So post President Biden’s inauguration speech, we’re going to see more #SouthernStrategy rhetoric emerge.

In particular, white folk being upset about the terms “racism” and “racist.”

And, I’m going to share response technique that my mother always used to clarity her points...

Condemn the actions not the person.
White folk see “racist” through a shallow criteria of taboo racism; saying “nigger” in the open or being a member of the Ku Klux Klan.

Even then racism will be met as an abstract. It’s why even overt racism doesn’t always register.

See; domestic terror attack on the US Capitol.
So because they want to internalize the term as a slur, without giving a single thought to their behavior — separate them.

Condemn the actions not the person.

It’s a great way to dismantle the tactics and put a spotlight on what racism is.

Here’s examples of my mom doing it...
“You’re not bad, but what you said was bad.”

“You’re not stupid, but what you did was stupid.”

This allowed her to correct me by examining my actions, extrapolating deeds and their effect on others.
It ain’t magic, they will spin bullshit, to focus on the term as applied to themselves.

But once you start talking about words, their actions, and impact, you create more ground to discuss racism than just their getting huffy over the word.
“Maybe you’re not racist Senator______, but gerrymandering in these counties racially disenfranchise Black voters.”
“Maybe you’re not racist Congressperson _________, but your COVID vaccines distribution plan mostly served wealth white communities and no those of color despite all CDC data proving POC are at higher risk.”
PS, y’all know I’m first in line to condemn racists, but the hyperbolic pearl clutch for soundbites will need to be met and they don’t get to be offended by being called racist when they are being racist.
PPS, excuse all typos. I haven’t has coffee yet.
Coffee had.

So when you respond, “...but what you said/did was racist.” they will reply (probably indignantly), “How is that statement/action racist?”

🪤 You go...
Use “racist” and “racism” liberally in breaking them down.

“You say ‘illegitimate votes,’ but as all the counties you’re contesting are predominantly Black, your words smack of racism.”

Fuck’em! Let them defend that.

More from Biden

Did you miss the Inauguration of the 46th President of the United States,Joe Biden?This Thread is the perfect synopsis for everything you need to know!

Donald Trump left the White House Wednesday morning. For the first time in 150 years the sitting president didn’t attend the swearing-in of his successor.


Kamala Harris, the first woman and person of color to hold the office of vice president was sworn in by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina member of the Supreme Court.


Chief Justice John Roberts later administered the presidential oath to Biden as Jill Biden held the bible and as his children, Hunter Biden and Ashley Biden, stood by.


President Joe Biden gave his Inaugural address. Check out the full transcript below.
Biden clearly should not do #1. The problem with #2 is that reconciliation delays the inevitable and creates a tiered system where issues that happen to be ineligible - like civil rights and democracy reform - are relegated to second-class status and left to die by filibuster.


This👇is the danger. By using reconciliation you’re conceding the point that major legislation deserves to pass by majority vote, but only certain kinds for arbitrary reasons. Plus the process itself is opaque and ugly. You risk laying a logistical & political trap for yourself.


All the “here’s what you can do through reconciliation” takes are correct but also look through the wrong end of the telescope. Any of the items mentioned, or a small number of them, would be relatively easy. But putting them all together in one leadership-driven mega package...

... with no committee involvement and no real oversight, enduring tough press for jamming a massive package through a close process and stories about lobbyist giveaways while dodging the adverse parliamentary rulings that are virtually inevitable and still maintaining 50 votes...

It’s possible! Maybe the mega-ness of the package ends up helping hold 50 votes. But the ugliness of the process is being underpriced. And to what end? You’re just delaying the inevitable since you can’t use it for civil rights nor can you allow civil rights to die by filibuster.

You May Also Like