In regard to the nature of public discourse on racial issues, Foner states, “What was acceptable and commonplace in 1900 would be considered unthinkable today.” Prior to reading this chapter in Ellis Island to JFK, I had a rather vague idea of the nature of such discourse, and although I knew that the immigrants of the past faced intense discrimination, I was not aware of the sheer magnitude of this intensity. Foner writes that the “inferior mongrel races” of the Italians and Jews were believed to contribute to a “falling off of good looks,” lower efficiency, less democracy, and moral depravity as they were once referred to as “moral cripples.” I was absolutely horrified by such acerbic language and way of thinking.  To find out that signs such as “No Jews or Dogs Admitted Here” were once pervasive in New York City and to find out that the “swarthy, oily” Italians received lower wages for the same work as their counterparts is just really upsetting and makes one empathize deeply with the immigrants of the past. Foner’s discussion of the “sting of prejudice” endured by the predominantly south and eastern European immigrants of the past initially prompted me to take a sigh of relief and feel grateful for the apparently changed environment of the New York City of today. However, after examining Foner’s subsequent discussion of race and the “newest New Yorkers,” the rather saccharine image in mind of NYC as a place where everyone can be him or herself with perfect impunity just didn’t seem so accurate anymore.

First of all, it is unequivocally clear that African Americans in New York City still have to grapple with the painful sting of prejudice. Foner writes, “Today, most white Americans would like to convey an image of themselves as unprejudiced and compassionate. Yet racial stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination against blacks have had a tenacious hold and persist in a variety of forms.” Even those who aren’t native-born blacks, such as West Indians and “dark Hispanics,” end up being thrown into the category of “black.” These individuals then try their hardest to prove to the rest of society that they aren’t “black” as this is a term that a wide range of people, not only native whites, have come to associate with crime, a lack of education and culture, and an antagonistic attitude. The story about the West Indian family whose newly bought house in Canarsie went up in flames even before they could move in in 1992 is the one that bothered me the most. While the frequency of such dramatic incidences is not particularly high anymore, other forms of prejudice and discrimination against the various groups of people collectively referred to as “black” are still very much alive and include things like racial slurs, insults, and offensive gestures and actions. “No matter how affluent or influential blacks may be, in public places they cannot escape the stigma of being black.” This causes one to stop for a while to think about how accepting and appreciative of “diversity” New Yorkers really are. On the surface, all seems perfect, but upon further examination, a rather troubling reality emerges.