>As it happened, the march was fairly racially mixed - but suppose it
>hadn't been. Imagine I'd written a post on Lbo-talk the next day
>saying "I went to check out the Diallo march, but everybody was
>black so I felt a bit uncomfortable and left." People may or may not
>have been able to muster any scraps sympathy for such a sentiment.
I think you've misrepresented what the writer said. There's nothing in there about leaving because everybody's white.
Nor is there any direct correlation with the imagined scenario you describe and the actual scenario the writer opened with. Part of the problem with discussing this topic is that it is hard to see how they are different. It's that difference that Tim Wise takes off from when he gets all preachy and self-righteous. But fuck him. Just because he's an asshole doesn't change the fact that what you describe and what the writer of that article was trying to get across are not the same thing.
>But if I then went on to actually condemn the organizers for their
>failure to accommodate my delicate white feelings by presenting
>enough white faces to make me feel comfortable - I mean, talk about chutzpah.
I didn't see condemnation of organizers in that piece. I'm tempted to use a phrase aimed here more than once at people who've been complaining about Michaels, i.e. "this piece must be touching a nerve." but I won't. :-)