Based in part, as I recall, on Irish family history.
The "America is simply not an egalitarian society" simply doesn't explain how blacks uplifted themselves for nearly a century after the Civil War ... and then it ground to a halt or I think worse, such that Moynihan could write about this in 1965.
Note also that "The gap between rich and poor" is seldom a concern for "the poor" if they're well off enough. [ Insert usual statistics on calorie consumption, TV and car ownership, etc. ].
You claim the poor are worse off on an absolute scale; that's not true to my knowledge and I'd like to see some evidence of that (before the Great Recession, of course; in the rest of argument you are saying the gap is the problem.
As for your initial paragraph, yep, cui bono, that's an elephant in the room, although I don't think it's quite as dire or racist as you posit. More an issue of class and politicians and those connected to them making a buck (and for the more ideological, trashing the hated suburbs)), but the article was long enough as it was.
Note also the mention in passing of "urban renewal", a "great social experiment" somewhat like this one (or so I gather, I've not studied it).
Based in part, as I recall, on Irish family history.
The "America is simply not an egalitarian society" simply doesn't explain how blacks uplifted themselves for nearly a century after the Civil War ... and then it ground to a halt or I think worse, such that Moynihan could write about this in 1965.
Note also that "The gap between rich and poor" is seldom a concern for "the poor" if they're well off enough. [ Insert usual statistics on calorie consumption, TV and car ownership, etc. ].
You claim the poor are worse off on an absolute scale; that's not true to my knowledge and I'd like to see some evidence of that (before the Great Recession, of course; in the rest of argument you are saying the gap is the problem.
As for your initial paragraph, yep, cui bono, that's an elephant in the room, although I don't think it's quite as dire or racist as you posit. More an issue of class and politicians and those connected to them making a buck (and for the more ideological, trashing the hated suburbs)), but the article was long enough as it was.
Note also the mention in passing of "urban renewal", a "great social experiment" somewhat like this one (or so I gather, I've not studied it).