Chamblee54

The New York Times is continuing the slow news day tradition of publishing clickbait content about race. The piece in question is How to Talk to a Racist. If you want to read this feature without interference from the NYT paywall, go here.
The article is useless. Twitter has people sharing the link. Clever people answer the question, how to talk to a racist, with one word: don’t. PG had too much free time, and read some of the comments. A thought came through. With all of this talk about talk, does anyone say anything about listening? As it turns out, the article does. Towards the end of the piece, we see this: “They’ll listen to what you have to say if they trust you’ll listen to what they have to say back.” This is an optimistic approach.
The next paragraph is where this feature begins to wrap things up, in anticipation of the ending. There is an 83 word sentence. “When you encounter a person who believes he’s merely honoring his ancestors by driving a car with an image of the Confederate battle flag on the tag, when a Facebook friend announces that it’s disrespectful to take a knee during the national anthem, when you sit down next to someone at the church picnic who genuinely loves and respects the black people they know but who consistently votes for politicians with overtly racist policies, stop for just a moment and take a breath.” Racist or woke, that sentence is a grammar nightmare.
The first example is “a person who believes he’s merely honoring his ancestors by driving a car with an image of the Confederate battle flag on the tag.” This person paid extra money to have a status license plate with the Stars and Bars. He may be honoring his ancestors, which is not a crime, yet. He may be giving the finger to uppity liberals, like @MargaretRenkl, author of the NYT piece. He might be a genuine white supremacist, and is advertising this attitude in hope of starting trouble. It is unlikely that most people will have much contact with him, except for seeing the license plate in traffic. Maybe the state agency raising money this way should be challenged.
The second example is “when a Facebook friend announces that it’s disrespectful to take a knee during the national anthem.” Holy red herring. A washed up quarterback does not stand for the national anthem. A orange haired politician makes political hay. Millions of football fans are offended when their ritual patriotism is not performed properly. Since Colin Kaepernick, presumably, had a black bio-dad, this is now racism. This issue is a waste of our national energy. It will have no impact, whatsoever, on the police brutality it purports to protest.
The third example is “when you sit down next to someone at the church picnic who genuinely loves and respects the black people they know but who consistently votes for politicians with overtly racist policies.” (The article has a subtle Christian slant, with a reminder to “Think of the plank in your own eye.”) Why are you talking about politicians at a church picnic anyway? What are the “overtly racist policies?” Who was the opponent? Maybe both candidates had “overtly racist policies,” as well as covertly crooked campaign financing. You are going to do a lot of breathing.
This post has gone on long enough. If you want to hear snarky comments about how yukky racists are, go online 24/7. If you want to learn how to talk to racists, or better yet, how to shut up and listen, google might be of some assistance. Or maybe not. Pictures today are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.