I'll give you the point that redlining and prosecuting crack more heavily than cocaine was systemically racist. BUT, how does it get fixed? Redlining was banned 53 years ago, and its effects are still treal. And so are the effects of people caught up on bogus crack charges that should've been cocaine charges. Outside of reducing the penalties for people currently in jail from crack to cocaine, I don't see an obvious solution for the redlining aspect of systemic racism. Mind you, the world is a complicated place, and we can point at flaws a lot. But I suspect that fixing them without a simple "undo" approach creates even more problems, fucking it up to a greater degree. That's what all of these "systemic racist folk" don't understand. We need more 'undos' and less innovation. It might sound counterintuitive, but just like DNA, when you tinker from the top down into complex and evolved systems, the likelihood of breaking the whole god damn thing is far greater than fixing it. If you don't believe me, flash forward 15 years, if you are still alive, and tell me where CRISPR has gotten us. That shit'll be outlawed quick, fast, and in a hurry by the remaining few soles who continue to occupy the planet. If you've ever tinkered around in image software, you know that the undo feature is the best fix for any mistake you make. If you imagine using the program without that feature, you'll see what's wrong with the run-of-the-mill social justice whiner. They're full of piss and vinegar and terrible ideas, but the easiest fix to a bad situation is to undo the mistake. If you think I'm wrong, try and use one of those programs without the undo button—and "innovate" when you make a mistake (instead of undoing), and see where it takes you. The problem with redlining is that it's spilled milk and or toothpaste that's escaped the tube. Slavery is the same situation. I mean, you can try and "fix" the various problems from the past with innovation, but it'll just create inequity for the present generations and more consternation to boot. Nice article! I agree to a degree, but not entirely. The big problem is trying to convince the experts of inequity—not to destroy parts of the system that do more good than harm. The thing with economies is that everything gets connected like gears and sprockets. Make a single change that sounds fancy, and if it's too radical, everything will grind to a screeching halt. I get, comprehend, and align with good intentions, but the bad ideas are horrible. Not accusing you of bad ideas, just most social justice warriors who confuse the map with the territory.