You are using the word “legend” to suit your purposes; I get it.

You could as easily describe “the welfare queen” depiction as a “lie”. There doesn’t need to be any truth in a lie for it to work its damaging magic on our society.

Indeed. Ibn Khaldun wrote about all this a long time ago.

So you say, and have said, repeitiously, without accounting for important aspects of my replies. (An important part of why I’ve decided not to engage with you further in this thread. Sophisticated, context-cognizant rhetorical/social analysis just does not seem likely in the near future of this exchange. Take the last…

You’re doing a whole lot of repetitious asserting, without accounting for the gaps in your analysis and the shallowness of your read, that have persisted throughout this exchange. Seriously, move on. I’m not obligated to improse your thinking on this subject, though I might have been motivated to do so at some point…

Your assertions are un persuasive and, in my view, uncritical. That said, there are fascists marching about in public and we both probably have bigger fish to fry going forward. Let’s call it a day. Take care, yourself.

Bizarre typo, that.

At the end of the day a year you’ve adopted a position that tells certain others that they mustn’t risk offending the beneficiaries of structural inequality by using strong language or forceful metaphors. I remain unpersuaded that such a position is a step toward that rectification.

“I argue against structural inequality DAILY...”

Jason, can I ask what sources you used for this (excellent) article? I’m interested to know what archive or book I can find that petition in, the one with the sentence “We, the white employees of the Philadelphia Transit Corporation, refuse to work with Negroes as motormen, operators, and station trainmen.” 

A PEDANTBOT IN EVERY HOME. #automation

PEDANTBOT. This is an automated response. Your failure to capitalize the elemental abbreviations in CO2 suggests that you know not whereof you speak. /PEDANTBOT

There are few things more personal than security in one’s livelihood. My question is, are you a paid apologist for the anti-labor team, or are you pissing on your neighbors free of charge?

Cheers. Would you be able to drop me a line? I’m at press at penandanvil dot com.

I’d like to talk to you about printing this reply of yours in a journal I publish, if you’re amenable.

Your question — “Do I deserve to be a irritated?” — is a neat encapsulation of your wrong-headedness in thinking about the role of person responsibility in light of structural inequality.

Christ, don’t be such a pill. Groups which suffer the consequences of structural inequality are generally given a pass to use rhetorical expressions such as these as a means to regain some of the power denied to them by those higher up in the gradient. Hence black power being an acceptable phrase, but white power not;…

That I’m uninterested in engaging in argument with you does not mean I am unable to muster an argument, chumly.

Like I thought — miserable enough.

I’m not sure what kind of dismissive reply to type to you.