Conservatives are retarded when it comes to discussing race. Conservatives treat the progressive position on race as a reasonable position that can be criticized on logical grounds.
Progressives believe that we shouldn’t be racist . . . and in order to not be racist, we need to give preferential treatment to people based on . . . race. The basic principles of the progressive view of race are contradictory.
For example, George Zimmerman is black by the progressive definition of a black person. My wife and I have some good couple friends with children. Their children are consider black – mom’s (half) black and dad’s white – for purposes of obtaining preferential treatments. One quarter black, in other words, means black. Except for when it doesn’t.
The New York (Beta) Times would generally describe George Zimmerman as "African-American." However, Zimmerman was a engaged in an implicitly conservative activity and he killed a suspicious-looking black man. Because of these circumstances, according to the Times, Zimmerman is "white Hispanic." Again, a person is black, except for when he isn’t.
Lots of conservatives are fond of saying things like: "Why is it that Democrats are cruising around accusing everyone in sight of being racist when it is they, not the objects of their ire, who engage in the racist behavior?"
This statement is profoundly ignorant. The implicit assumption behind this statement is that treating people differently based on their race is racist. In reality, racism is a political construct. It’s who – whom all the way down. If you’re a progressive, you’re not racist. This is a fact – conservatives need to accept it. If you’re conservative and you talk about race, you’re racist. The actual content of your message is irrelevant. If you don’t talk about race, you’re almost certainly racist . . . and anyway, it’s close enough since you associate with some people somewhere who said something about race at some time.
Another recent example is Naomi Schaefer Riley. She’s obvious not racist in the logical sense of the word – she’s married to a black dude. But again, the logical sense of the word is irrelevant. She suggested that "the dissertation topics of the [black studies] graduate students mentioned were obscure at best and ‘a collection of left-wing victimization claptrap,’ at worst."
Instead of proving her wrong by pointing to the mountain of high-level scholarship produced by the discipline of black studies, black studies activists got her fired. If you don’t understand what who – whom means, you do now.
Reactionaries could make a huge contribution to political debates if they could find a way to stop conservatives from beclowning themselves when they bring up race. Engaging progressives on the topic of race as if their position was a logical one is playing into their hands. It gives them credit that they don’t deserve.