Why isn't anyone talking about this?: NAACP Colorado office bombed

[mr marcus]

meth gives this guy a book recommendation to educate him on the subject and yet he still asking for a short answer response.

Why don't yall understand that these issues are not that simple? 

but I'll assume you all choose to be ignorant. Waiting on yall to appear in the thread of the man who threw his child over the bridge but that doesn't fit the agenda but I digress. 

 

[Master Zik]

BRUH, like that's even remotely the same difference.



Are you ******* kidding me?



Did plantation workers rape, exploit, breed out and murder generations of plantation owners OR WAS IT THE OTHER WAY AROUND?



Have generations of plantation workers benefitted from years of that exploitation and government land grants OR WAS IT THE PLANTATION OWNERS?



Have plantation owners descendants given back those land grants? Or given back the money their forefathers generated on the backs of black slaves?



You talking some straight BS.

First off, you're taking everything completely out of context. The point is that neither sig is okay, and shouldn't be allowed, period. With that sig, he's singling out a specific race, and given his history with ignorant comments towards caucasians, it's pretty safe to say that's comparing plantation owners and descendants, as if descendants should be held accountable for their ancestors actions, or committed crimes against humanity that they should pay for. 

No he's not.

White ppl weren't the only slave owners.

 

[Methodical Management]

Meth, you're confused and are ignoring everything I'm saying, while putting words in my mouth.

That's not the way to have a discussion.

Of the two of us, I'M confused?  

Read what you've been writing in this thread about Jay Z.  It's a rambling maze of contradictions. 

 

 
Separate topic, but one I've discussed extensively over the years.  Do yourself a favor and give this a read:  Amazon product ASIN 080704153X
You're not dealing with an apples to apples comparison for a LOT of reasons, and that is a whole conversation unto itself.  

Honestly, oversimplifying this issue actually does a disservice to many Asian Americans - as it involves a lot of pan-ethnic and pan-cultural stereotyping that ignores or even spites the issues faced by those who are all just sort of lumped into the same category.  We can talk about different waves of immigration (how the very same values now posited as the cause of success were once blamed for economic struggles), different nations of origin, etc. etc.  And the very same could be done for European and African immigrant populations.  

It's an interesting field, and one I hope you'll pursue in greater depth.  I'm more than happy to recommend some additional sources via PM if you're interested.

Sure, I'd be more than willing to get the book and have a read. In the meantime, I'm interested to hear your short-version response to my questions.   I suspect you might be referring to the Chinese Exclusion Act from 1882 but most of the immigrant parents to these Asians students who end up at the specialized high schools are often first generation, who come to the United States speaking no English, and with no familial or economic foundation already present. 

Again, that's a different topic.  The tangent we're discussing with respect to the NAACP office bombing has to do with racial profiling.  In other words, there's this school of thought that racism isn't a big deal in 2015 and most contemporary racial inequality is somehow "self-inflicted," if that's where you're going with the "educational values" argument, I'd be very disappointed.  

Listen, when Irish and Italian immigrants first arrived in the United States, their values were ridiculed and blamed for their relative inability to gain traction.  In fact, "ethnic Whites", as they're sometimes called, were second class citizens.  

In fact, there's a whole chapter in Steinberg's book that compares the myth of Jewish intellectualism with the myth of Catholic anti-intellectualism.  

Before someone calls Steinberg "self-hating" for attacking the myth of Jewish intellectualism, it's important to remember that "second-wave" Jewish immigrants were subjected to quotas and denied entrance to higher education.  This, obviously, was a form of discrimination - but what's particularly instructive is to examine its timing.  In other words, "first wave" Jewish immigrants were not subjected to these quotas - and were not alleged to have any special cultural values effectively favoring education.  

So, what made the difference?  

Read the book.  I promise you it's worth it.  

 

[Master Zik]

It's pure gold that Meth has roped in this dude's Jay-Z stanhood to display his hypocrisy he tries to strut around in these other race threads like there isn't a clear contradiction, the same one that exists in most of rap with the moneymakers and their content.

Best part about it is how hard he goes at Nas for his music and allegedly not selling or making good albums or being relevant. Son backpeddaling and is ready to jump **** quick now.

 

[fontaine]

Sure, I'd be more than willing to get the book and have a read. In the meantime, I'm interested to hear your short-version response to my questions.   I suspect you might be referring to the Chinese Exclusion Act from 1882 but most of the immigrant parents to these Asians students who end up at the specialized high schools are often first generation, who come to the United States speaking no English, and with no familial or economic foundation already present. 

any proof that its mostly first gen Asians and not the cherry picked over achievers?

I brought this Asian argument up before.


And why do you ignore that African students are progressing at a higher rate than Asian students?

And for the LOVE OF GOD... How did a black establishment getting bombed by a rscist white dude...

Turn into Asians vs blacks?

 

[illuminatinyc]

 
meth gives this guy a book recommendation to educate him on the subject and yet he still asking for a short answer response.

Why don't yall understand that these issues are not that simple? 

but I'll assume you all choose to be ignorant. Waiting on yall to appear in the thread of the man who threw his child over the bridge but that doesn't fit the agenda but I digress. 

If I told you to go read a book written by a white guy to educate yourself rather than provide a direct response to a question you asked, you'd think I was crazy and tell me to ***** right?  

From the Amazon link Meth provided:

"In this classic work, sociologist Stephen Steinberg rejects the prevailing view that cultural values and ethnic traits are the primary determinants of the economic destiny of racial and ethnic groups in America. He argues that locality, class conflict, selective migration, and other historical and economic factors play a far larger role not only in producing inequalities but in maintaining them as well, thus providing an insightful explanation into why some groups are successful in their pursuit of the American dream and others are not."

I have no idea whether reading the book will answer the questions I posed to Meth which is why I asked for a short-version response.

Again, that's a different topic.  The tangent we're discussing with respect to the NAACP office bombing has to do with racial profiling.  In other words, there's this school of thought that racism isn't a big deal in 2015 and most contemporary racial inequality is somehow "self-inflicted," if that's where you're going with the "educational values" argument, I'd be very disappointed.  

Listen, when Irish and Italian immigrants first arrived in the United States, their values were ridiculed and blamed for their relative inability to gain traction.  In fact, "ethnic Whites", as they're sometimes called, were second class citizens.  

In fact, there's a whole chapter in Steinberg's book that compares the myth of Jewish intellectualism with the myth of Catholic anti-intellectualism.  

Before someone calls Steinberg "self-hating" for attacking the myth of Jewish intellectualism, it's important to remember that "second-wave" Jewish immigrants were subjected to quotas and denied entrance to higher education.  This, obviously, was a form of discrimination - but what's particularly instructive is to examine its timing.  In other words, "first wave" Jewish immigrants were not subjected to these quotas - and were not alleged to have any special cultural values effectively favoring education.  

So, what made the difference?  

Read the book.  I promise you it's worth it.  

Different topic or not, I would think that someone that's discussed the topic of education extensively like you indicated, would be able to provide a brief response to my questions, which is limited ONLY to the disparity in racial makeup in the specialized highschools in NYC.  

 

[illuminatinyc]

any proof that its mostly first gen Asians and not the cherry picked over achievers?

I brought this Asian argument up before.


And why do you ignore that African students are progressing at a higher rate than Asian students?

And for the LOVE OF GOD... How did a black establishment getting bombed by a rscist white dude...

Turn into Asians vs blacks?

My parents were the first of their families to immigrate to the United States.  Every other Asian family I met growing up had similar makeups where the children were the first to actually grow up in the United States.   I grew up poor, went to the same schools as other poor minorities.  Considering that you need to take an examination to get into the specialized highschools in NYC, I don't see where you're going with the whole cherry picking notion.  It's ironic that you guys bash me because I don't know what it's like to grow up black in America, yet you seem to know what it's like to grow up Asian in America. 

 

[mr marcus]

Dude has a fetish for black people. Weird stuff

 

[Master Zik]

At this rate, I'm expecting LionBlood to come through and ask Meth an off topic question about how come there isn't enough attention on black on black crime compared to this attempted terrorist attack

Dude once again talking about his Asian experience in NYC and pitting it against black ppl when he's already a grown man a few generations removed :x

 

[illuminatinyc]

Dude has a fetish for black people. Weird stuff

Again with the personal attacks.  What's the matter? Can't answer direct questions and engage in civil conversation?

At this rate, I'm expecting LionBlood to come through and ask Meth an off topic question about how come there isn't enough attention on black on black crime compared to this attempted terrorist attack

Dude once again talking about his Asian experience in NYC and pitting it against black ppl when he's already a grown man a few generations removed

That's funny considering that many posters here such as Mr Marcus will turn essentially every thread about the injustice towards blacks.  Go look at the French terrorism thread for example.

 

[Methodical Management]

And why do you ignore that African students are progressing at a higher rate than Asian students?

And for the LOVE OF GOD... How did a black establishment getting bombed by a rscist white dude...

Turn into Asians vs blacks?

That's just it:  it shouldn't be adversarial.  

I often bring up Dr. King's final Sunday sermon, "the Drum Major Instinct", when discussing these issues, because he perfectly explains to his White prison guards how they are put in position to support their own oppressors simply because they have received a small degree of status.  Du Bois referred to this as the "public and psychological wage."  

You can see the same today, and it's true of too many recent African immigrants as well.  Some people will accept a subordinate position so long as they're given a stake in that system.  In other words, they're willing to occupy a lower place on the ladder so long as they're at least one rung up from the bottom. 

It's interesting to examine the way poor White people are treated and stereotyped, for example.  Many of the rural poor, for example, are widely stereotyped and ridiculed - and they're done so in a way that attempts to "purify" Whiteness.  In other words, they're labeled "White trash", as though they're somehow separate from and less than the White standard.  At the same time, ironically enough, they're stereotyped as vicious racists. 

Why?  Well, if you're just as poor as someone else - but you believe you're still better than they because you are White, or because you are male, or because you are straight, or because you were born in this country, or because you are Christian, then you may use this privileged status to feel superior - just as Dr. King's prison guards or Nelson Mandela's prison guards did.  In truth, they were all poor, and they were all suffering in different ways.  

We'll be better off when we as a society realize that we are ALL worse off for racism, that we are ALL worse off for sexism, for heterosexism, and for this quasi-caste system that so many have bought into for so many different reasons - and all to the same end.  

Different topic or not, I would think that someone that's discussed the topic of education extensively like you indicated, would be able to provide a brief response to my questions, which is limited ONLY to the disparity in racial makeup in the specialized highschools in NYC.  

Honestly, I think in this instance I think elaboration would have a diversionary effect and it's for this reason that I have suggested several times to either find a separate venue or pursue it independently.  

Doing so here is inflammatory precisely because the rhetorical effect would be "see, they bring it on themselves because they don't work hard!"  And, frankly, that's just not true.  

Again, I could challenge you to summarize your field of expertise on the back of a matchbook - as though nothing could be simpler for a true scholar or practitioner - but that's not a reasonable or productive request.  You're asking a loaded question, because inherent in the question is a false equivalence that must first be disentangled.  If you think these two population groups are identical save for your own key variable - "cultural values re: education," then you are grossly oversimplifying the issue.  It's not an "apples to apples" comparison for many reasons, and "culture" is not one of them.  

I've given you a FANTASTIC resource that addresses your concerns in a broader historical context.  

It cannot be reasonably argued that Irish, Italian, Jewish, or German immigrants just suddenly "developed" a strong work ethic or belief in education.  All of those groups struggled at first.  Nobody, to my knowledge, has seriously suggested some sort of "sudden onset" in educational values to account for the difference in social outcomes among these groups during different periods of American history.  There's sort of an historical amnesia that takes place with these "cultural values" arguments, and the best way to treat that, obviously, is to flesh out the history.  

To the extent that ANY of us values education, we should actually do that work rather than seek some sort of shortcut or oversimplification. 

I have no idea whether reading the book will answer the questions I posed to Meth which is why I asked for a short-version response.

I do, and that's why I suggested it.  I even told you which chapter is especially relevant. 

There's insincere Internet gamesmanship, and then there's legitimate intellectual curiosity.  I get the sense that you are legitimately interested in education policy, and, if that is the case, I think you owe it to yourself to read the text in full.  

 

[mr marcus]

Every post you bring up these nyc schools and go with your asian vs black narrative. It's lame and it doesn't compare at all. Instead of worrying about us so much why don't you go help the people from your native country?

It is a fetish cause I have yet seen you speak on any other group but african americans. your other three buddies choose to talk down on Muslims too but I haven't seen you doing that so I'll give you a pass on that.

3 outta the 4 prejudice trolls are minorities. I find that hilarious

 

[Master Zik]

At this rate, I'm expecting LionBlood to come through and ask Meth an off topic question about how come there isn't enough attention on black on black crime compared to this attempted terrorist attack


Dude once again talking about his Asian experience in NYC and pitting it against black ppl when he's already a grown man a few generations removed :x

That's funny considering that many posters here such as Mr Marcus will turn essentially every thread about the injustice towards blacks.  Go look at the French terrorism thread for example.

At least you're admitting it.

Seems a lot of ppl have agendas, some perceived to be real, the others not so much.

 

[mr marcus]

Dude has a fetish for black people. Weird stuff

Again with the personal attacks.  What's the matter? Can't answer direct questions and engage in civil conversation?

At this rate, I'm expecting LionBlood to come through and ask Meth an off topic question about how come there isn't enough attention on black on black crime compared to this attempted terrorist attack


Dude once again talking about his Asian experience in NYC and pitting it against black ppl when he's already a grown man a few generations removed :x

That's funny considering that many posters here such as Mr Marcus will turn essentially every thread about the injustice towards blacks.  Go look at the French terrorism thread for example.

Nah I defended Muslims from your buddies ignorant post.

They then chose to derail and I replied accordingly

 

[EddieDoyers]

Every post you bring up these nyc schools and go with your asian vs black narrative. It's lame and it doesn't compare at all. Instead of worrying about us so much why don't you go help the people from your native country?

It is a fetish cause I have yet seen you speak on any other group but african americans. your other three buddies choose to talk down on Muslims too but I haven't seen you doing that so I'll give you a pass on that.

3 outta the 4 prejudice trolls are minorities. I find that hilarious

I bet he didn't know Asian Americans supported the Black Panthers
*sips on tea

 

[illuminatinyc]

Honestly, I think in this instance I think elaboration would have a diversionary effect and it's for this reason that I have suggested several times to either find a separate venue or pursue it independently.  

Doing so here is inflammatory precisely because the rhetorical effect would be "see, they bring it on themselves because they don't work hard!"  And, frankly, that's just not true.  

Again, I could challenge you to summarize your field of expertise on the back of a matchbook - as though nothing could be simpler for a true scholar or practitioner - but that's not a reasonable or productive request.  You're asking a loaded question, because inherent in the question is a false equivalence that must first be disentangled.  If you think these two population groups are identical save for your own key variable - "cultural values re: education," then you are grossly oversimplifying the issue.  It's not an "apples to apples" comparison for many reasons, and "culture" is not one of them.  

I've given you a FANTASTIC resource that addresses your concerns in a broader historical context.  

It cannot be reasonably argued that Irish, Italian, Jewish, or German immigrants just suddenly "developed" a strong work ethic or belief in education.  All of those groups struggled at first.  Nobody, to my knowledge, has seriously suggested some sort of "sudden onset" in educational values to account for the difference in social outcomes among these groups during different periods of American history.  There's sort of an historical amnesia that takes place with these "cultural values" arguments, and the best way to treat that, obviously, is to flesh out the history.  

To the extent that ANY of us values education, we should actually do that work rather than seek some sort of shortcut or oversimplification. 

I do, and that's why I suggested it.  I even told you which chapter is especially relevant. 

There's insincere Internet gamesmanship, and then there's legitimate intellectual curiosity.  I get the sense that you are legitimately interested in education policy, and, if that is the case, I think you owe it to yourself to read the text in full.  

First off, nowhere did I make any conclusory statements about black people such as "them bringing it upon themselves because they don't work hard". Secondly, I thought my question as to the racial disparity in NYC specialized highschools was pretty straightforward.  You claim that there's a false equivalence between poor Asians and poor Blacks, who live in the same neighborhood and go to the same schools.  Which is why I asked for YOUR personal opinion as to the disparity in educational "success" if you will.  

While I can't seem to find a readily available copy of the book online to read, I found the following New York Times article written by a sociology professor at Harvard about the book.

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/04/12/books/america-the-various.html

From the article:

More than a third of the book is devoted to a critique of assorted ethnic myths: the Horatio Alger theory of Jewish success, the cultural explanation of Jewish intellectualism and Catholic antiintellectualism, the cultural basis of black poverty and the ethnic explanation of the willingness of the Irish, and the refusal of Jews and Italians, to work as domestics. Some of these issues might seem to be trivial, others dated, but the recency of Mr. Steinberg's citations suggests that many persons still find them troublesome. Rejecting the traditional view that variations in occupational choices and educational performance can be explained by more or less ''superior'' attitudes, values and traditions, Mr. Steinberg proffers instead the premigratory economic experiences of the migrants and the timing of their arrival. The Jews, for example, forged ahead of other immigrants because they came from the urban sectors of Europe and had skills that were highly appropriate to the industrial needs of America at the time of their arrival.

In a lucid synthesis of the literature on the black experience, Mr. Steinberg shows how Northern capitalists, Southern planters and the immigrant working class had mutually reinforcing interests in the containment of blacks as a peon class in the post-emancipation terror of the rural South. Modern rivalry between blacks and the white working class goes back to the earliest contacts between both groups; ethnicity was not the cause but the idiom for the expression ofnaked economic competition. ''The fact of class difference,'' he claims, ''is far more important than the fact of ethnic difference, and ...ethnic conflict is often only a surface manifestation of a deeper conflict of an essentially social class character.''

Yet Mr. Steinberg frequently overstates this argument. Economic factors no doubt explain a good part of Jewish success, but they cannot explain all of it. The author's own argument would suggest that groups with superior economic opportunities should have performed proportionately better in education than Jews. They have not. Something in Jewish life encourages unusual educational performance, and if one rejects genetic explanations it must be partly cultural. For blacks as well, class factors were and still are critical, but culture is also important. In the black underclass there is a massive institutional breakdown, especially in the family. It flies in the face of the facts and, ironically, reinforces headin-the-sand chauvinism to deny this tragic state of affairs, and it is recklessly glib to condemn those who express concern and alarm at the consequences of this social havoc as ''blamers of the victim.'' What Mr. Steinberg, in his extreme materialism, fails to understand is that structural and cultural explanations are not mutually exclusive. Nor does a ''class analysis'' require that culture always be viewed as causally secondary - only that it is ultimately so. Even Engels in his dotage realized this.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

While I still intend to read the book, it is merely one person's social theory which shouldn't be accepted as fact, nor should it be used as a general application to all races or ethnicities such as black, jewish, irish, etc., particularly since things today aren't exactly the same as they were in 2001, when the book was written. I understand there's been a long history of systemic oppression of blacks, from the work force, to education, and even basic civil and social equality.  I also understand that while race relations may have improved somewhat over the years, racism still does exist today, as does the residual effects of past oppression.  That being said, what are your thoughts on how to change that?  

 

[jab step]

^I said this before in that other thread where you brought this same topic up. I went to one of those high schools (you said you did as well) and the majority of the Asian students were middle class kids who came from the same middle schools. A lot came from the Flushing, Bayside, and basically subsections of middle class Queens' middle schools. A lot of students also came from good middle schools in middle-upper class environments in Manhattan. 

I know you say you grew up poor and I know there were kids who were lower class who attended those schools. However, from what I could tell many of the students came from stable backgrounds. Parents who were committed to their children's education, stable income, roof over their heads etc etc. 

There were black students in my high school, but not as many as the Asian students. The black students that were in my high school seemed to all have a common denominator in their background. Stable household, parents committed to their education etc. Just as the Asian kids had these same characteristics in their lives. 

The reason for the lesser representation of black students in these schools comes down to a few things in my mind. 1) Where they received their previous education (elementary, middle school). Comparatively the lower class students aren't getting the same education as the middle class individuals because of the environment/neighborhood they live in. 2) The stability in their life. Could be lack of parental structure etc. I think you can see how this leads to a cycle, right? 

Certain people can break from this cycle. I knew a kid from the South Bronx, lower class killing it in school. Same with a kid from Brownsville. But understand breaking free from that is EXTREMELY hard. 

Few years later after graduating from one of those high school, during my college years I tutored at this community center and a lot of the students that came in were black students. Some were high schoolers, some were trying to get their GED. They all had a drive to do well. The fact that they came all the way to one center to succeed showed their drive. But there was a lack of foundation in certain aspects of their education that you could see held them back from understanding certain things. It's due to their circumstances (not having a stable home, not having the right education etc). So I really never want to hear the subtle, black people are lazy, they bring it upon themselves thing. 

And the topic of the high school thing, I do think other considerations should be taken into account to try getting these underprivledged students into these high schools so they can finally receive an awesome education. The problem is it might be a band aid on a bigger wound, meaning they should fix up elementary schools, middle schools etc and try making these kids prepared for the rigors of these specific high schools rather than forcing them into the HS without the proper foundation. 

 

[mr marcus]

Let me find out dude was exaggerating this poor asian thing about these schools [emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji]


Repped your insightful post

 

[mister friendly]

Yeah the rigor and higher order thinking is lacking at lower economic schools

 

[jab step]

Let me find out dude was exaggerating this poor asian thing about these schools [emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji]


Repped your insightful post

Don't get me wrong, there were lower socioeconomic class students. Plenty of the kids got free lunch (which is based on parental salary). I don't want to diminish that. However, from what I could tell (our high school was pretty tight knit) the students came from backgrounds of stability even though the money may have not been excessive. Stability as in parents who were there, who heavily cared about education, etc. Of course we can't know everyone's personal life, so I'm speaking in generalizations. Even though kids got free lunch, there were a lot of middle to upper class individuals. A lot of kids came from the Upper West Side and nice spots in Manhattan. A lot of kids (asian kids) came from nice suburban spots of Queens, etc. 

Now people will say, well why don't black people have this stability. And I touched upon that very slightly by showing how cyclic of a problem this is. There's much more as Meth has shown, and there's much more a black person could say about this. I'm not black, so I can't speak on it fully because I'm not the one going through the experiences. 

 

[mr marcus]

Got ya but thanks for your unbiased honest assessment. I'm not familiar with these schools since I'm not from there.

 

[Nouss]

Since this became an inflammatory and down right offensive pissing contest, why don't you compare those first/second generation asian students to their african counterparts?

Geez, I cant even believe it came to this. :x

 

[fontaine]

My parents were the first of their families to immigrate to the United States.  Every other Asian family I met growing up had similar makeups where the children were the first to actually grow up in the United States.   I grew up poor, went to the same schools as other poor minorities.  Considering that you need to take an examination to get into the specialized highschools in NYC, I don't see where you're going with the whole cherry picking notion.  It's ironic that you guys bash me because I don't know what it's like to grow up black in America, yet you seem to know what it's like to grow up Asian in America. 

soooo...

It's purely anecdotal?

And I didn't attack you famb. I just asked.

 

[fontaine]

Boys lying just to prove points now?

 

[illuminatinyc]

 
^I said this before in that other thread where you brought this same topic up. I went to one of those high schools (you said you did as well) and the majority of the Asian students were middle class kids who came from the same middle schools. A lot came from the Flushing, Bayside, and basically subsections of middle class Queens' middle schools. A lot of students also came from good middle schools in middle-upper class environments in Manhattan. 

I know you say you grew up poor and I know there were kids who were lower class who attended those schools. However, from what I could tell many of the students came from stable backgrounds. Parents who were committed to their children's education, stable income, roof over their heads etc etc. 

I actually grew up in Flushing and the kids I went to school with were FAR from middle class.  Most families like mine had parents working multiple jobs just to try and make ends meet.  That didn't stop my family from getting evicted eventually, which is what compelled me to become a lawyer, but that's a different story.

You must have hung out with the better off kids in high school then because while Mr Marcus would like to believe I'm exaggerating, consider the following:

"Last spring, seven black students were offered seats in Stuyvesant’s 800-strong freshman class. That’s seven kids, not 7 percent. Latino admission rates were similar.  Only 3 percent of Stuyvesant kids are black or Latino, but nearly half the student body receives free or reduced-price lunch."  

(**Mr. Marcus - free and reduced price lunches are offered in NYC to poor students**)

http://nypost.com/2014/12/14/diversity-drive-for-top-ny-high-schools-is-really-anti-diversity/

If only 3% of the students are black or latino, doesn't that suggest to you that the remaining 47% or almost HALF the students are poor Asians?  That's quite a contrast from your contention that most Asians who went to the specialized highschools were middle class.

I know you say you grew up poor and I know there were kids who were lower class who attended those schools. However, from what I could tell many of the students came from stable backgrounds. Parents who were committed to their children's education, stable income, roof over their heads etc etc. 

There were black students in my high school, but not as many as the Asian students. The black students that were in my high school seemed to all have a common denominator in their background. Stable household, parents committed to their education etc. Just as the Asian kids had these same characteristics in their lives. 

The reason for the lesser representation of black students in these schools comes down to a few things in my mind. 1) Where they received their previous education (elementary, middle school). Comparatively the lower class students aren't getting the same education as the middle class individuals because of the environment/neighborhood they live in. 2) The stability in their life. Could be lack of parental structure etc. I think you can see how this leads to a cycle, right? 

A stable household does NOT have to be synonymous with a economically well off household.   You can still have a stable household. one that emphasizes education, while still being poor.   If you're attributing the lack of representation of black students in these schools to prior education, lower quality education and parental structure (i.e. stability), how do you propose to correct that?

Boys lying just to prove points now?

Please...at least I'm trying to have a civil discussion here unlike some people.