The Trouble with Low Hanging Fruit
For the past 10 years, software developers have largely used the same tool to keep track of the files that make up your favorite applications. Think of it as a Google Drive for code that makes it easy to save different versions of the same files so that you can test and tinker without breaking the original copy. By default, this original copy is called the “master” branch. For the past week, a small corner of Tech Twitter has been engulfed in debate about the merits of changing this convention, due to what some call an insensitive reference that evokes the memory of slavery.
Like many other industries, the tech sector is viewing this moment as a sort of reckoning. As aspiring allies examine the role that they can play in creating more inclusive environments in a sector notoriously lacking in diversity, they don’t have to look hard to find the informed opinions of Black leaders across this space. They have called for changes in inequitable hiring practices. They have long since pointed out discrepancies in funding afforded to Black founders compared to their white peers. They have called out companies based on a lack of Black representations amongst their partners, executive leadership, and boards of directors. They’ve made it as clear as a six-word directive, “make the hire, send the wire.” Thus, you could imagine my confusion upon seeing the hill that our allies have chosen to die upon.
Do not get me wrong. This effort to erase the term “master” from the field of software engineering is certainly not ill-intended. It is just nowhere to be found on the long list of grievances that we have pinned to the chapel door.
I have found myself glued to this debate because it is emblematic of so many other conversations about racial justice that are being held on behalf of but not with Black people. The effort does little to materially improve the lives of Black people in the space. And in fact, it may actually be hurting our cause by detracting from other efforts that are taking place in the industry or by absolving those in power of their duty to do more by succumbing to this simple but ultimately meaningless gesture.
So you may be asking, “how in the hell did we get here?” Well, people typically rationalize these sorts of efforts by saying “it costs you nothing” or “it’s worth it if it helps even one person.” It’s driven by a desire to do something. Thus, we cohere around what we view as the easy win. However, I would argue that when it comes to matters of racial justice, there is no such thing as low hanging fruit. Though some battles may be harder fought than others, in all arenas we are attempting to wrestle power from those who have been warned for decades of the dangers of “giving an inch.” This can be seen by the predictably large amount of pushback that this master branch initiative has received. This free and trivial show of solidarity has been met with the same amount of deflection, intellectualizing, and bigotry that one would expect of any proposal that would actually level the playing field in a substantive way for Black people.
If, no matter what, we will have to contend with an opposition that will fight as if every inch conceded will translate to a mile, then we might as well get the whole damn mile. As I note the influence of allies weighing in on this debate, I can only think about the impact of their collective efforts if they were instead directed toward their own companies’ recruiting, hiring, or advancement practices. This is not a matter of either/or, it’s a question of order of operations. If we win the battle for inches, Black people will continue to walk into the same inequitable institutions that exist today; however, when we again raise the grievances that sparked this battle for low-hanging fruit in the first place, our detractors will say “What more do you want? We gave you the ‘master’ branch.”
