Steve, I think my response was muddled. we can ignore most of it. I like your definition of racist being tied to intent more than bias.

But their is one point worth clarifying.

I see you as a voice that can cause change.

But not change among conservatives or among whites. That change is being pressed by the society as a whole.

Instead I see you as a voice to change liberals and POC. If their righteous anger can be properly focused on the true problem, and can be focused in a way that itself is not a kind of racism that creates that which it hopes to destroy, THEN you will have made a HUGE difference. If these efforts can be focused at the root problem, and can be focused in a way that is not exclusionary, THEN they will have a much bigger effect. (I know you know this.)

But notice now, who is your real audience... is is POC and liberals who have that righteous anger boiling in them. We need that rage to remain, but to be slightly revectored. So the reason to ALWAYS say out loud how this IS actually differentially helping those of color who have been differentially harmed, is because that is what your audience needs to hear, to understand that you are on their side.

I know you worry what that white dude will think, and in your mind you hear him saying HEY THAT IS NOT FAIR. and you even agree with him. Sure, but they are not your audience. The larger push which you are revectoring is what will pile drive them into the history books. You just need to accurately AIM that rage for maximum effect.

alot of words.... sorry. I suck at writing compared to you! but think about the levers at your disposal, and the chess game which is a foot.

--dan