We've completed the move from a conversation about definitions to a conversation about activism, which we could take forever hashing out. So I'll just say this, as it sums up the aspect of progressive activism that I find most infuriating.

Do you have any sense of how difficult it is to design and implement effective policy for a single issue? Do you see how slowly conversations about police reform, say, move? And how often they fizzle out onto nothing? Especially because you're constantly battling the tide of idiots screaming things like "aBoLIsH tHe PoLiCe!!" Yet you're suggesting splitting focus between several areas, the racial aspects of which are almost entirely downstream of the universal issues that might, at least, gain widespread support and will make a bigger difference in black people's lives.

Yes, I agree that race and class are (currently, not necessarily) intertwined. But in almost all cases, class is the relevant lever to pull if you're striving for the most meaningful effect.

One of the main points I'm making in the article is that activism should focus on the big, measurable problems first, then adapt if necessary. It's the emergency room doctor dealing with gunshot wounds before broken legs. The brand of "we can do it all" activism you're advocating almost always leads to nothing much happening at all. Sadly, the evidence is very clear that we cannot, in fact, walk and chew gum at the same time.