logo
How did 2020's Black Lives Matter movement change the world? Our panel responds

How did 2020's Black Lives Matter movement change the world? Our panel responds

The Guardian25-05-2025

Osita Nwanevu
Columnist at the Guardian US and a contributing editor at the New Republic. He is based in Baltimore
Five years after 2020's historic wave of racial justice protests, the US is very obviously a country much changed, though not in the ways that activists and reformers had hoped. Many pundits have interpreted Donald Trump's re-election in November ⁠and the culture war he's waging against the kind of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives that flourished in response to BLM's activism as the products of a broad public backlash against the movement's goals. On DEI in particular, that backlash is not much in evidence ⁠– a CBS poll in October, for instance, found 64% of Americans agreeing efforts to promote racial diversity and equality were going either about right or not far enough. But perceptions matter more than realities in politics.
It should be said too that realities on the ground have been disappointing for police reformers lately. While the protests of 2020 led to the drafting of thousands of reform bills in state legislatures across the country, momentum has long since stalled. Civilian oversight boards are struggling to make an impact. Cities that initially cut police budgets wound up increasing funding above pre-protest levels. And federally, a few executive orders aside, hopes for major action fizzled completely under Joe Biden ⁠– whose 2020 campaign, researchers have found, was probably aided by the political engagement and shifts in public opinion the protests induced.
We may not see protests of this scale again, but one never knows: 74 unarmed people, mostly people of colour, were killed by US police officers last year. And well beyond killings and confrontations, criminal justice in the US is riven with extraordinary inequities, racial and not, that affect millions. With the right spark or the right case, the country could return its attention to those inequities sooner than we expect.
Fabiana Moraes
Journalist and author based in Recife, Brazil
I will never forget when the first protest after the murder of George Floyd was called in my city, Recife, in north-eastern Brazil. A neighbour soon appeared in our building's WhatsApp group sharing the poster of the call and saying: 'Be careful, it will be near the building.' The idea that anti-racist movements are something to be scared of is deeply rooted in Brazilian society.
The killing of Black people has been part of the Brazilian social landscape for centuries. In fact, our infamously lethal police force is a source of pride for many. In São Paulo, the high number of killings in the outskirts of the city is celebrated, and there had been attempts to refuse body cameras on police uniforms. The state governor, Tarcísio de Freitas (Republicans party), a supporter of the former president Jair Bolsonaro, is a likely candidate for president of Brazil. Though he has seemingly reversed his position on body cameras, the thinktank Afrocebrap still warns that Freitas is committed to 'the populist notion that 'a good criminal is a dead criminal''.
Unfortunately, the record for leftwing administrations is also grim. In the state of Bahia, which has a Workers' party governor, 752 people were killed in 662 violent incidents involving military police in less than one year in 2023. Another statistic about the Bahian police is even more stark: in that state, of the 616 people killed as a result of military police intervention in 2021, 603 were Black. This number represents 97.9% of the cases. Five years on from Black Lives Matter (BLM), there is little sign of reform or progress – in fact, the US is exacerbating the issue as they provide funding and training to Brazilian police.
Adam Elliott-Cooper
Researcher and writer based in London. He is the author of Black Resistance to British Policing and a member of Black Lives Matter UK
2020 was a hugely significant moment for our movement. BLM UK as an organisation received more than 36,000 individual donations, amounting in total to an incredible £1.2m. We didn't see this money as 'ours' but meant for Black anti-racist struggle in general, so we decided to redistribute 50% of the funds to other groups. It was described as the largest redistribution of funding to Black groups since the 1980s.
This mean £570,000 went towards to dozens of grassroots, Black‑led collectives. This was part of our goal to uplift Black organising both in Britain and internationally. We dedicated the remaining funds towards building a Black-led, antiracist movement that can face the challenges ahead. Some of this key work is represented at our Festival of Collective Liberation, an annual national event in central London, and Project Timbuktu, our Black liberation political education programme.
Hundreds of thousands of people in Britain took to the streets chanting 'Black lives matter', and forced institutions to confront colonial legacies, remove racist symbols and adopt (often imperfect) DEI initiatives. These modest and largely symbolic gains were short-lived, as the growth of anti-immigrant sentiment and recent race riots reveals the tenacity of racism in Britain. The return of Donald Trump and the rise of Reform, in the context of Labour's austerity economics, declining living standards and the hostile environment, makes antiracist solidarity and resistance more urgent now than ever.
Zanele Mji
Writer, investigative journalist and podcaster based in Johannesburg, South Africa
In June 2020, South Africans marched through Johannesburg. We had taken to the streets the year before over the rape and murder of 19-year-old Uyinene Mrwetyana, a watershed-moment in our problem with gender-based violence. And we are no stranger to state killings – notably there was the case of Collins Khosa, who was beaten to death by soldiers in Johannesburg during South Africa's Covid-19 lockdown enforcement. This time, we were marching in solidarity with BLM.
But I noticed something: the US-based BLM organisation and its leaders offered little reciprocal support to our and other African struggles, such as Nigeria's #EndSars protests against police brutality. It seemed that some Black lives mattered more than others.
BLM's insularity benefited US corporations more than Black communities worldwide. Brands rushed to declare solidarity, launching DEI initiatives and partnering with prominent Black figures. But their investment in representation didn't translate into lasting systemic change.
Meanwhile, 'digital nomads' fleeing the Trump presidency's erosion of human rights and DEI gains have flocked to South Africa, driving up the cost of housing and other necessities (conversely, Trump is inviting white Afrikaners to seek 'asylum' in the US citing false claims of 'white genocide'). Among them are Black Americans who seem to ignore local Black South Africans' pleas for them to consider the impacts of their 'lifestyle neocolonialism'. Wealthy, western Black lives matter most of all.
Abeo Jackson
Multi-disciplinary artist and academic from Trinidad and Tobago
When I sat opposite the US Embassy in Port of Spain after the killing of George Floyd in 2020, I knew why I had been moved to join the protest. It was about recognising the injustice of racism and anti-blackness not just in the US but here in Trinidad and Tobago, where a considerable percentage of Afro-Trinbagonians face disparities in income, education and opportunity, and are victims of extrajudicial killings that are excused by a desensitized wider society.
Trinidad and Tobago has seen few truly meaningful changes regarding the betterment of Black lives and our interactions with state apparatus. There have been amendments to school policy as it pertains to Afro hairstyles. This in a nation where more than 40% of our population is, in fact, of African descent. But our education system remains unequal, and government schools face the scourge of limited resources. The caveat of the new hair policy is that despite the new amendments being ministry policy, enforcement is at each school board's discretion.
Extrajudicial killings undertaken by the police continue largely unchecked. The Police Complaints Authority continues to fight an uphill battle against 'rogue' elements in the service. And the population vacillates between apathy and support for these killings in the face of feeling helpless with regard to white-collar-funded gang violence. There continues to be outcry, however, in impoverished 'hot spot' communities where these murders take place. Many times their pain is met with wider public castigation and ridicule.
We now have the further complication of a new government that is extremely sympathetic to Trumpian policy. The United National Congress administration was elected on a manifesto that promised easier access to firearms for citizens and stand-your-ground home invasion laws. These potential developments do not bode well for us, a society with issues of distrust along racial lines.
Daniel Gyamerah
Chair of Each One Teach One
In Berlin, Black African people have been marching under the banner of Black Lives Matter since the Ferguson unrest of 2014. But 2020 felt like a turning point – the first time that we were joined by a cross-section of German society, to confront this global phenomenon of anti-Black racism. There was a sense that things in Germany might actually change. The German government presented a list of 89 measures to fight racism and extremism. But five years on that change has not come, the measures long forgotten.
In April 2025, a young Afro-German man, Lorenz A, was killed by police in Oldenburg. He was shot at least three times from behind. This has made Afro-diasporic communities feel incredibly vulnerable and unsafe, and the government has said nothing. Even the most basic demand – to refer to a current UN effort to protect the human rights of people of African descent in the new coalition agreement's priorities – has not been taken up.
Such disappointment has meant that antiracism activists have restrategised. Though we still agitate for change, we are focusing more on building our own institutions and infrastructure to sustain our movement. To take one example: Each One Teach One is a Black empowerment organisation based in Berlin – we recently published the Afrozensus, a data-gathering project that aims to fill in the knowledge gaps about the 1 million people of African origin in Germany. Though the rise of the far right threatens these gains, we are building confidence, and durable empowerment infrastructure not beholden to political moments.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Education Secretary Linda McMahon struggles with basic math when trying to add up proposed budget cuts
Education Secretary Linda McMahon struggles with basic math when trying to add up proposed budget cuts

The Independent

time12 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Education Secretary Linda McMahon struggles with basic math when trying to add up proposed budget cuts

Secretary of Education Linda McMahon was given a math lesson during a Senate hearing on Tuesday when Senator Jack Reed pointed out that $1.5 multiplied by 10 is not 'over a trillion dollars' but actually $15 billion. Sitting before the appropriations subcommittee that focuses on education, McMahon nodded her head along as Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana mistakenly claimed that the U.S. spends '$1,580,000' on federal grant programs, known as TRIO and GEAR UP, per year and that after 10 years, that adds up to be 'over a trillion dollars.' The U.S. actually spends $1.58 billion per year on the programs, which does not add up to more than a trillion after 10 years. But, McMahon did not correct Kennedy's math error. However, Reed, the senator from Rhode Island, did. 'I'm not a great mathematician, but I think you were talking about a trillion dollars? I believe $1.5 billion times 10 is $15 billion, that's a little bit off from a trillion dollars,' Reed said. McMahon responded, 'I think the budget cuts $1.2 billion for TRIO.' 'Well, $1.2 billion that would be $12 billion, not a trillion dollars,' Reed replied. 'Ok,' McMahon said. The math blunder was part of McMahon's testimony about President Donald Trump's 2026 budget proposal, which includes sweeping cuts to the Department of Education – drastically impacting education grants such as TRIO or GEAR UP. The Independent has asked the Department of Education for comment. TRIO, a federal program comprised of various grants, are some of the Education Department 's largest investments aimed at assisting low-income or first-generation college students or individuals with disabilities to advance through the academic pipeline. In 2024, the Education Department provided $1.191 billion for the program. GEAR UP, a federal grant program, assists low-income students preparing to enter postsecondary education. In 2024, the Education Department provided $388 million for the program. But under Trump's proposed 'skinny budget,' essentially all of the TRIO and GEAR UP grants would be eliminated. It's part of his efforts to shutter the Education Department. During the hearing, Senator Susan Collins of Maine aired concerns about the cuts to TRIO, saying she had 'seen the lives of countless first-generation and low-income students, not only in Maine, but across the country… changed by the TRIO program.'

Trump is ‘obsessed' about having a call with China's Xi this week to hammer out trade deal, insiders reveal
Trump is ‘obsessed' about having a call with China's Xi this week to hammer out trade deal, insiders reveal

The Independent

time22 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Trump is ‘obsessed' about having a call with China's Xi this week to hammer out trade deal, insiders reveal

President Donald Trump has grown increasingly focused on calling Chinese President Xi Jinping this week to get closer to a deal to end the ongoing trade war between the world's two largest economies. The White House has said that Trump and Xi will 'likely' speak this week. However, it may not be the barrier-breaking conversation the president is aiming for. 'The president is obsessed with having a call with Xi,' a person familiar with the talks told Politico. Trump believes he can untie the knot even though the U.S. is trying to change a trade relationship worth $600 billion and doing so without losing too much political capital in the U.S. The person familiar with the discussions told the outlet that the administration is 'under a lot of pressure' following China 's critical minerals blockade, which blocks U.S. access to essential components in auto and electronics manufacturing as well as the production of munitions. 'I don't think Xi is too interested in exporting any more rare earths or magnets to the United States; he's made his position clear,' the person noted. But they added that Xi would likely take Trump's call. 'The president has some leverage, and the question is when he's ready to impose maximum pressure on the Chinese government,' they said. Meanwhile, a former Trump official who remains close to the White House told Politico that the president 'feels like a call between principals is a way to cut through a lot of this noise, and get right to the heart of the matter.' However, some observers think Trump will struggle to get Xi on the phone. Obama's assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Daniel Russel, told Politico that China 'has a sharp nose for weakness, and for all his bravado, Trump is signaling eagerness, even desperation, to cut a direct deal with Xi.' 'That only stiffens Beijing's resolve,' he added. Beijing has reportedly also been disturbed by Trump's very public showdowns with world leaders, such as with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. This has made the Chinese hesitant to participate in high-level discussions. Biden National Security Council deputy senior director for China and Taiwan, Rush Doshi, told the outlet that China 'sees President Trump as unpredictable, which poses risks reputationally for President Xi.' 'It's not usual practice for PRC diplomats to put the leader at risk of a potentially embarrassing or unpredictable encounter,' he added. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Monday that Xi and Trump would 'likely talk this week,' but a call has yet to be scheduled, a White House official told Politico. Meanwhile, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said, 'I have no information to share' regarding a call. Last month, China and the U.S. reached an agreement to lower U.S. tariffs from 145 to 30 percent. Beijing cut back on levies on imports from the U.S. to 10 percent, and they said they would remove barriers on the exports of essential minerals. The agreement included a 90-day deadline to begin fresh discussions on a wider trade deal to take into account U.S. concerns regarding Chinese trade practices. However, these new talks have gotten off to a bad start with miscommunication and differing expectations. The Trump administration has argued that China has slowed its new shipments of critical minerals and rare earth magnets. Appearing on CNBC on Friday, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said: 'When they agreed in Geneva to remove their tariff and their countermeasures, they removed the tariff like we did. But some of the countermeasures, they've slowed on.' While a business official told Politico that 'Everyone agrees that for any additional progress to happen on tariffs, the gateway is fentanyl,' the U.S. hasn't responded to two proposals put forward by Beijing to deal with the issue. The proposals have been described as being designed by Beijing to provoke talks about what the Chinese can do to stop the flow of components that Mexican cartels use to make the drug. However, many officials in the Trump administration don't believe China would actually take the steps required to adhere to any fentanyl agreement. Former Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush assistant U.S. trade representative Harry Broadman told Politico that while 'Trump is a deal maker,' Xi is not. 'He's a Party guy at the top of an administrative superstructure,' he said. 'I cannot imagine that Xi would get into specifics — at most, they might agree on certain principles, but that's not likely to satisfy Trump.'

Weinstein retrial nears end as lawyers argue: sexual predator or #MeToo 'poster boy'?
Weinstein retrial nears end as lawyers argue: sexual predator or #MeToo 'poster boy'?

The Independent

time22 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Weinstein retrial nears end as lawyers argue: sexual predator or #MeToo 'poster boy'?

Harvey Weinstein 's lawyer portrayed him as the falsely accused 'original sinner" of the #MeToo era, while a prosecutor told jurors at his sex crimes retrial Tuesday that the former movie mogul preyed on less-powerful women he thought would never speak up. The two sides took very different tones in their closing arguments, which are due to conclude Wednesday. Weinstein's lawyer, Arthur Aidala, veered into folksy jokes and theatricality — sometimes re-enacting witnesses' behavior — as he contended that his client engaged in a 'courting game,' not crimes. Prosecutor Nicole Blumberg, as direct as Aidala was discursive, urged jurors to focus on Weinstein's accusers and their days of grueling testimony. 'This was not a 'courting game,' as Mr. Aidala wants you to believe. This was not a 'transaction,'' she told jurors. 'This was never about 'fooling around.' It was about rape.' The majority-female jury is expected to start deliberations at some point Wednesday, inheriting a case that was seen as a #MeToo watershed when Weinstein was convicted five years ago. It ended up being retried, and reshaped, because an appeals court overturned the 2020 verdict. Weinstein, the former Hollywood honcho-turned-#MeToo outcast, has pleaded not guilty to raping a woman in 2013 and forcing oral sex on two others, separately, in 2006. Aidala argued that everything that happened between the ex-producer and his accusers was a consensual, if 'transactional," exchange of favors. The attorney accused prosecutors of 'trying to police the bedroom' and zeroing in on the man seen as 'the poster boy, the original sinner, for the #MeToo movement.' 'They tried to do it five years ago, and now there's a redo, and they're trying to do it again,' he told jurors. His hours-long summation touched on matters from the acclaimed, Weinstein-co-produced 1994 film 'Pulp Fiction' to his own marriage and his grandmother's Italian gravy, at times playing for — and getting — laughs from jurors and Weinstein. Aidala depicted the former studio boss as a self-made New Yorker, while painting Weinstein's accusers as troubled and canny 'women with broken dreams' who plied him for movie opportunities and other perks, kept engaging with him for years and then turned on him to cash in on his #MeToo undoing. All three received compensation through legal processes separate from the criminal trial. Blumberg countered that Weinstein interpreted a sexual 'no' as a cue to 'push a little bit more, and if they still say no, just take it anyway.' She argued that his accusers stayed in friendly contact with Weinstein because they were trying to work in entertainment, and they feared their careers would be squashed if they crossed him. 'He chose people who he thought would be the perfect victims, who he could rape and keep silent,' the prosecutor said. 'He underestimated them.' Weinstein had a decades-long run as one of the movie industry's most influential people. In 2017, allegations of sexual assault and harassment tanked his career and catalyzed the #MeToo movement, which seeks accountability for sexual misconduct. He was subsequently convicted of sex crimes and sentenced to prison in New York and California. His California appeal hasn't been decided. Since the New York retrial opened April 23, prosecutors have brought in more than two dozen witnesses. The prosecution centered on Weinstein's three accusers, who each faced days of questions. In often graphic and sometimes tearful testimony, the women said the Oscar-winning producer used his showbiz stature as a hook to prey on them. Jessica Mann, who accused Weinstein of rape, was a hairstylist hoping to make it as an actor when she met him. The sexual assault accusers also were trying to build careers in entertainment: Miriam Haley was a production assistant and producer, and Kaja Sokola was a teenage model who wanted to get into acting. Prosecutors added Sokola's allegations to the case for the retrial. But some other accusers from the first trial weren't part of the second. The appeals court said it was prejudicial to include their accusations, which never resulted in charges. Weinstein, 73, decided not to testify. His attorneys presented a few witnesses to cast doubts on certain aspects of the accusers' accounts. But Weinstein's defense also relied heavily on questioning prosecution witnesses — even surprising Sokola with her own private journal — to try to undermine their credibility. The Associated Press generally does not identify people without their permission if they say they have been sexually assaulted. Sokola, Mann and Haley have agreed to be named.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store