Hacker News Reader

Comment by leahcim | Hacker News Reader

Black Lives Matter

Amen.

For much of U.S. history, law enforcement meant implementing laws that were explicitly designed to subjugate Black people and enforce white supremacy. That’s why Black people, along with hundreds of thousands of others, are calling for city, state, and federal governments to abolish policing as we currently understand it. We must divest from excessive, brutal, and discriminatory policing and invest in a vision of community safety that works for everyone, not just an elite few.

We know the safest communities in America are places that don’t center the police. What we’re looking for already exists, and we already know it works. We need look no further than neighborhoods where the wealthy, well-connected, and well-off live, or anywhere there is easy access to living wages, healthcare, quality public education and freedom from police terror.

We can’t stand by while our city, state, and federal governments continue to fund an excessive, brutal, and discriminatory system of policing. We will no longer be told that what we deserve is not politically viable or logistically possible. We will no longer be deprived of what others have long enjoyed in this country: basic rights, safety, and freedom.

> We know the safest communities in America are places that don’t center the police.

Worth thinking about: https://www.wsj.com/articles/good-policing-saves-black-lives...

This disregards broader system dynamics. We are not simply looking to cut back on policing and stop there. The objective is to invest in people and attend to their fundamental needs in a way which produces lasting change. This goes beyond the particular short-term reactions to parameter changes in the system.

Through the lens of Donella Meadow's work in complex systems, we can we policing pulling back and homicides increasing as:

9. Constants, parameters, numbers (subsidies, taxes, standards).

8. Regulating negative feedback loops.

7. Driving positive feedback loops.

Yet, this movement seeks to operate at a greater leverage point of:

2. The goals of the system.

1. The mindset or paradigm out of which the system — its goals, power structure, rules, its culture — arises.

--- Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System

http://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to...

Information bubbles on all sides of the spectrum.

People not willing to compromise and move in small steps.

Making bogeymen out of your opponents.

And, obviously, downvoting all the dissenters into the oblivion.

I think this comment exhibits a few problems as part of the conversation on systemic racism.

"Information bubbles on all sides" is vague, but it seems to imply people trying to fight racism are either fighting for the wrong reasons or misunderstand the problem they're facing. Without more detail, it doesn't contribute anything meaningful for people to take away.

And what is there to compromise on racism? The comment doesn't say any more, so it's again hard to know what it's referring to.

Commenting on the "refusal to take small steps" or "making bogeymen" also detracts from the issue by shifting the conversation to the methods and approach the movement is taking. You may earnestly believe that the protesters and the movement could benefit from changing their approach. Unfortunately, on a wider scale, this sort of rhetoric is consistently used to delegitimize dissenting voices by refusing to cooperate or acknowledge a problem unless dissenters behave themselves. It also implies that doing things in a "respectable" manner is more important than hearing and addressing the problems people are protesting.

"Information bubbles" means that people on both sides are only willing to communicate with those who supports and shares their own opinion. People are not listening to each other, people are not giving the benefit of doubt and even heavily ostracize those who suggests there may be "some fine people" on both sides of the barricade.

A compromise on racism is easy: for most people being non-racist is enough to make this world better. We cannot and we should not mandate everyone to be actively anti-racist. Race relations is a complex topic. It's actually more complex than most people think and there are no easy answers. The same way like everyone should not be actively anti-covid: leave it to doctors and nurses and simply do your part not to make the problem worse.

The BLM issue is too vague to detract it further: the way it's put now it's "against all bad and for all good". Is it about black lives? Or about police brutality? Or about police accountability (or lack thereof)? Or about racism - in its direct sense when people are laid off purely because the color of their skin? Or about black culture which does not promote education and other "white people values"? Or about economic inequality that went through the roof?

And, by the way, when I wrote about refusing to make a compromise, I was thinking more about police unions: they've built the dam that is now broke open.

On top of this. Understanding the difference between acceptance, and being 'non-racist' vs being 'anti-racist' - which is what the movement needs more than anything. True allies are embracing the 'anti-racist' term and shutting down every symbol of racism. Look at the rebranding of Mrs. Butterworths, Aunt Jemima, Cream of Wheat, Uncle Ben.

Look at cities willing to remove Christopher Columbus statues, etc.. there's been a tectonic shift in public opinion, maybe unlike anything we've ever seen. I'm proud to see so many people of all colors marching together for the BlackLivesMatter movement, gives me hope in humanity.

I vehemently disagree. This hysterical scramble to label everything as racist regardless of merit, and suffocate any rational discussion of issues, is tearing the fabric of society apart, and only serves to dilute the message against police brutality.

The US was founded on slavery and racism. The majority of Constitutional signatories owned slaves. Slavery was written into the Constitution in the 3/5ths clause. The majority of people on our paper money owned slaves. Black people make far less money than white people, they are vastly under represented in politics, far more likely to be imprisoned, have lower life expectancy, have far lower accrued wealth, rarely see themselves represented reasonably in media, are far less likely to hold professional or C-level jobs, and are far more likely to grow up in poverty in single parent households. If it isn’t the case that “everything is racist” (i.e. our society harbors deep cultural, institutional, and systemic racism) then that’s a hell of a coincidence.

Worth a watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRCzZp1J0v0

The interviewee expands essence of the parent comment out into a coherent argument.

I can’t wait until this “intellectual dark web” stuff is consigned to the drawer where we keep other embarrassing movements like phrenology.

> only serves to dilute the message against police brutality.

As much as I agree with the sentiments of BLM, this cannot be overstated.

Media conglomerates are amplifying the BLM "white/black divide" to distract from the fact that law enforcement bullies and assaults EVERY ONE OF US if the circumstances are right.

You cant just disagree... really, no one asked. BLM demands.

And that's why no one here should follow that trend. Also p sure it will cool off within months. Everyone is already tired of it. Might come back to media attention later this year if enough blacks get killed just like with covid19.

Black Lives Matter.

Black live matter more than the next stupid tech trend to ride the Gartner hype cycle. Tech that doesn't include everyone shouldn't be built. Stop reading HN and get out into the streets and support your fellow human beings.

Black Lives Matter.

It needs to be said more. Not sorry.

No tech in history has ever included everyone. All ideologies are lies, “buy low sell high” bullshit. Build any tech that makes the world a better place, and try to make it as inclusive as possible. My intuition is that for breakthroughs to occur, we need new technologies in creating markets for activities with high positive externalities. Look at education, for example. The budget on that seems mostly wasted, because there is not a good market to direct the spending to efficient solutions. If we look at MOOCs and KhanAcademy and similar projects, it’s clear that they are more or less worse versions of a traditional class. They could be so much more. We could have great interactive, multimedia textbooks with integrated teacher support that answer questions, and integrated exercises that auto-grade and tell you how to fix your mistakes. We could have platforms that measure and certify productivity of workers, so that the current credentialism and mad-high university prices crash down. Our problems won’t be solved by religions. Religions have never worked. The only thing that can solve our problems is social innovation. We need better institutions that align incentives of decision-makers to their people, and create competition to drive progress. If you look at why first world countries are better than third world countries, you’ll see it’s because of better institutions, not religions. In fact, third world countries are much more keen on religion and virtue signaling. Religion thrives on poverty and corruption.

I hope so, but I fear it will be forgotten in the next month or so, like everything else that trends.

But then again, the BLM movement has been around since, what, 2013?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com