Miller and Bannon have gone ridiculously out of their way (and gotten thrown out in the courts over and over) to create explicitly racist policies.
They want to spend trillions to build an ineffectual wall to keep out the "other" - and you say that "the only institutional racism is affirmative action" ... that's what I would expect to hear from a white middle class person whose not experienced any hardship due to their race... ever?
Also securing a country’s border is not racist.
I'm really curious what arguments the downvoters of the parent post have to say and why they didn't say them.
I don’t agree with a lot of political opinions of others but I don’t try to pretend like I don’t understand where they are coming from. Requiring someone to explain something you already know is how you would keep people eternally occupied with meaningless work, not what you would do to have a fruitful conversation. What you’re doing here is one reason why no one ever makes any progress these days in resolving their differences.
Many people view affirmative action as racist.
I could even imagine there existing a proponent of affirmative action who says, "Yes, I concede it's racist, but it's racist for the sake of helping the downtrodden, not racist for the sake of hurting the downtrodden, so it's OK."
So if people want to argue against affirmative action, they probably need to say why it's bad specifically, not just that it's racist.
Meanwhile, you didn't even attempt to provide nuance to my interpretation of "affirmative action", nor did you try to counter my argument in any way whatsoever. Seems more like you're in bad faith by trying to use a vague claim like "overly simplistic" without providing any sort of support.
Otherwise you are preaching to the choir, my friend.
Look, like any religion, both racism and racial equality statements require careful interpretation by certified personnel. Applying common sense will inevitably lead to blasphemy and the producer of the heresy will be burnt at the stake.