The word “racism” doesn’t mean whatever the right says it means.
The winger right has been losing the argument on race for quite some time now, culminating in 2008′s election of Barack Obama as President of the United States. It’s driving them insane, too. ABL talked about the idiotic Derrick Bell “hug-troversy” yesterday, and the right is gleefully pointing to young Harvard Law Review president Barack Obama speaking about diversity and Harvard faculty as proof he’s a “racist”.
This is because the right loves to reframe the definition of anything bad as “something that applies primarily to liberals.” It goes something like this: “We’re tired of being called racist by you people, so we’re going to define racism as ‘including race in the consideration of anything’ and therefore that means all liberals are racists. We win. What are you going to do about it? You can’t deny that liberals are aware of race in differing points of view and take them into consideration through diversity and inclusiveness. That means you’re defining people by race, and that makes you racists, Q.E.D. Oh, and we’re done talking to you about this, because we don’t talk to racists.”









Comment of the Week: "Race and Racism – Why Joan Walsh Doesn't Get It" – A Salon Commenter [Bonus ABL rant included]
Joan Walsh and David Sirota will *never* get it, and I am giving up.
Salon commenter Jcwtts1 writes:
→ 35 Comments
Posted in Comment of the Week, Now That's Some Racist Bullsh*t
Tagged David Sirota, Joan Walsh, race, racism, Salon, Salon.com, The Grand Conversation on Race