The Identity Trap - New York Times

The final two points I’d make are: First, this whole show seems stale and deranged to the younger set, as Obama and Clinton seemed to recognize when they damped down the feud yesterday afternoon. The interesting split is not between the feminist and civil rights Old Bulls, it’s between the establishments of both movements, who emphasize top-down change, and the younger dissenters, who don’t. Second, this dispute is going to be settled by the rising, and so far ignored, minority group. For all the current fighting, it’ll be Latinos who end up determining who gets the nomination.

Latinos? You think?

If that is true, then saddle up for Hillary, because there is a bit of a race war going on between blacks and latinos that the MSM seems entirely unaware of.

By the way, what are the new PC capitalization rules? In Brooks’ piece, I see the following:

white male

African-American

black or female thing

black radio stations

Latinos

I hazily suspect that you are supposed to capitalize terms when they refer to ethnic origin somehow, hence “African-American” and “Latino,” but not when descriptives are used: black, white, male, female.

In order to keep the capitalization wars equal, should we then refer to Latinos (or “Hispanics”) as “browns,” when we are using “black” to mean “African-American?” or “white” to mean “Caucasian-American” or “European-American?”

I dunno. It’s so hard to keep up with the proper grammar and nomenclature rules for the various sects of the perpetually aggrieved.

UPDATE: Anent this Brooks file: The Volokh Conspiracy - -

Uh, that would be critic of affirmative action Ward Connerly, not disgraced professor Ward Churchill….

No, I didn’t catch it either. But I should have. And as for the fifty layers of editors and fact checkers at the NYT….

Submit to Stumbled Upon!