3 ms·

It is like a nicotine addiction. I am sure from the outside looking in you think it is easy for someone to quit smoking, but they have built their lifestyle aro

It is like a nicotine addiction. I am sure from the outside looking in you think it is easy for someone to quit smoking, but they have built their lifestyle around it and it's convenience and comfort it provides to them, it is very hard for them to let go. It is the same with a ghetto, many people living in them want those places to stay the same. They have built up a life around the society norms and don't want it to change. It is hard to fix something when it desires to stay broken. Meanwhile, a war just needs to end. The structure can always be rebuilt. The culture may not be the same as it was when it started, but it won't be in disarray forever, and the people in a warzone usually want the war to end.

carti 7y ago
Blaming the people in the ghetto for the problems of the ghetto is a common refrain of those who seek to deny the material conditions and motivations that created the ghetto in the first place. This train of thought leads to the justification of various cutbacks and reductions in social aid programs (exacerbating the situation), as the presumed beneficiaries of such programs are deemed lazy, morally unworthy, and lacking the desire to change their ways. Changing this perception is key to making progress on this and related issues of class and resource distribution. There's heaps of research out on the positive difference a slight increase in resources can make in terms of human development.
- michannne 7y ago
  What? I literally grew up in the ghetto, I can say from firsthand experience there is no lack of opportunity preventing anyone from moving up out of the ghetto. The only thing holding me back were others who wanted to stay in the ghetto. I never said anything about laziness or unworthiness, don't lump my experience or comments with some other group you have imagined. And lastly, I will not change my perception on anything. I have first-hand experience of having my life threatened because I was on the wrong side of the street at the wrong time, or I declined to do something for someone who couldn't take no for an answer, or I simply walked a certain way. These experiences won't be diluted so that you can co-opt them to influence others on your ideology.
  - carti 7y ago
    I wasn't assuming you did say anything about those things; I was merely saying that others commonly do so, and do in fact frequently lump those together with "they have opportunities, but don't want to take them" in a way that harms the communities like the one you grew up in, while being quite ignorant of the policy, available resources, and conditions in general. I am honestly glad you made it out, by the way. I'm not so presumptuous to think that a comment here would "change your perception" or "co-opt" anyone to serve my "ideology." Not sure why you'd think your personal experience is representative of the average experience -- decades of social science research suggest the contrary.
    - jcranberry 7y ago
      What does the social science research say in precise terms? Are you sure it doesn't just say that external factors created or create pressures against taking extant opportunities, rather than those opportunities don't exist in the first place?
shadowprofile77 7y ago
The last two points you made really struck me simply because I really think they nail these problems on the head quite succinctly. Wars are terrible, destructive and complicated, but they tend to end pretty quickly (few exceptions aside) because the people involved in their absolute majority don't want the disruption war brings to an otherwise comfortable (if imperfect) normal state of existence. The project "warzones" of large urban areas are themselves the comfortable state of existence for millions of their inhabitants. And thus no matter their their nastiness and miseries, just as you mentioned, attempts at positive external change are in a way analogous to war actually, because like war, they're the external and mostly imposed disruptions despite their good intentions. No amount of money and resources being thrown at urban blight will easily change things without bearing this in mind. This is not to say that resources for improving ghetto life should be cut off, but how they're attempted needs to seriously be reconsidered.

carti 7y ago

Blaming the people in the ghetto for the problems of the ghetto is a common refrain of those who seek to deny the material conditions and motivations that created the ghetto in the first place. This train of thought leads to the justification of various cutbacks and reductions in social aid programs (exacerbating the situation), as the presumed beneficiaries of such programs are deemed lazy, morally unworthy, and lacking the desire to change their ways. Changing this perception is key to making progress on this and related issues of class and resource distribution. There's heaps of research out on the positive difference a slight increase in resources can make in terms of human development.

michannne 7y ago
What? I literally grew up in the ghetto, I can say from firsthand experience there is no lack of opportunity preventing anyone from moving up out of the ghetto. The only thing holding me back were others who wanted to stay in the ghetto. I never said anything about laziness or unworthiness, don't lump my experience or comments with some other group you have imagined. And lastly, I will not change my perception on anything. I have first-hand experience of having my life threatened because I was on the wrong side of the street at the wrong time, or I declined to do something for someone who couldn't take no for an answer, or I simply walked a certain way. These experiences won't be diluted so that you can co-opt them to influence others on your ideology.
- carti 7y ago
  I wasn't assuming you did say anything about those things; I was merely saying that others commonly do so, and do in fact frequently lump those together with "they have opportunities, but don't want to take them" in a way that harms the communities like the one you grew up in, while being quite ignorant of the policy, available resources, and conditions in general. I am honestly glad you made it out, by the way. I'm not so presumptuous to think that a comment here would "change your perception" or "co-opt" anyone to serve my "ideology." Not sure why you'd think your personal experience is representative of the average experience -- decades of social science research suggest the contrary.
  - jcranberry 7y ago
    What does the social science research say in precise terms? Are you sure it doesn't just say that external factors created or create pressures against taking extant opportunities, rather than those opportunities don't exist in the first place?

shadowprofile77 7y ago

The last two points you made really struck me simply because I really think they nail these problems on the head quite succinctly. Wars are terrible, destructive and complicated, but they tend to end pretty quickly (few exceptions aside) because the people involved in their absolute majority don't want the disruption war brings to an otherwise comfortable (if imperfect) normal state of existence. The project "warzones" of large urban areas are themselves the comfortable state of existence for millions of their inhabitants. And thus no matter their their nastiness and miseries, just as you mentioned, attempts at positive external change are in a way analogous to war actually, because like war, they're the external and mostly imposed disruptions despite their good intentions. No amount of money and resources being thrown at urban blight will easily change things without bearing this in mind. This is not to say that resources for improving ghetto life should be cut off, but how they're attempted needs to seriously be reconsidered.