Sure thing, I’ll do my best to explain it:

One way systems in downtowns are good at one thing: Moving suburbanites into downtown for work, and out of downtown for the commute home.

The cons of them are numerous:

They distribute vitality unevenly, and cause many businesses to fail due to decreased visibility on cross streets (you can’t see a store on the south side of a cross street in the intersection if you are facing north, but you can see it if you are facing south).

They intimidate out of towners, and those not familiar with downtown. It is shown that often a suburbanite will just often just leave downtown all together, rather than loop around the block if they miss their destination.

One way systems move cars faster. This seems like a good thing at the surface, but is actually a really bad thing. A faster car means a car less likely to stop for a pedestrian. A faster car means a higher likelihood of fatality in a pedestrian accident. A faster car means a driver less likely to find a business on a whim they want to purchase from. Simply put, congestion and/or slow driving are objectively good things in downtowns. Slow, two way streets encourage walkability, and they statistically encourage wayyy more sales at local businesses. Slow streets in dense areas are wealth generators.

There’s probably more I can think of but this is the main gist of it.

Found an article quickly if you wanted to read up on it.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-01-31/the-case-against-one-way-streets