"[I]nsisting on this taboo [of the n-word] makes it look like black people are numb to the difference between usage and reference, vague on the notion of meta, given to overgeneralization rather than to making distinctions."

"To wit, to get [NYT reporter Donald] McNeil fired for using the N-word to refer to it makes black people look dumb. And not just to the Twitter trollers who will be nasty enough to actually write it down. Non-black people are thinking it nationwide and keeping it to themselves. Frankly, the illogic in this approach to the N-word is so obvious to anyone who does make distinctions that the only question is why people would not look on and guiltily wonder whether the idea that black people are less intellectually gifted is true."

Writes John McWhorter (who is African American) in "The N-word as slur vs. the N-word as a sequence of sounds/What makes the New York Times so comfortable making black people look dim?" (Substack).

We talked about the ousting of McNeil a couple days ago, here. I commented on the loss of the old "use/mention" distinction. McWhorter is adding something important: Those who have rejected the distinction are perpetuating — and maybe even relying on — a racist stereotype. I hasten to add that McWhorter doesn't say "racist," "racism," or "stereotype." He says that those who've made it taboo to say the n-word — even just to refer to it — are making it "look like" they think black people are too dumb to understand the distinction. 

Why don't those who believe racism is pervasive feel compelled to analyze the racism in their own efforts to fight racism? Surely, their meaning well isn't enough. McWhorter is pointing out a background belief that is reflected in the ban on merely saying the "sequence of sounds" that is the n-word. If that isn't a call to do more "work" understanding systemic racism, then the game of critical race theory is rigged.