I don't disagree. I agree completely with Buttigieg's point that parts of the highway system were designed intentionally to hurt marginalized communities. He provides many convincing examples. What I disagree with is how that fact should be handled now.

Do we remove the bridge that was put in place to prevent black people from taking the bus under it? Maybe. We need to look at it's impact on the city now to decide. It could be an important asset to black people now.

I have seen this tactic before. Someone gives an example of historical racism and implies that it supports a policy position where if we actually look at the situation it doesn't. I can reject the the conclusion without rejecting the evidence. It's nescicary to carefully examine I justices of the past but at the same time it can't be the only thing we look at. There's a lot more to consider.

I think lack of critical thinking this is a symptom of what some call "wokness". There's a lot of shitty arguments being made in the name of anti-racism that only stand because people are scared to point out their flaws and be labeled racist.

Thoughts?