Maybe movements for justice--and the people who comprise them--shouldn't limit themselves to what does well with the centrist white focus groups, despite what the Savvy Analysts™ think.
(Notice all the Savvy Analysts™ are white men. As are all those who QT them approvingly or respond with gushing praise to their "don't let woke politics ruin Democrats' chances" takes. I'm not exaggerating--literally every reply I saw was from a white dude)
"Well, Dr. King, you make some good arguments, but there are key white voter blocs who just aren't comfortable with all this 'social justice wokeness,' so we're gonna have to ask you to cool it with the marching. Also, 'we shall overcome' seems a bit too confrontational..."
"Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good," say the people who prize procedural inertia over the discomfort of real justice.
Maybe civil rights for all shouldn't be hostage to the delicate feelings of defensive white people? Just spitballing here.
Everyone knows the Fredrick Douglass quote. "if there is no struggle, there is no progress." But it's worth reading the full passage: 
The key point that Douglass identified: "power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has and never will." The Matty Y's of the world are the power structure itself, refusing to concede, and telling you to stop with all the pesky demands.
It's always the same people being asked to compromise, to be patient, to tone down their language, to not be so pushy, etc etc etc. There's a reason for that. But it's also a sign that movements for justice might actually be accomplishing as something, and we should keep it up.
In other words, if it's making the white people who've made centrism their brand uncomfortable, it's the right thing to keep doing.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
