3 ms·

> The thing about statistics on race, it's really hard to rule out all the other factors and make conclusions. It's not some sort of allegation that black moms

> The thing about statistics on race, it's really hard to rule out all the other factors and make conclusions. It's not some sort of allegation that black moms are systematically being killed. When I see people argue that systemic racism is a driver, they're not arguing that there's a conspiracy directly targeting people of color. Rather, they're arguing that racism drives things that create conditions where people of color disproportionately suffer harm. A classic example of this from several decades ago is redlining, which prevented people of color from moving into safer neighborhoods, and undermined the neighborhoods they were able to buy homes in. Settlement patterns have long-term generational effects, so while it would be incorrect to say that predominately black neighborhoods have higher levels of asthma, violence, poverty etc as a deliberate plot, it's absolutely true to say that those are consequences of direct racism from several decades ago. I don't think this should be a particularly controversial point. Where I think it gets more controversial is two points -- 1. What redress, if any, should people downstream from historical racism have? They're still suffering the effects, after all. 2. What patterns and decisions are happening _now_ that will similarly have downstream generational effects? I'm not going to even attempt to suggest answers to those, just hoping to illuminate the framing here.

incomingpain 2y ago
>A classic example of this from several decades ago is redlining, which prevented people of color from moving into safer neighborhoods, and undermined the neighborhoods they were able to buy homes in. Settlement patterns have long-term generational effects, so while it would be incorrect to say that predominately black neighborhoods have higher levels of asthma, violence, poverty etc as a deliberate plot, it's absolutely true to say that those are consequences of direct racism from several decades ago. No, the latter argument isn't logical followed, and not a conclusion one can make. The 30 year old dad with asthma problems for his kids is not that way because of some housing racism that happened decades before this dad was born. >I don't think this should be a particularly controversial point. Where I think it gets more controversial is two points -- 1. What redress, if any, should people downstream from historical racism have? If something didn't directly affect you, then your claim to redress is far significantly less. That's even acknowledging generational trauma. >They're still suffering the effects, after all. 2. What patterns and decisions are happening _now_ that will similarly have downstream generational effects? redress from who though? Less than 2% of people in north america ever owned slaves at the peak. Nobody alive today ever owned slaves, nor were slaves. It's also not completely clear if there's any harm being done today and if there is, then how much harm and most especially by who. These aren't just assumed to be the government's fault and so they should pay.

incomingpain 2y ago

>A classic example of this from several decades ago is redlining, which prevented people of color from moving into safer neighborhoods, and undermined the neighborhoods they were able to buy homes in. Settlement patterns have long-term generational effects, so while it would be incorrect to say that predominately black neighborhoods have higher levels of asthma, violence, poverty etc as a deliberate plot, it's absolutely true to say that those are consequences of direct racism from several decades ago. No, the latter argument isn't logical followed, and not a conclusion one can make. The 30 year old dad with asthma problems for his kids is not that way because of some housing racism that happened decades before this dad was born. >I don't think this should be a particularly controversial point. Where I think it gets more controversial is two points -- 1. What redress, if any, should people downstream from historical racism have? If something didn't directly affect you, then your claim to redress is far significantly less. That's even acknowledging generational trauma. >They're still suffering the effects, after all. 2. What patterns and decisions are happening _now_ that will similarly have downstream generational effects? redress from who though? Less than 2% of people in north america ever owned slaves at the peak. Nobody alive today ever owned slaves, nor were slaves. It's also not completely clear if there's any harm being done today and if there is, then how much harm and most especially by who. These aren't just assumed to be the government's fault and so they should pay.