I agree with you on that.
The article is well structured and well argued. Its analysis is clear and compelling. Its conclusions are irrefutable.
Which, I imagine, explains why the response was an ad hominem attack on the author.
(I think the attack was poorly made, though, and I tried to point that out.)
The outrage it suggested?
How dare anyone suggest that white people quietly listen to others' complaints and then take appropriate actions to remedy injustice!
