Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I appreciate this post for explaining what you are thinking -- I didn't mean to misquote you, but my objection to the last one was that you called the piece racist without saying anything more.
I don't think disparaging antiracist writing is necessarily racist. If an antiracist tract is poorly written and hard to read, saying that could be fair. Do you agree with Akila Lacy's attack on Lee Fang?
|
Im not letting him off the hook so easily.
For all I know, Taibbi is a secret racist. I am more focused on the piece. Taibbi is critiquing the concept of white fragility. ALL concepts - let me repeat, ALL of them - are subject to critique.
His critique is not automatically racist and defense of it is not, either. There are no doubt loads of antiracists out there who think the concept of white fragility has flaws in it. Would they be converted to racists if they say so? To say so in a dismissive manner as Taibbi has? No, and no.
That his words may delegitimize the concept of white fragility does not mean they are automatically racist. It means they are automatically anti-white-fragility-as-a-concept.
One can be antiracist and be anti-white-fragility-as—concept at once. Driving this notion through some heads seems difficult, but these are not mutually exclusive positions.
But nevermind the logic there.
Threaded Mode