Remember How Great California Was? (Kennedy, Bradley: income, cost of living, plantation)

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by silverkris

For me, as an Asian American, in terms of race relations, it's a hell of a lot better now.

Yes, and it was pretty bad for Mexican Americans in California as well. I didn't even know about school segregation of Mexicans until I was an adult.

"As a child, Sylvia Mendez thought her parents' court case was all about a playground.

That's because in 1944, the school bus would drop her off at the white school, which had "manicured lawns" and a "beautiful playground," but she wasn't allowed there. Instead, she would have to keep walking down the street to the Mexican school — two wooden shacks on a dirt lot next to a cow pasture."

Mendez vs. segregation: 70 years later, famed case 'isn't just about Mexicans. It's about everybody coming together' - Weekend

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Black and Hispanic people didn't institute redlining, permit segregation and support restrictive covenants on housing, did they, so who was responsible if not whites? I was born in 1946 and grew up in Richmond. Racial segregation was common in Richmond even before the war, but it got much worse after...here's an example

I was in no way inferring that they did. Clearly, many still have a bone to pick. You being one of them. I guess that's understandable.

By the way, in case you haven't noticed, 1952 was 65 years ago! It was not the sum total of California, even back then.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

I was in no way inferring that they did. Clearly, many still have a bone to pick. You being one of them. I guess that's understandable.

By the way, in case you haven't noticed, 1952 was 65 years ago! It was not the sum total of California, even back then.

I noticed the date, but I'm not sure why you feel that's an issue. I was discussing post war Richmond and that article offered a good insight into how non whites were treated at that time. And to be fair, segregation didn't impact me much because I'm white, but the segregationist policies laid the foundation for ghettos that in some cases still exist, and they harmed an awful lot of people whose only crime was not being born with white skin. And I'm not sure how different it was in other parts of California, maybe someone here can weigh in on that, when I was a kid my dad used to tell me that California was as racist as Mississippi the difference being that Mississippi admitted it and California didn't.

[silverkris]

Originally Posted by nmnita

CA was better in the 50s than now. Yes, racism was a problem, is still a problem on both sides and yes, it was tough on many people of color, but the thread is about the olden days in Ca and generally it was a much better time. There are exceptions to every rule, we all know that. You are right about he air quality. Thank God it has improved so much.

Of course everything would be better if people made an effort to fix things. Yet, I don't believe the OP meant this as "how bad things are now" it was just a return to what once was. It is refreshing to remember back when. It is fun for many who were not born then or didn't live in CA then.

I am glad your daughter doesn't get called names as well, let's hope it remains that way for her and others.

CA was NOT better in the 50s if you weren't white, which was my point. The Ozzie and Harriet, Father Knows Best, Leave It to Beaver era was a myth.

For people of my community - there are just more opportunities open today than it was back 50-60 years ago in terms of employment, professional advancement, civic involvement and cultural acceptance.

[silverkris]

Originally Posted by nmnita

and in reality though you may be right, isn't this a problem best handled by states? I am a strong believer in states rights. Who should know better how to handle local problems than the state itself. What might work for say, AR may not work for Alaska. When I see people blaming him for the homelessness of people in Los Angeles it makes me want to laugh. As mentioned he was governor 40 years ago. Has any governor since made an effort to correct what so many think was invented by him? Homelessness has been a problem for ever and with the high cost of living and drugs it is getting worse.

Well, you can get better coverage through the ACA if you live in CA compared to TX because Perry and Abbott hate Obamacare. As a result, TX has a much higher % of uninsured residents than the states that have chosen to expand Medicare.

So in many cases, states' rights don't always work out for the residents. Someone else has already covered the issues of civil rights tied into states rights, which is a pretty shameful historical record.

[silverkris]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

In a sense, race wasn't an issue because most populations were rather homogenous. Like attracted like and people self-segregated by race.

I was significantly raised in Orange County, Newport Beach to be exact. While I was raised in the military and we came and went, much of our time was spent in our CA home. Newport Beach was as white as rice. Most Asians lived in conclaves in Anaheim (Japanese strawberry farmers) and Westminster (Asian and Pacific Islander) and most Mexicans in Santa Ana. During the one semester I spent in Newport Harbor High I don't recall ever seeing a student of color and it didn't phase me one whit at the time (1960) because that's just the way it had always been. It was the same in Orange Coast College in Costa Mesa (1964-66).

Granted, much of that "division" was due to racist legislation and practices in the 40s and 50s, many having begun in the mid-1800's. All that being said, I don't think the bulk of us born, raised and living in CA from the 40s, on, need be vilified for it now. That's as racist as what you're intimating about us.

A Mexican friend of mine back in the 70s once debunked the "melting pot" image America portrayed saying the reality was that it was more like a salad bowl. I think she was right.

To come full circle and all that aside, California was, for many, a great place to live in the past and for some/many it continues to be.

Race WASN'T an issue because people were homogenous and self-segregated? Gimme a break!

Well, a lot of that was not necessarily by choice.

Real estate covenants often specifically stated exclusion of certain ethnic groups from many neighborhoods.

San Leandro was consciously hostile to any people of color moving into their city - the city government, real estate agents, and businesses all conspired to keep African Americans out for many many years, even after the Mumford Act was passed. You should read Brian Copeland's personal chronicle about being one of the first African American families to move to San Leandro, Not A Genuine Black Man.

Refuting the rose-colored nostalgia of the past is not vilifying anyone in particular. It's just giving a balance based on other experiences that may vary with yours.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by silverkris

CA was NOT better in the 50s if you weren't white, which was my point. The Ozzie and Harriet, Father Knows Best, Leave It to Beaver era was a myth.

For people of my community - there are just more opportunities open today than it was back 50-60 years ago in terms of employment, professional advancement, civic involvement and cultural acceptance.

The 50's/60's was the era of Chinese laundries and Japanese gardeners.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by nmnita

CA was better in the 50s than now. Yes, racism was a problem, is still a problem on both sides and yes,

How does racism happen on 'both sides'? I think you mean anyone can be prejudiced, but that's not the same as racism. Prejudice just infers having a preconceived idea about something or someone i.e. "I don't trust redheads"

But racism describes a system of discrimination or the imposition of disadvantage based on race and as such it can only be exercised by the dominant race. In a society like Japan the dominant asian population has practiced racism in certain ways including their immigration policy and in their treatment of "hafus" (mixed race Japanese). But a white person living in Japan would not have any opportunity to practice racism, they would have no power to do so. In the US, it's obvious that the dominant race and the one that controls most of the Government and industry is white so it's comical to think that any one other than a white person could practice racism.

[victorhernandez]

It's much better nowadays. Better air quality, more things to do, more jobs, not as segregated...
It's simply more expensive now and some people still resent that they got priced out to Idaho

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

How does racism happen on 'both sides'? I think you mean anyone can be prejudiced, but that's not the same as racism. Prejudice just infers having a preconceived idea about something or someone i.e. "I don't trust redheads"

But racism describes a system of discrimination or the imposition of disadvantage based on race and as such it can only be exercised by the dominant race. In a society like Japan the dominant asian population has practiced racism in certain ways including their immigration policy and in their treatment of "hafus" (mixed race Japanese). But a white person living in Japan would not have any opportunity to practice racism, they would have no power to do so. In the US, it's obvious that the dominant race and the one that controls most of the Government and industry is white so it's comical to think that any one other than a white person could practice racism.

Racism can be practiced by anyone. It is a rejection of the rights, dignity, intelligence, etc of someone of another race. The idea that racism is only by the majority is presented and has been since the 60's as a way to avoid admitting other races are racist as well.