Black vs. The Board of Education

The whiter the school...the better the education.  I work within a city school system which is predominately black, and it is obvious to me that the environments constructed for these black students are disproportionately disadvantaged to that of the surrounding predominately white school districts.  I thought segregation ended in the 60's.  Apparently, our society has figured out a way to protect the privileges of the majority, with little regard for the under-resourced and underexposed students of the inner cities.  The cities aren't faced with challenges because blacks chose to move to these areas.  Blacks have always been there.  Over the last 50 years whites and now middle class blacks have moved away from the cities for better living, working and educational conditions.  In doing so, they've taken the resources, businesses and tax base from the cities.  Cities are left with lower income families, and less tax revenues which fund the schools.  Structures or policies that prohibit or disable minority groups from equally accessing opportunities, resources and services is racist.  Racism as it's been historically known has evolved.  It's masked by exclusionary programs which claim to be economically based in their creation and implementation.  The economics of our society is one of the most racially polarizing constructs that highlights "the haves and have nots."  I blame the Fair Housing Act and Welfare programs of the 1950s.  The Fair Housing Act provided whites with a means to escape integrated cities, and Welfare created a culture of "second class citizenry" amongst a concentrated population of people in the inner cities, which typically happens to be black.  If we're all supposed to have access to equal education, why are urban schools performing far worse, graduating fewer students and contributing to the "school to prison pipeline" far more than their suburban counterparts?  Is this arrangement intentional or a byproduct of simple economics?  How can educational racism be removed from our society, to insure that all children have equal opportunities to learn and inevitably compete as adults, regardless of where they live?

Urbanizer

The Devolution of Hip Hop

Jay Z said he went from "fighting over building blocks to fighting over blocks with buildings."  In his music he refers to his maturity and other's lack thereof.  Comments like being "young enough to know which car to buy, but old enough to not put rims on it" speak to the overwhelming saturation of immature lyrics and overly embelished lifestyles of today's version of Hip Hop.  I'd like to say Hip Hop has matured since the 70's and became a man in the mid 90s with icons like BIG and Pac.  With maturity comes substance and purpose.  Hip Hop has always had that.  Becoming a man also requires the incorporation of substance and purpose.  It's like they've always been linked.  A man paints a picture of his struggle, his existence, his hood, his ideals, his joy and pain.  That's Hip Hop.  It's how inner city youth have expressed themselves, represented their experience and spoke their truth.  Hip Hop was a way to escape for those writing and those listening.  It's been said that the life span for an inner city male is approximately 25 years.  If that's the case, then Hip Hop and young men are again linked.  It was the late 90s when I began to witness what I call the "devolution of Hip Hop" and that of our young people.  Hip Hop continues to sacrifice substance and purpose for a quick buck.  Our youth continue to sacrifice their futures for immediate gratification and irresponsible living.  I don't think it's much of a debate as to whether or not our youth are negatively affected by Hip Hop.  My question is if Hip Hop is dead, what do we call this new medium and what can either do to provide our youth with a respectable way to escape their realities?