logo
Black Lives Matter Plaza Is Gone. Its Erasure Feels Symbolic.

Black Lives Matter Plaza Is Gone. Its Erasure Feels Symbolic.

New York Times16-03-2025

This week, government workers near the White House, on two blocks lined with luxury hotels and union headquarters, used a jackhammer and a pickax to tear up a mural that read 'Black Lives Matter,' painted on the road during the long hot summer of 2020.
The symbolism was potent.
The erasure of the bold yellow letters of Black Lives Matter Plaza, installed on 16th Street after the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer, was a concession from Washington's mayor, Muriel Bowser, who faced threats from congressional Republicans to cut off federal funds to the capital city if the words were not removed. But to Black Americans grappling with a fierce resurgence of forces that they believe are beating back the causes of social justice and civil rights, it felt like much more.
That plaza was 'spiritual,' said Selwyn Jones, an uncle of Mr. Floyd. 'But them taking the time to destroy it, that's making a statement, man. That's making a statement, like we don't care.'
Even those who did not put much faith in the mural to begin with were taken aback.
'Bowser caving immediately to the faintest hint of pressure on the name of the plaza is somehow even more cynical than the move to name it Black Lives Matter Plaza in the first place,' said Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò, a Black associate professor of philosophy at Georgetown.
A movement that once crested with a former Republican senator, Mitt Romney, marching in the streets has now waned. After a brief window of conversation about the ways racism had impeded the progress of Black citizens, the country in November chose to return President Trump to the White House, after he called the words 'Black Lives Matter' a 'symbol of hate' and Black-centered history 'toxic propaganda' at the end of his first term.
'We saw the largest protest movement in our nation's history, a unique and powerful moment where it seemed anything was possible, and you had the numbers to do anything,' lamented Samuel Sinyangwe, executive director of the nonprofit Mapping Police Violence, without exaggeration.
The millions of dollars that flowed to groups with 'Black Lives Matter' in their titles have slowed to a trickle, forcing some to retrench, others to close shop. The Black Lives Matter Foundation Inc., for instance, raised a staggering $79.6 million in fiscal year 2021. The next year, that figure was down to almost $8.5 million. By 2023, it was about $4.7 million, with expenses of $10.8 million, according to records tracked by the nonprofit journalism organization ProPublica.
As it recedes, Mr. Trump has sought to bury it. In two short months, his administration has moved to end diversity, equity and inclusion as goals of the federal government and pressured private industry to do the same. It shut down the National Law Enforcement Accountability Database, which tracked the misconduct records of federal law enforcement officers.
Words with even a hint of racial, ethnic or gender sensitivities are being struck from federal websites and documents. Just this week, the Environmental Protection Agency moved to eliminate offices responsible for addressing the disproportionately high levels of pollution facing poor communities, often with predominantly minority residents.
The billionaire White House adviser Elon Musk has even said pardoning George Floyd's killer was 'something to think about.'
Beyond Washington, journalists and academics who vaulted to stardom a half decade ago on their reinterpretations of history, their views on racism and their valorizing of the African American experience find themselves sometimes marginalized, and often under attack.
'I feel we are going backwards,' Mr. Jones said.
Given the swift change of circumstances, some in the Black Lives Matter movement say they must answer an existential question: How do they pursue racial justice amid so fierce a backlash?
Veterans of the movement say they must broaden the activist coalition to be more multiracial, working class, economic and inclusive in its messaging. Although Mr. Trump made gains among voters of color in November, even bragging that he had support of some in the Black Lives Matter movement, they insist his base of support still stems from bigotry.
'Folks got sold a bag of goods under this idea of racism and xenophobia,' said Addys Castillo, a social justice organizer and law student in Connecticut.
But, she said, the administration's policies will hurt all those who aren't wealthy, 'so if there was ever a time to have a multiracial, cross cultural movement, this would be the time.'
James Forman Jr., a former public defender, an author and a fierce critic of the criminal justice system and its effects on people of color, said persuading all Americans that a system that has harmed Black Americans has harmed them too is difficult — but crucial.
'It's always been hard to be able to get people to see two things at the same time: the ways in which these institutions disproportionately harm Black people, and the way that these institutions harm all people,' he said.
Ms. Bowser, who is Black, told laid-off federal workers earlier this month that the mural was a significant part of the city's history, but circumstances have changed. 'Now our focus is on making sure our residents and our economy survive,' she said.
Observers say the racial justice movement that crescendoed after Mr. Floyd, an unarmed Black man, was murdered by a Minneapolis police officer in May 2020 had some successes, at least in raising public awareness about structural racism and police violence.
Protesters and Black activists pressed people to evolve from support for civil rights as 'mere etiquette' to 'an understanding that actual institutions, political institutions, criminal justice institutions had to be challenged to work differently,' Mr. Táíwò said.
But the movement must mature, said Representative Wesley Bell, a Missouri Democrat who rose to prominence after the police shooting of a Black teenager, Michael Brown, in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson. Mr. Bell, who is Black, defeated one of the most demonstrative Black progressives in the House, Cori Bush, in a heated primary last year, promising voters to bring Greater St. Louis a more sober, effective leadership.
'Some folks think it's just about getting out and protesting,' said Mr. Bell, who advocates moving the social justice cause from the streets to the corridors of power. 'The best protesters do not make the best politicians, and the best politicians don't make the best protesters.'
Black Lives Matter began as an online hashtag after the 2013 acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed Black teenager. But the phrase coalesced into a movement after the killing of Michael Brown the following year.
From the beginning the phrase drew attacks.
'When you say 'Black lives matter,' that's inherently racist,' the former New York City mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani said in 2016. 'Black lives matter. White lives matter. Asian lives matter. Hispanic lives matter.'
Four years later, as he campaigned unsuccessfully for re-election, Mr. Trump accused supporters of Black Lives Matter of 'spreading violence in our cities' and 'hurting the Black community.'
But in the summer of 2020, millions of Americans took to the streets from all walks of life. Conservative voices, like the president of the Heritage Foundation and Mr. Trump's former ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, lamented Mr. Floyd's murder.
Some of the protests turned violent. A Minneapolis police station was burned to the ground. The calls for incremental police reform became drowned by the rallying cry, 'defund the police.'
And that gave Mr. Trump his most potent line of attack against the movement. He reframed a cause that hoped to protect Black lives as a lawless assault on police officers. In his telling, the leaders of the movement were avatars for every left-wing cause in his sights.
Because of the Black Lives Matter movement's decentralized structure, many groups were lumped together and faced intense scrutiny, often with negative consequences for the movement as a whole.
'Any strategic or tactical misstep for the movement is going to produce more severe and swift negative consequences,' Mr. Forman said.
The Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, for instance, faced criticism that it misused funds, including the purchase of a $6 million California home.
'I'm not particularly happy with the organization Black Lives Matter, because of their shenanigans,' said Mr. Jones.
'Black Lives Matter, they are not a perfect organization,' said Angela Harrison, an aunt of Mr. Floyd. 'They probably made mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. But their intention was for the good.'
But mistakes added up. The movement to examine historical ways racism has shaped current disparities in areas such as housing and wealth creation gave way to the opposite. Conservative activists successfully pushed state governments to ban teachings that they said made people feel inherently responsible for actions committed in the past.
Corporations that once made a show of racial, ethnic and gender sensitivities have begun rolling back their diversity initiatives, seemingly more afraid of the conservative activists fighting them than the social justice activists who had supported them, said Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
That, he said, 'could certainly suggest that maybe the belief isn't strongly held, but also more of a sense of resignation.'
Mr. Sinyangwe is taking a long view and sees parallels and patterns with many historical movements for social justice.
'This movement has followed the trajectory that freedom struggles in the United States have always tended to follow,' he said.
A marginalized community pushes back against injustice. Some of its demands are met, but others don't materialize. So they push for more transformative changes only to be met with backlash. 'And that's sort of how America does business,' he said. 'That's not the fault of anyone's slogan.'
In June 2020, after Mr. Trump marshaled federal law enforcement and the military to violently confront protesters outside the White House, Ms. Bowser announced that she was renaming a street just off the protest site 'Black Lives Matter Plaza,' complete with 48-foot letters on the pavement.
The mayor's decision to remove the letters with Mr. Trump's return to power has been met with ambivalence. Some agree that Ms. Bowser has more pressing concerns, such as budget cuts and the slashing of the federal work force in her city.
'The painting ain't saving any of us,' said Ms. Castillo.
Others are gearing up for a fight that will outlive any one presidency.
'I don't believe we'll ever be in a place where there won't be a fight,' Mr. Bell said. 'But I will say this — I don't think that President Trump can stop progress either.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump Says Musk Will Face ‘Very Serious Consequences' If He Backs Democrats
Trump Says Musk Will Face ‘Very Serious Consequences' If He Backs Democrats

Epoch Times

time27 minutes ago

  • Epoch Times

Trump Says Musk Will Face ‘Very Serious Consequences' If He Backs Democrats

President Donald Trump on June 7 warned that Elon Musk could face 'serious consequences' if he decides to back Democratic political candidates in upcoming elections. While Musk campaigned for Trump's 2024 presidential run and was a key member in the Trump administration's fight against fraud and waste, the two were involved in a public spat this week, apparently fueled by their disagreements over Trump's budget priorities in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Trump drops Nasa nominee Jared Isaacman, scrapping Elon Musk's pick
Trump drops Nasa nominee Jared Isaacman, scrapping Elon Musk's pick

Yahoo

time38 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump drops Nasa nominee Jared Isaacman, scrapping Elon Musk's pick

The White House has withdrawn as its nominee for Nasa administrator, abruptly yanking a close ally of Elon Musk from consideration to lead the space agency. Donald Trump said he would announce a new candidate soon. 'After a thorough review of prior associations, I am hereby withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to head Nasa,' the US president posted online. 'I will soon announce a new Nominee who will be mission aligned, and put America first in space.' Related: Drugs, marital advice and that black eye: key takeaways from Trump's Oval Office send-off for Elon Musk Isaacman, a billionaire private astronaut who had been Musk's pick to lead Nasa, was due next week for a much-delayed confirmation vote before the US Senate. His removal from consideration caught many in the space industry by surprise. Trump and the White House did not explain what led to the decision. Isaacman, whose removal was earlier reported by Semafor, said he was 'incredibly grateful' to Trump 'and all those who supported me throughout this journey'. 'I have gained a much deeper appreciation for the complexities of government and the weight our political leaders carry,' he posted. 'It may not always be obvious through the discourse and turbulence, but there are many competent, dedicated people who love this country and care deeply about the mission.' Isaacman's removal comes just days after Musk's official departure from the White House, where the SpaceX CEO's role as a 'special government employee' leading the so-called department of government efficiency (Doge) created turbulence for the administration and frustrated some of Trump's aides. Musk, according to a person familiar with his reaction, was disappointed by Isaacman's removal. 'It is rare to find someone so competent and good-hearted,' Musk wrote of Isaacman on X, responding to the news of the White House's decision. Musk did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It was unclear whom the administration might tap to replace Isaacman. One name being floated is the retired US air force Lt Gen Steven Kwast, an early advocate for the creation of the US space force and a Trump supporter, according to three people familiar with the discussions. Isaacman, the former CEO of the payment processor company Shift4, had broad space industry support but drew concerns from lawmakers over his ties to Musk and SpaceX, where he spent hundreds of millions of dollars as an early private spaceflight customer. The former nominee had donated to Democrats in prior elections. In his confirmation hearing in April, he sought to balance Nasa's existing moon-aligned space exploration strategy with pressure to shift the agency's focus on Mars, saying the US can plan for travel to both destinations. As a potential leader of Nasa's 18,000 employees, Isaacman faced a daunting task of implementing that decision to prioritize Mars, given that Nasa has spent years and billions of dollars trying to return its astronauts to the moon. On Friday, the space agency released new details of the Trump administration's 2026 budget plan that proposed killing dozens of space science programs and laying off thousands of employees, a controversial overhaul that space advocates and lawmakers described as devastating for the agency. The Montana Republican Tim Sheehy, a member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation committee, posted that Isaacman had been 'a strong choice by President Trump to lead Nasa'. Related: Universe's mysteries may never be solved because of Trump's Nasa cuts, experts say 'I was proud to introduce Jared at his hearing and strongly oppose efforts to derail his nomination,' Sheehy said. Some scientists saw the nominee change as further destabilizing to Nasa as it faces dramatic budget cuts without a confirmed leader in place to navigate political turbulence between Congress, the White House and the space agency's workforce. 'So not having [Isaacman] as boss of Nasa is bad news for the agency,' Harvard-Smithsonian astronomer Jonathan McDowell posted. 'Maybe a good thing for Jared himself though, since being Nasa head right now is a bit of a Kobayashi Maru scenario,' McDowell added, referring to an exercise in the science fiction franchise Star Trek where cadets are placed in a no-win scenario. With Reuters

Trump vowed to help US farmers. These four say his policies are ‘wreaking havoc'
Trump vowed to help US farmers. These four say his policies are ‘wreaking havoc'

Yahoo

time39 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump vowed to help US farmers. These four say his policies are ‘wreaking havoc'

Donald Trump may have won the votes of the US's most farming-dependent counties by an average of 78% in the 2024 election. But the moves made by his administration in the past few months – imposing steep tariffs, immigration policies that target the migrant labor farmers rely on, and canceling a wide range of USDA programs – have left many farmers reeling. 'The policies of the Trump administration are wreaking havoc on family farmers. It's been terrible,' said John Bartman, a row crop farmer in Illinois. Bartman is owed thousands of dollars for sustainable practices he implemented on his row crop operation as part of the USDA's Climate-Smart program. And he's not the only one. Other farmers across the country are reporting that the Trump administration's policies have destroyed their markets by ending programs that help farmers sell their produce to local schools and food banks; implementing draconian immigration policies that destabilize the farm labor pool; and generally creating volatility that makes it hard for farmers to plan ahead. One group of farmers, the Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York, joined organizations like Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council in suing the USDA for removing department webpages focused on climate change, arguing that the move was unlawful and undermines farmers' ability to adapt and respond to climate threats. (On 13 May, the coalition declared a kind of victory when the government committed to restore the purged content; the government is set to provide more information about the restoration process on 11 June.) Some farmers, such as Bartman, loudly oppose Trump. 'I've met some Democrats who'll say: 'You farmers deserve this. You voted for him.' Well, I didn't vote for the guy. The programs that have been impacted the most are targeted towards farmers that care about the environment.' Others, such as those living near North Carolina farmer Patrick Brown, are experiencing 'buyer's remorse', said Brown, 'but they don't want to say it because they voted for the current administration'. No matter who they voted for, farmers across the country are living in the new reality created by the Trump administration's agricultural policies. The Guardian spoke to four farmers about what it's like trying to grow crops, feed people, and keep their operations afloat in 2025. John Bartman, Bartman FarmMarengo, Illinois I am a vegetable and grain farmer; we're mostly a row crop operation. My family has been farming in Illinois since 1846; we have the oldest continuous running vegetable stand in McHenry county. I farm 900 acres. I try to use the least amount of fertilizer and herbicides that I can. Three main policies have been impacting us. Number one is the cancellation of USAID. That's about a billion dollars worth of grain that the United States purchases from farmers like me, and they give it to third world nations who are hungry. To kill that program is a disaster. It's morally bankrupt, and it hurts farmers' bottom line. Another thing that's very pressing is the payment freezes to farmers from the USDA. I was involved in the Climate-Smart practices. We were paid to implement stewardship practices that the USDA has been preaching since the Dust Bowl. The added benefit is these practices combat climate change. That's what the current administration doesn't want anything to do with. I'm supposed to be paid close to $100 an acre. Then the current administration came in and put a freeze on everything. $100 an acre may not sound like much, but there are some years where we're happy if we make $20 an acre off of things. I have an operating loan that I haven't been able to pay off because I was counting on this money. I have rent that's due. I have seed costs. I have chemical costs. I try to explain to people, if I were a repair person, and I went to my local grade school and fixed their furnace, and in the meantime, a new school board was elected, I still deserve to be paid. I've signed a contract with the USDA. The full faith and credit of the United States is at risk, because if Uncle Sam will renege on a farmer, they'll renege on anybody. The third one is the tariff situation. China is and has been our number one export for soybeans; 100% of the soybeans that I grow are exported. During Trump's first administration, half of all the soybeans that China purchased were from the United States. By the end of his first administration, it was down to a quarter. Now Brazil has taken over our role as the number one importer of soybeans into China. From an environmental standpoint, that means more deforestation in the Amazon. Mexico purchases 40% of all the corn in the United States. And he wants to have a trade war with Mexico? Mexico can just as easily buy their grain from Argentina and Brazil. The USDA has also canceled a lot of contracts for food pantries and school districts to purchase from local farmers, and that's absolutely devastating. I was just in Springfield, Illinois, testifying and hearing testimony from other farmers. Many of them are first-generation farmers, and that program gave them an outlet for their produce. It's so sad listening to them saying, 'I finally had my dream of owning my own farm and making a living at it. Now I don't know what I'm going to do, because my market has dried up.' Shah Kazemi, Monterey MushroomsSanta Cruz county, California People don't recognize that we either have to import our labor, or import our food. We operate five farms right now: in California, Tennessee, Texas and Mexico. We have close to 2,000 employees. Our business has been totally dependent on migrant workers, just like all other ag businesses in this country. Without them, there is no food on anybody's table. In 1983 we acquired a farm in Loudon, Tennessee. At the time we didn't have one migrant worker in that plant. By the early 1990s we had about 20% migrant workers, and by the early 2000s we had 85%, because nobody wants to do that kind of work any more in this country. When you're bent over picking strawberries, cucumber, lettuce, zucchini, whatever the crop is – try to do that for eight hours. See how your back feels, how the rest of your body feels. Farming is hard, physical work. These are skilled workers, harvesting at a certain rate to stay productive; you have to know your trade. A skilled mushroom picker can pick about 75 to 80 pounds an hour, and some of them exceed 100 pounds an hour. A new picker comes in, their productivity is in the 20s, and it will take six to eight months to get them up to 50. So if you had to replace a guy that's picking 80 pounds an hour with people who are picking in the 20s, you need three or four of them. We have a lot of respect and admiration for these people. They're really underappreciated. I have a friend who is in the farming business. About a month ago, there was an Ice [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] raid in the area. The following day, most of his employees didn't show up. Even the people who have been here for a long time, they're listening to the news and hearing that people with green cards are being deported. The fear factor has been heightened significantly. That's what has happened with the new administration coming in. If we don't have enough workers, we cannot harvest our crops. And if you don't harvest, then it's all wasted. The uncertainty and erratic decision making creates volatility in the marketplace. And now we're concerned about where we're going to get future workers. What's going to happen a year from now, as some of these people get deported, or they feel so fearful they go back to their home country? Who's going to replace them? We need to have a program that lets people come in who can do the work, and then at the end of whatever the term is, they can go back home. They have a guest worker program in Canada that works significantly better than what we have here. Nobody pays any attention to the farmers, and we are the people who put food on the table every day. And the migrant workers, those are the hands that pick the crops that you eat. Josh Sneddon, Fox at the ForkMonee, Illinois I got into farming because I love to cook. When I was in New Jersey and I was getting my food from local farmers, ranchers and fishermen, the quality of the food was so much better that my spice cabinet became essentially salt and pepper, because the food was good enough [on its own]. I took my entrepreneurial spirit and applied it to my interest in building a local food system driven by higher-quality foods, greater accessibility, and a climate smart focus on our food system. Fox at the Fork is a 10-acre regenerative farm – we grow fruit and nut trees like pecans, persimmons and currants, while also stewarding approximately one acre of land intensively in annual vegetables. It's my fifth year in business. In prior farm bills and administrations, the USDA supported individuals like me who are considered 'beginning farmers'. That's one of their historically underserved categories. The USDA [formerly] created and reinforced programs that supported individuals who hadn't had the same opportunities – Bipoc, LGBTQ+, beginning, veteran farmers – to have an equitable shot at growing and establishing small-scale food businesses in their communities. Being considered a beginning farmer was part of the criteria that has helped me secure NRCS [Natural Resources Conservation Service] grants, one of them being a Conservation Stewardship Program contract. That's a five-year contract that recognizes all of the conservation practices we implemented. For us, that's about [protecting] native prairie; cover cropping; building bird boxes to bring back native kestrels and owls. Almost all federal grants require that some of the money spent is yours and is not reimbursed. So farmers have a stake in the game; it's not just the government giving out corn and soy subsidies. The other program that really helped our farm last year [that has been canceled under the current administration] is the LFPA, the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program. It was getting up to $25m [in Illinois] that had been obligated to the state for food distribution organizations like food banks, who provide food to the community and pay a fair market value to us farmers. I also have a Reap contract – the Rural Energy for America Program – which is another program that faced direct cuts. At the end of last year, I spent approximately $79,000 to install solar, having already received approval and signed paperwork. That grant is a 25% reimbursement through the USDA reap, which is for me, $19,784. I'm still waiting for that. Not receiving that $19,784 has slowed what investments I'm going to make for the year. It's hard to predict the long-term impacts, but the short-term impact is more anxiety, fewer investments on the farm, and likely greater effort trying to get my food placed in the community at a fair market price. Patrick Brown, Brown Family FarmsWarren county, North Carolina I'm a fourth-generation row crop farmer. My home farm is about 165 acres. I also grow industrial hemp fiber and produce – watermelons, leafy greens, tomatoes, sweet corn. We're an impoverished community, and we don't have access to a lot of food, so I try to get healthy options to children especially. We were participants for the past two years in a USDA project – which has just gotten terminated – providing fresh food to local schools. We also created a non-profit to help create a path for young kids that want to become farmers. And I also am a director of a non-profit called Nature for Justice, and we were awarded a USDA Climate-Smart contract to help farmers with conservation practices. All my projects that were funded by the federal government have been terminated during the current administration. It's caused us to pivot. We're so used to not having anything – as a minority farmer, that's the way things have always been. But when you sign a government contract, you feel some sense of, 'this can't be taken away.' I was doing two projects: one for cover crops and nutrient management, and the other one to plant trees to help with erosion and chemical drift, and to create habitat for wildlife. We did all this work and invested all this money, all for them to say, as of 29 January, the project is no longer in place. We were expecting to get over $65,000 this year from work we did in 2024. They claim that I will eventually get the money, but who knows how long that will be held up? Plus, the announcements made during this administration through the secretary of agriculture are not getting down to the rural community offices that represent small farmers. It's almost as if things are announced on social media, and then the offices hear about it. And our local NRCS offices and our Farm Service Agency offices are more understaffed than they've been in 20 years. The technical assistance is non-existent. The main thing we need right now is for our local legislators to speak up for us. A lot of them are being quiet. But we need to advocate against the wrongdoing that is being done to farmers.

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