Who Among Us Hasn’t Inartfully Expressed Our Racism?

“We should call all of this what it is: an immoral, dishonest, and scurrilous smear campaign. And this sort of thing will only intensify.” https://t.co/6FTeAIq9Qn

— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) January 27, 2022

Campaign against who?

“Former Cato Institute director Ilya Shapiro, now executive director of Georgetown’s Center for the Constitution, wrote, 'Objectively best pick for Biden is Sri Srinivasan, who is solid prog and [very] smart. Even has identity politics benefit of being first Asian (Indian) American. But alas doesn’t fit into last intersectionality hierarchy so we’ll get lesser black woman. Thank heaven for small favors?'" reported Blake Montgomery.

"In a second tweet, Shapiro added, 'Because Biden said he’s only consider [sic] black women for SCOTUS, his nominee will always have an asterisk attached. Fitting that the Court takes up affirmative action next term.'" 

According to the report, Shapiro has now deleted both tweets and called them "inartful," while Georgetown Law Dean William Treanor denounced the comments as "demeaning," "appalling," and "at odds with everything we stand for at Georgetown Law" in an email.

Well, he was just inartful! He meant to hide his racism more carefully.

What’s really sad is that the institution that employs Shapiro is part of the immoral, dishonest and scurrilous campaign.

The Tweets are at odds with everything we stand for at Georgetown Law and are damaging to the culture of equity and inclusion that Georgetown Law is building every day,” [Bill] Treanor [Dean of Georgetown University Law Center] wrote.

But, you know, cancel culture, so the school can’t distance itself too far. Or it can. Stay tuned.

I will agree using the word “intersectionality” in any context is inartful. It’s just a word you shouldn’t even use in jest.