Iām going to keep this short, because variants of this piece have been written so many times that spending more than 600 words on this will make my ears explode.
On Twitter earlier today, New York Times features writer Elizabeth Williamson shared a piece from columnist (and colleague) Bret Stephens about Sarah Jeong, whose hiring by the Times two weeks ago immediately sparkled a tsunami of performative and fake-as-the-fuck outrage over a series of tweets where Jeong picked fun at white peopleāwhite men, specifically.
Suggested Reading
Williamson has since deleted that tweet, but below is a screenshot of it when it was shared in The Rootās Slack.
This sentence contains two whopping lies. First, of course, is the idea that Sarah Jeong āhas yet to proveā that she deserves confetti cake and a fucking ticker tape parade from her new co-workers. And, as Williamson tweeted, if Jeong doesnāt deserve a classy welcome from the people who she was recently hired to work with and next to, what exactly does she deserve? A bag of dog shit at her cubicle? A disinvitation to a Slack room? A really intense sneer? CAN THESE PEOPLE PLEASE JUST GET THE FUCK OFF OF SARAH JEONGāS NUTS?
After reading Williamsonās tweet, curiosity got the best of me and I clicked on and read Bret Stephensā āclassy welcome.ā And now Iām blind. I can still see well enough to write this, but I can feel my vision decreasing by the second.
Predictably, Stephens doubled down on the assertion that what Jeong did is racist and fits well within the definition of racism. To strengthen his point, he included a nice little jab at āliberals.ā
We should call many of these tweets for what they are: racist. Iāve seen some acrobatic efforts to explain why Jeongās tweets should be treated as āquasi-satirical,ā hyperbolical and a function of āsocial context.ā But the criteria for racism is either objective or itās meaningless: If liberals get to decide for themselves who is or isnāt a racist according to their political lights, conservatives will be within their rights to ignore them.
I do not know if Bret Stephens has internet access. I think (and hope) he does, but Iād be wrong to assume. You can never be too sure. I, however, do. And, with this internet access, I was able to jaunt over to Merriam-Webster to see how racism is defined there.
1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2aĀ : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
bĀ : a political or social system founded on racism
It would seem as if the actual definition of racism from the actual fucking dictionary addresses the fact that racism is incomplete without power. This is not some double meaning arbitrarily decided upon by liberals to fit a political agenda. THE FULL DEFINITION IS IN THE FUCKING BOOK OF DEFINITIONS.
Forget about whether Sarah Jeong gets a classy welcome. Can someone please let Bret Stephens borrow a wifi password?
Straight From
Sign up for our free daily newsletter.