There is a neighborhood in a large Northern California city I am very familiar with. It was developed in the 1920’s and was working class white; mostly Catholic immigrants, until the 1940’s when Black shipyard workers began moving in. By 1960 it was mostly Black but it was mostly owner occupants and considered a good neighborhood. Between 1960 and 2000, a few Black families from the neighborhood began to buy up houses and the majority of the residents were Black renters with Black landlords. The housing stock may have declined a bit but it was still considered a good neighborhood. Beginning in 2000, white and Asian families began buying houses and moving in. This usually involved Black landlords evicting Black tenants who were generally unable to find rental housing they could afford in that neighborhood and had to move to less desirable neighborhoods. The white and Asians moving in were hardly rich. They were generally politically liberal and saw the diversity in the neighborhood as desirable. They were the marginal middle class who were buying in the only neighborhood they could afford. There is still a significant Black presence but they tend to be the more affluent homeowners. It is assumed that it will continue to become more white and Asian and more affluent. While one can view this as gentrification/colonialism it can also be seen as organic urban progression. Neighborhoods change in responses to multiple changes in the greater society. As can be expected, there will be winners and losers. The big losers now appear to be the Black renters who were forced out but the big winners were Black property owners.