[WS:] In a high mix environment - yes. But geographical proximity of segregated communities is hardly a high mixed environment. It is "unmixed" environment in which the "unmixed" parts have a greater chance to collide.
Wojtek
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 4:38 PM, // ravi <ravi at platosbeard.org> wrote:
> On Jan 27, 2012, at 1:43 PM, Wojtek S wrote:
>> [WS:] I think a lot of it has more to do with actual behavior than
>> prejudice - in which case the more exposure the less tolerance obtains
>> (contrary to your hypothesis.) It has a lot to do with social norms
>> of behavior accepted in one subculture that other subcultures find
>> objectionable. I've seen just as much of this type of intolerance
>> among blacks against whites as in whites against blacks. More
>> educated whites are better at hiding it, but it is there.
>>
>> In other words this form of racism or rather intolerance - which is
>> think is different from the "traditional' US racism - is based on
>> reaction to actual differences in social behavior rather than
>> prejudice. And of course it is not limited to the US - I've seen that
>> quite a bit in other countries. People more easily associate with
>> those of the same cultural/educational background as themselves in,
>> say, South Africa, Kenya, Mexico, or India than with people of
>> different cultural/economic background who live next doors.
>>
>
> I get that, and yes people might be selective about their associations, but I thought the thesis (of the studies I hint at) was that in high-mix environments, it is difficult to retain that wall, and when interaction is thus enforced, it has the [surprising?] effect of softening the attitude of the intolerant.
>
> Thank you for the response,
>
> —ravi
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-- Wojtek http://wsokol.blogspot.com/