighbourhood after it was taken over decades ago, but that's not because people weren't (and still aren't) crying racism. It's because you're insulated from what goes on outside the gates of your community.
- mrrrgn 7y agoI feel like you misread the thread here and jumped hastily into taking an accusatory tone. The argument in the thread was essentially: Person One: It's bad to say that one group "took over" an area from another instead of using a term like "demographics shifted." Person Two: Why is it bad? If someone said that White people "took over" an area it seems unlikely that a negative connotation would be assumed. You responded with an offhand comment about gentrification being involved with racism, then painted a picture of the person you were responding to as someone who lives in a gated community playing golf with out of touch people. The thread was already becoming a terrible exercise in whataboutism. This added element of describing commenters as if they were bad guys from 1980's summer camp films made it even worse.
- mieseratte 7y ago> You might not hear a lot among you white straight male friends at the golf club about things like Rochester's Inner Loop I'll make sure to discuss the issue thoroughly with my friends at the next Punk in Drag show.