Allow me to help you with that, as an NYT subscriber.
https://pastebin.com/WAC3UAXM
The link is a transcript of the article, set to expire in one week and unlisted, to ensure that I don't hurt the newspaper's income in any way.
Oh my fucking non-existent god most of that article is so awful it hurts. People are supposed to have sympathy for Murdoch for him losing one of his mansions in the California fires or treat McCain's offensive politics with silk gloves? Hate of whiteness "as a system" is implied to be offensive and racist? (The concept and system of "whiteness" is the base for separating races and modern racism, it is not referring to the white people as a race.)
If it's not referring to white people as a race, then why use the term "whiteness?" I'm sure there are plenty of terms they could've used that aren't as loaded. Maybe I'm just being ignorant, but surely they could've called it something like "root racism." Could you imagine if they called it "Jewishness?"
And I love how you singled out the most controversial examples cited and wrote off the entire article because of them. Tell me, why didn't you mention the "Your DNA is an Abomination" article? It's only the example that starts the article.
https://thoughtcatalog.com/emily-goldstein/2015/05/get-rid-of-white-people/
Really? I hope that this is one of those moments where you didn't read your own links. "Emily Goldstein" calling for white genocide? The troll is so obvious that one of the first Google results for the name is an anti-semitic blog calling them out for doing harm to anti-semitic conspiracy theories.
I was hoping somebody would catch that. Thank you for pointing out that "assume they're being serious" isn't always the best course of action.
A lot of this seems like nutpicking, just because some of the most extreme outliers of people who talk about Black Pride, like the ones mentioned in the NYT piece, are raving loonies who call whites abominations doesn't discredit the idea of Black Pride per se-nor does it alter the fact that in the "anglosphere", whites are socially and economically on top and generally know who their ancestors were so don't have to fall back on skin color.
Way back in the day Run DMC used to rap about being proud to be black, if they thought white people were abominations what the hell were they doing performing with Aerosmith?
Who said anything about black pride? I'm talking about anti-white racism. And yes, it's generally white people who make up the social and economic elite in the Anglosphere, but that doesn't mean we should assume all white people have it easy. Rural people are more likely to be white, and the current economic problems hit them especially hard.
And where were your complaints about nutpicking when Askold posted the racist responses to the post that began the campaign?
But I'm sure you think I should assume they are serious. That I should assume the Affinity writer genuinely wants to ban white men from voting and thought catalog girl really wants to be murdered. So why? Why should I assume they are serious but the guy claiming to be a nazi isn't? What's the difference?
Who said anything about assuming the self-proclaimed white supremacist is a troll? I merely said that on a website where no accounts exist and trolls make up a lot of the userbase, there's always the possibility that they're just being ironic. And yes, it is possible that the Affinity article was intended as satire. But hey, I'm not the one who said we should assume every rustle in the grass is a tiger, just to be on the safe side.