While reading the selections from Massey and Denton’s American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the American Underclass, the contrast between the outcomes of the black neighborhoods and the neighborhoods of European immigrants stood out to me. Massey and Denton write that “the manner in which blacks were residentially incorporated into American cities differed fundamentally from the path of spatial assimilation of other ethnic groups” (10). How were these neighborhoods different? What caused this to happen? Why did the two types of neighborhoods have such vastly different outcomes? Would it have been possible for the black ghettos to have the same outcome as the immigrant neighborhoods?

I believe that one explanation for the cause of the integration differences can be linked to the invasion-competition-succession model. Both the blacks and the European immigrants invaded northern cities. The invasion of the two groups differed slightly for the rate of European immigration fluctuated inversely with the Great Migration of blacks from the south to the north. However, I don’t see how this would have greatly influence the integration of the different groups. I think that the major source of inequality between the immigrants and the blacks stems from competition. When settling in the cities, European immigrants “reaffirmed their own ‘whiteness’ by oppressing a people that was even lower in the racial hierarchy” (Massey and Denton 29). This is a stark contrast to the black population who were forced to compete against both the European immigrants and the whites who were already residing in the cities. The European immigrants were able to solidify themselves above the blacks in the hierarchy and this helped integrate the group into the white section of the hierarchy. This resulted in the succession part of the model with blacks segregated from the Europeans and whites.

Massey and Denton claim a ghetto “refers only to the racial make-up of a neighborhood” (19) while our class defines ghettos as “settlements marked by voluntary or involuntary segregation.” I think the class definition, with its specification of voluntary and involuntary segregation, suggests a different approach to what a ghetto actually is. Massey and Denton’s classification fails to distinguish between internal and external segregation. I believe when contrasting enclaves to ghettos, the difference between internal and external segregation, or voluntary and involuntary segregation, is key. Calling both European immigrant neighborhoods, such as Little Italy, and the black neighborhoods described by DuBois in The Philadelphia Negro does not seem right to me. The European neighborhoods tended to be voluntary segregation. I got the sense that the immigrants wanted to live together to share their culture and Massey and Denton described the enclaves as part of the “process of immigrant assimilation” (33). This feels very different than what is referred to as the black ghetto. Blacks were often forced to relocate to Black Belts due to zoning regulations, race riots, violence, and many other negative things. The relocation was not voluntary. Is this a fair comparison to make? Should there be a greater distinction between enclaves and ghettos?

When looking at the differences between European immigrant neighborhoods, black neighborhoods, and white neighborhoods, I notice that there are still parts of this around today. How do we solve this problem? Is it possible to solve it? I think a lot of this stems back to the larger issues of inequality and equity. Much of American society is built off of these issues and there still seems to be no clear solution to the constant inequality so often seen in the U.S. What role does (or should) the Federal government play in all this? We’ve looked at the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Housing Acts of 1949 and 1954 as evidence that work has been made to try and solve these issues. While I don’t think that solving these inequalities will happen overnight, I think that steps are being taken and believe there will be change.