The New York Times thinks it's responsible to validate that worldview.
Guess what you guys Port Huron MI racists still like the racist guy, and they don't think that makes them racists.
When somebody says to me that the word “racist” no longer has any meaning, that means they now understand that the meaning applies to themselves and they refuse to investigate the implications.
In a racist society, it’s everywhere. It’s not something you get to opt yourself out of.
But one advantage racism gives to those it unjustly advantages is the option to not see racism.
Which is what the NYT is trying to do.
but a white person does get to decide “I’m not racist for voting against police reform, because I didn’t think the words ‘I will do a racism’ as I voted.”
That alignment is racism. The reasons for the alignment are utterly immaterial to that fact.
Just as well to go to the local swimming pool and ask people in the water if they think they’re wet.
I derive unjust advantage because of arbitrary phenotypes my society has identified as “white”
This advantage comes to me automatically in ways that I find I cannot opt out of.
All I can do is confess it and refuse to align with it.
Racism requires a very specific meaninglessness.
All that remains is to self-exonerate your own individual thoughts.
Assisting racists in this exercise has been the NYT project with these heartland Trump voter pieces.
I think the impulse to make the first priority self exoneration and separation from the crime of it is just another part of it.
Let’s see those assholes try to dodge the implications of THAT.
And, therefore, the freedom to improve.
This is why those aligned with racism hate being called racist so much more than those aligned against it.
It scares them to self-confront. They must deny.
As we see.
These are false and miserable people.
If you watch, you can see they know it.
Understanding it would require finally seeing it.
Which is why the simple observation of it is so often received as if it were an accusation.