Things in poor neighborhoods are done differently than in middle- and upper- class neighborhoods. People that grow up in poor neighborhoods develop behaviors, customs, and beliefs that are different from other neighborhoods because they are part of surviving in the struggle. When they move on up, some of those behaviors, customs, and beliefs are no longer necessary and can even be harmful (e.g. strong reactions to perceived attacks). Others may actually provide an advantage (e.g. living through power outages). Regardless, these changes can cause a sense of estrangement from their childhood and original culture, leading to some resistance. Given all that:
What did you change and what did you keep?
It’s short for council estate. We also have the same connotation if you own an estate, a large parcel of land with a big house or whatever.
I think your “council estate” is our “section 08,” govt provided shitty housing projects?
Funnily enough the council-built housing in the UK is generally of a very high structural and architectural quality. I am currently sitting in a 100+ years old council property that is still eminently habitable. Only four houses of the 125 that were built here have been demolished. All others are currently inhabited. It all began at the end of WW1:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_Walters_Report
Well shit, nevermind!
I know. It’s weird just how good the UK’s social housing was. There was a great belief that the housing estates you built had a direct effect on the people who lived there. Compare that with some of the US’s efforts - that demolished place in St. Louis, O’block in Chicago etc. Different worlds. Eventually the UK government switched to inner city high rises (“streets in the sky”) and social results were… mixed, to say the least. Throw a lot of poor, disenfranchised, non native, non related people in a closed building and, shock horror, negative results were had. Colour me surprised.