|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006 Location: China
|
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
But races do mix!! A lot actually. Genes are always on the go!
Fose was addressing how a 17 year old saw upper class blacks. As an older person and a millionaire I am sure he has a different opinion now.
Is it some how wrong that ethnic groups want to live in groups and are more comfortable with each other? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TECO

Joined: 20 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sector7G wrote: |
| TECO wrote: |
Birds of a feather, always flock together. People who are from the same socio-economic background, educational background and race will always remain in those same groups.
Who wrote, "The races weren't meant to mix"? I'm paraphrasing here, but don't we see a lot of that in Canada and America? North America has fairly large enclaves of cultural pockets forming - Chinese, Korean, Black, Latin American - that are separate from the host culture. They have created their own cities. |
There's no denying that, but the question is why? Is it by choice, or because they have little choice, for one reason or another?
Or is it just a case of being hard to break out of one's "comfort zone", for lack of a better term? |
A combination of all of the above? But what happens to a country that develops these isolated cultural enclaves? Many of the people never assimilate; they don't learn the language or adopt the same values, etc. Canadian Historian Jack Granatstein has written quite a bit on this topic and I found his articles interesting. Granatstein refers to some of the problems multiculturalism has brought, such as "....ethnic ghettos, lack of common Canadian values and the importation of foreign disputes." He asks: "Why didn't we make Canadians of the newcomers?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Duke is a tough school academically but so is UCLA, Cal, Michigan, Indiana, Georgetown, N. Carolina, Texas A&M and a few other academically challengng schools that seem to have no problem recruiting inner city kids.
Rose was wrong in his statement about the blacks there being uncle Toms. Flat out. However, Duke does have the reputation of not recruiting black inner city players, many of whom are from single parent homes and in the lower socio-economic classes. I would never begrudge anyone, black or white, accepting a scholorship to Duke. Its an excellent school with an excellent basketball program.
I'm no fan of Duke. I hate them as well. Many people of all ethnicities and races and socioeconomic classes hate Duke, but I think Rose is right that the school is hated for much more personal reasons in the black community because of the type of players they seem to recruit. Coach K has recruited inner-city white players (Bobby Hurley from Jersey City) but by and large has stayed with black players outside the inner city from 'stable' two parent homes and generally from middle class backgrounds.
To be fair, John Thompson recruited pretty much all black players when he was at Georgetown and rumor has it even turned down recruiting Chris Mullins who rumor has it was a big fan of the school. Thompson could be accused of doing the same at Georgetown but the difference his defenders would say was that he was using Georgetown to give underpriveleged inner city players, many of whom had checkered pasts (Allen Iverson) a chance. He used it to help these kids and he made sure they got an education with admirable graduation rate. Remarkable given the standard of education most of the players came with and the difficulty of Georgetown where its pretty tough to 'hide' academically.
The inference from Duke and admittedly it may not be fair at all regards the coachability of inner city black kids. Proven wrong at many other schools but Duke's reputation and recruiting practices seems to support the stereotype. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006 Location: China
|
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think to be fair to Duke. Inner city kids would have a tough time at Duke. This is far more the fault of these cities than it is Duke's. Yes a guy from a stable two parent home is going to have it easier at Duke.
Duke is not an affirmative action program.
I honestly think that what rose was trying to point out is that among young inner city blacks successful blacks are often seen as not being "black " enough. Remember that Obama was seen by some as not being "black" enough. I think Rose bringing this up was a good thing to spark debate.
I was a big fan of Thompson and his willingness to give those guys chances they would have never had without his determination. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2011 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tough time academically? I'd agree but so would the vast majority of HS seniors. Duke is a tough place academically for most and I would bet a fair number of DavesESL forumites may not cut the grade there as well. That said, there are other schools that are tough academically that recruit inner city kids. Cal, Georgetown, Virginia and Duke's rival NC. As I've note, Georgetown graduated a high degree of their basketball players.
If we're talking socially, pretty much ANY school would be an adjustment for an inncer city kid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|