I found the information in the Kasinitz et al article to quite interesting because it talks about the challenges of becoming incorporated into American society along with its effects on the next generation. In the reading, it talks about segmented assimilation, which suggests that second-generation young people living with those of America’s minority groups proceed to a path of downward social mobility. I find this viewpoint to be overly generalizing and absurd since it doesn’t encompass the various factors that can contribute to the downward spiral that might be observed. As a result, the article states that those that created that assumption failed to look at the full range of experiences of the minority groups and failed to acknowledge that “native whites” also take part in behavior that is not acceptable in American society. I suppose it is this idea of segmented assimilation that brings forth the various stereotypes that still plague the immigrant generation today.
By reading the second article, I learned that there are actually names to the various groupings of people in certain neighborhoods. Although now the term “ghetto” doesn’t mean the same thing as it did in the past, everyone knows the word and knows what it refers to. However, I doubt many people know that a place like South Richmond Hill and South Ozone Park are called enclaves for those of West Indian origin. In addition to this, I doubt anyone looks at a wealthy neighborhood and calls it a citadel. However, I don’t think that these groupings occur because people solely want to promote the welfare of their group or enhance its position. For example, many immigrants tend to seek out neighborhoods with people that come from the same place because of comfort and familiarity. Along with this, the wealthy tend to stick together because it would be difficult to fit into a neighborhood of middle or lower classed people. Therefore, people’s level of comfort plays a big role in the formation of citadels and enclaves.
