4 ms·

I just realized I don't even know what "disproportionately impacts" actually means. Disproportionate to what? Does it simply mean bigger impact or bigger-than-p

I just realized I don't even know what "disproportionately impacts" actually means. Disproportionate to what? Does it simply mean bigger impact or bigger-than-predicted-by-an-oracle impact? Because I'm quite sure that every bad thing on this planet impacts poor people more.

sReinwald 1y ago
"Disproportionately impacts" means that the burden of pollution isn't randomly distributed - it's systematically concentrated in specific communities. In this case: predominantly Black neighborhoods in South Memphis already have asthma rates and cancer risks 4x the national average (per the article), and xAI added unpermitted turbines to that existing burden. You're absolutely right that most hazards affect poor communities more. That's not a coincidence - it's the predictable result of power dynamics in zoning and enforcement decisions. Your comment reads a bit like "water is wet, why mention it?" But most people living in clean-air zip codes have no idea their comfort of living depends on someone else's respiratory disease. They assume industrial siting is purely based on logistics or economics, not on which communities lack the political capital to fight back. The whole point is that zoning decisions, permit enforcement, and industrial siting aren't random acts of nature. Rich neighborhoods get golf courses and poor neighborhoods get data centers with unpermitted turbines. That's not gravity - it's policy. Documenting these patterns isn't stating the obvious, it's the first step toward accountability. Because "that's just how things are" is exactly what those benefiting from the status quo want everyone to believe.
- dotancohen 1y ago
  > it's the predictable result of power dynamics in zoning and enforcement decisions. How is that a race issue and not a political issue? Are you suggesting that certain races are less successful in manipulating power dynamics?
  - sReinwald 1y ago
    This is such transparently bad faith rhetoric it's almost impressive. You're trying to paint me as racist for pointing out systemic racial inequities. But sure, I'll bite. You're pretending "race" and "politics" are separate categories, as if centuries of explicitly racial policy - slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, voter suppression - somehow exists outside of politics. Black Memphis residents were systematically excluded from voting until the 1960s. Redlining prevented Black families from building wealth through homeownership. When your grandparents couldn't vote, buy homes in certain areas, or sit on zoning boards, that directly determines whether your neighborhood gets parks or pollution today. Sometimes it helps to put concepts into a different context to understand them better, so maybe this analogy helps: When I point out that Palestinians in the West Bank can't effectively oppose settlement expansion because they're systematically excluded from political power, I'm not claiming Palestinians are racially inferior because they're "incapable of manipulating power dynamics" in their favor. I'm pointing out how systematic disenfranchisement creates predictable and unjust outcomes. And even if those barriers vanished tomorrow, Palestinians would still live with the accumulated consequences for generations. Same principle in Memphis. Noting that unpermitted pollution affects 90% Black neighborhoods isn't claiming racial inferiority - it's documenting the predictable result of decades of deliberate exclusion from political power. If you genuinely can't grasp how racially motivated systematic political disenfranchisement creates racial disparities, start with basic history.
    - dotancohen 1y ago
      I'm so glad that you touched an analogy whose framework I am familiar with. Palestinians in the West Bank can not oppose Israeli settlement expansion for the same reasons that white New Yorkers can not oppose Indian reservations from building houses. The Palestinians have their lands on which they build their settlements (areas A and B) and the Israelis build their settlements in area C - as agreed in the mutual agreements signed in the 1990s. Note that some Palestinians also live in Israeli settlements, while no Israelis are permitted to live in the Palestinian settlements - Israelis can not even drive into area A under threat of both law and lynch. Note also that Israel's population is 20% Palestinian, and those citizens enjoy all benefits of law, court, and society as do so other Christian, Jewish, and Druze citizens of Israel.

sReinwald 1y ago

"Disproportionately impacts" means that the burden of pollution isn't randomly distributed - it's systematically concentrated in specific communities. In this case: predominantly Black neighborhoods in South Memphis already have asthma rates and cancer risks 4x the national average (per the article), and xAI added unpermitted turbines to that existing burden. You're absolutely right that most hazards affect poor communities more. That's not a coincidence - it's the predictable result of power dynamics in zoning and enforcement decisions. Your comment reads a bit like "water is wet, why mention it?" But most people living in clean-air zip codes have no idea their comfort of living depends on someone else's respiratory disease. They assume industrial siting is purely based on logistics or economics, not on which communities lack the political capital to fight back. The whole point is that zoning decisions, permit enforcement, and industrial siting aren't random acts of nature. Rich neighborhoods get golf courses and poor neighborhoods get data centers with unpermitted turbines. That's not gravity - it's policy. Documenting these patterns isn't stating the obvious, it's the first step toward accountability. Because "that's just how things are" is exactly what those benefiting from the status quo want everyone to believe.

dotancohen 1y ago
> it's the predictable result of power dynamics in zoning and enforcement decisions. How is that a race issue and not a political issue? Are you suggesting that certain races are less successful in manipulating power dynamics?
- sReinwald 1y ago
  This is such transparently bad faith rhetoric it's almost impressive. You're trying to paint me as racist for pointing out systemic racial inequities. But sure, I'll bite. You're pretending "race" and "politics" are separate categories, as if centuries of explicitly racial policy - slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, voter suppression - somehow exists outside of politics. Black Memphis residents were systematically excluded from voting until the 1960s. Redlining prevented Black families from building wealth through homeownership. When your grandparents couldn't vote, buy homes in certain areas, or sit on zoning boards, that directly determines whether your neighborhood gets parks or pollution today. Sometimes it helps to put concepts into a different context to understand them better, so maybe this analogy helps: When I point out that Palestinians in the West Bank can't effectively oppose settlement expansion because they're systematically excluded from political power, I'm not claiming Palestinians are racially inferior because they're "incapable of manipulating power dynamics" in their favor. I'm pointing out how systematic disenfranchisement creates predictable and unjust outcomes. And even if those barriers vanished tomorrow, Palestinians would still live with the accumulated consequences for generations. Same principle in Memphis. Noting that unpermitted pollution affects 90% Black neighborhoods isn't claiming racial inferiority - it's documenting the predictable result of decades of deliberate exclusion from political power. If you genuinely can't grasp how racially motivated systematic political disenfranchisement creates racial disparities, start with basic history.
  - dotancohen 1y ago
    I'm so glad that you touched an analogy whose framework I am familiar with. Palestinians in the West Bank can not oppose Israeli settlement expansion for the same reasons that white New Yorkers can not oppose Indian reservations from building houses. The Palestinians have their lands on which they build their settlements (areas A and B) and the Israelis build their settlements in area C - as agreed in the mutual agreements signed in the 1990s. Note that some Palestinians also live in Israeli settlements, while no Israelis are permitted to live in the Palestinian settlements - Israelis can not even drive into area A under threat of both law and lynch. Note also that Israel's population is 20% Palestinian, and those citizens enjoy all benefits of law, court, and society as do so other Christian, Jewish, and Druze citizens of Israel.