Who mentioned Penn specifically?  I said, " If it were not Penn, it could be
some other institution.  It matters not to
>> me."

 "Politically, though, do you see any way for us to achieve it -- as long
> as poor Philadelphians are politically isolated from the funding sources
> controlled by non-poor Pennsylvanians?"

My answer is no. As long as the racial politics of this country are as they
are, no. Especially since people continue to sugar-coat it and refuse to
face that is exactly what has caused this situation, no.


On 4/7/08 5:33 PM, "Anthony West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Wilma,
> 
> I perfectly agree with you that there should never be such a prerequisite.
> 
> Politically, though, do you see any way for us to achieve it -- as long
> as poor Philadelphians are politically isolated from the funding sources
> controlled by non-poor Pennsylvanians? Which gives them a better shot at
> success: isolation or connection?
> 
> If whites began this process by fleeing the city and disinvesting in it
> ... then isn't the logical remedy for them to return to the city and
> reinvest in it? White flight and gentrification can't both be bad at the
> same time.
> 
> All forms of urban change involve displacement and its pains shouldn't
> be taken lightly. But I don't see any way for urban education to become
> normal again, unless a full range of social classes (race isn't really
> the key) returns to the city. Neighborhoods do change over time. White
> flight was driven by change. Do you think ethnic and class change can
> grind to a halt now? Would it even be good for change to be halted? To
> me, the question is how changes should be managed.
> 
> I don't see any particular point in bashing Penn when it is merely one
> of many non-public partners now pitching into the School District in
> many different ways. Penn didn't think this movement up, after all. If
> Penn is bad, then they all are equally bad, no? Or if Penn is specially
> bad, then someone should study the other intervenors and explain what
> they are doing better that Penn is doing worse.
> 
> -- Tony West
> 
> 
>> What I was saying is there should NEVER be a prerequisite that poor children
>> should have to wait to garner any benefits from "middle-class" Whites
>> re-discovering Public Schools, that have received infusion from
>> corporations, universities or other institutions and re-entering the School
>> System.
>> 
>> The system CAN and SHOULD be funded equally without the non-poor being
>> bundled with the poor.  It just has not happened and most people think the
>> poor do not deserve this because they did not pay for it.
>> 
>> The poor children in question in this situation ARE black from which whites
>> fled and began the disinvestment in public education and other City
>> Services.
>> 
>> Can YOU accept or even admit the disinvestment went with that 'middle-class'
>> population's flight, and their attempts to return and re-claim the schools
>> and area will result in those poor kids being pushed out?
>> 
>> When one tries to present this and veil it with 'silk hands', I feel is one
>> is trying to do is defend Penn at all costs and deny gentrification has and
>> still displaces people of color, not to mention broad brush people who have
>> concerns as anti-Penn/gentrification.
>> 
>> If it were not Penn, it could be some other institution.  It matters not to
>> me.
>> 
>> Can you accept that and admit that?
>> 
>>   
> 
> 
> ----
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
> list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
> <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.


----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.

Reply via email to