I think Reed does what Michaels doesn't, coming up with an understanding of the role of race in contemporary US politics which doesn't depend on the idea of diversity. The critique of diversity is a useful part of coming up with such an understanding, so I can see why Reed would support Michaels. I don't know if support would go the other way, though - my problem with Michaels is not only that he doesn't come up with an alternative analysis of race, he doesn't even seem to think one is necessary. I've just listened to Michaels on your show from yesterday, and what he says seems to confirm this.
--
"The slightly richer ... eat in semi-darkness, preferring
candles to electricity. These candles make me laugh. All the
electricity belongs to the bourgeoisie, yet they eat by
candle-end. They have an unconscious fear of their own
electricity. They are embarrassed, like the sorcerer who has
called up spirits he is unable to control."
-- Vladimir Mayakovsky http://blog.voyou.org/ voyou at voyou.org