Marley K. , this was a proper dress down and it shows how weak and fragile these kinds of retorts are. They do highlight how entrenched and indebted these individuals are to the ideologies of supremacism and this longing to make America great again.
So when the vanity and insanity of the likes of a Chris Crawford suggests that he has “age, experience and patience” to whitemansplain to you how threatening it is to have you articulate with such captivating influence, — so much so that he had to read and respond — I would take it more as an ill-considered compliment.
Surely, his feeble remonstrative attempts at pointing out reverse-racism by labeling you a racist is quite laughable, because I guess we are all supposed to believe that he is now a victim of this imagined predation in which you daringly challenged a morally corrupted worldview. I hardly see any logic🤔 in that and so I guess that respectively comes from his age, experience, and patience. 🤨
This faux sagacity that he has raised in his response is pseudo profound. Because this sort of racism is insufficiently criminal given the pretext of constitutionality — though it conspicuously espouses hatred or offense to fellow citizenry — there obviously would be no addressable claim nor conviction sought. However, Northam is an elected official, and therefore is subject to calls for impeachment by his constituency, whether Mr. Crawford agrees with it or not. It is obvious that it is Northam’s perfidiousness that has made the public lose confidence with him as representative for them politically. A rational person would find much dissonance with trusting Northam would act in the best interest of people of color or rational whites going forward after learning this bit of information from his past or simply after casting a vote for him in earnest. To simply shut-up and move on is not acceptable nor conscionable to the dignity of humanness.
Anyway, what individuals like Mr. Crawford fails to recognize is that you are not seeking in particular his approval of the perceptible concerns that you have deliberated on in your piece. This is your inalienable right to speech and expression and any attempt to silence or discourage it with such patriarchal overtones is nothing more than resentful histrionics and fragility on their part. It would also be unconstitutional.
That said, what we will not be returning to is what once made America great for white men in particular at the expense of everyone else, even the white women who awkwardly found some benefit from it. What we will seek to do is unlearn why it is so important that we observe the benefit of the doubt so undeservingly granted to figures who evince white entitlement and privilege for just the sake of it. Based on a real sense of history why should we be so inclined to do so?
By the way I thought you sufficiently stated your case here.