[millermp12]

Can we dispense with "minority" and "people of color" when we're talking really about blacks and to a lesser extent hispanics?

This kind of intellectual forgery is why the left (and it's prescriptions) are increasingly viewed with suspicion. Bring yourself to be honest with your words and assessments. Make sure what you say passes the smell test. Otherwise you're just preaching to the converted.

[nmrm2]

It's not just blacks and hispanics. It's a lot of other hues as well. And that's before asking what "black" and "hispanic" even mean, which is highly contextual to culture.

And anyways, "white" isn't even a color -- which is kind of obvious if you think about it for a second because a dark white person and a fair-skinned white person can be as far apart as a dark white person and a latino person. Rather, white is a collection of socio-economic attributes and their indicators, of which color and other physical indicators are only the most obvious/visible. And not all white people have always been white. See e.g. "How the Irish Became White".

[richmarr]

> This kind of intellectual forgery is why the left (and it's prescriptions) are increasingly viewed with suspicion

Tautology. "The left" isn't a thing, other than when viewed with suspicion by "the right".

> Bring yourself to be honest with your words and assessments.

Implying that it's dishonest to use terms like "minority" and "people of color" is a leap that you need to back up to have credibility.