10. "I just don't get how "whiteness"" In response to In response to 0 Tue Feb-28-17 02:59 PM by Stringer Bell
gets to go unchecked here in this article, as a stand-in for the evil traits that happen to be exclusively available to white people in a white-supremacist society. It's neither precise nor responsible usage.
As with "Dear White People" (which, were it titled "Dear Racist White People" I'd have no problem with), the problem is one of conflation of essential qualities with inessential ones, in a manner totally inconsistent with the liberal/non-racist worldview that is the only apparent way forward for a peaceful multicultural society.
The article's conflation of "whiteness" itself as that trait which "terrorizes" is such a direct contradiction to the careful way liberal non-racist people don't seek to conflate (for example) "blackness" or "Jewishness" with any inessential quality, even positive ones (like a greater propensity for athleticism or wealth-building).
Indeed, gender theorists on the left have even told us that it would be incorrect to assert that Maleness suggests anything other than certain anatomical differences.
How does one hold this cognitive dissonance: that possessors of Blackness and Femaleness have Satre-like existential freedom, to be anything they like, while Whiteness is somehow imbued with hereditary sleaze?