Well, I know you are being sarcastic, but my initial impression of the article was that while I agreed with everything the author stated, I felt the author was

Well, I know you are being sarcastic, but my initial impression of the article was that while I agreed with everything the author stated, I felt the author was no where as subtle as she thought she was in herself promoting this polarization by what was left out. All of the examples were one sided (and imo true, with many worse ones left unmentioned), while there was no mention of the elephant - the world view that all members of a certain race are racist by definition, and that all interactions between races are, by definition, based on race, no matter what the context. How is this not demonizing the "other" ? My fear is that what used to be disagreements over what rights an individual has (who to marry, what to do in your personal space, what if any deities to bow before, what you are able to do with your own body) have turned into disagreements over what framework we should use to govern our society. Individual rights, imo, need to be respected, and can be done without infringing on anyone else. However, the current undercurrent of how we should govern ourselves as a society (marxism vs capitalism) is something that we all, as a society, need to abide by, and that differences in these views, historically, has been settled through war.