I have an issue with this style of reasoning. To me it seems just incredibly lazy to point at some arbitrary statistical fact and infer a "system designed to re

I have an issue with this style of reasoning. To me it seems just incredibly lazy to point at some arbitrary statistical fact and infer a "system designed to reinforce racial segregation". A system might be in place, but that sole number doesn't prove that. It just says something about the incredibly complex world we live in, but nothing about cause and effects or how world is supposed to be. Same goes for "there are multiple books" thing. That statement by itself doesn't reinforce your point, both because you aren't specific enough with that generic "books", and because there is a multitude of books written about vaccines causing autism. Book authors can be wrong. I'd also like to point out that the very article you've posted contradicts your point. As Rebecca Sibilia, founder and CEO of EdBuild, explains, a school district's resources often come down to how wealthy an area is and how much residents pay in taxes. "We have built a school funding system that is reliant on geography, and therefore the school funding system has inherited all of the historical ills of where we have forced and incentivized people to live," she says. So basically school funding partially depends on how affluent the area is. Due to various, mostly historical, reasons poor people are disproportionately black and so schools that have lower funding tend to have more black pupils. There is nothing requiring a grand racist conspiracy in this explanation, limited social mobility and income disparity are sufficient to explain this phenomenon. And you can never, ever be able to understand root causes just from that number you've cited. You'd need those causes to fix stuff, unless the only "solution" that you're trying to justify is "white people bad and rich, black people poor and good, take money from white people, give it to black people". That one isn't really helpful.