Your criticism isn't internally consistent. For the sake of argument, let's say that racism is quantifiable. It probably isn't, but saying people get more or less racist pretty much implied that it is, so just run with it for a second. Say that after moving to DC, everyone's racism level gradually moves towards 75. That obviously means it's about DC, not the people. But some people started at 30 and some people started at 90. So some people get less racist and some get more racist.
The statement I was responding to was, "This has far more about cultural friction than the people involved."
Your reply supports this: whether they do or don't (and to what degree) is an individual matter. I wasn't disputing that experience can change a person's attachment to racism.
It's not that a specific person does a specific things that's bad. It's that cultures have different takes on accepted behaviors. Some behavior that seems more or less ok in culture A, is going to piss people off from culture B. Do you stand on the left or right side of a hallway when talking down it?
At the same time you will find people going against type regularly. Which has a moderating effect. It's hard to think X are bums when you see hard working people from X.
I think my contrived example implies the exact opposite. If their new level is largely determined by where they live and work, why wouldn't you expect the same of the old one? Perhaps the 30 moved from New York, while the 90 moved from San Francisco.
