Kirkpatrick says that the pushback against Critical Race Theory "isn’t about white identity," but rather, about "people who really believe in colorblindness pushing back against an effort to make everything about race." I don't see a meaningful distinction.
When a system privileges one racial group over another, then advocating colorblindness is no different from advocating for the interests of the disadvantaged group, because colorblindness is in that group's best interest. This is why progressives conflate civic nationalism with ethnonationalism and meritocracy with white supremacy. They know that any system that is truly fair will put their favored groups at a de facto disadvantage by not giving them an artificial advantage.
Does Kirkpatrick prefer explicit white identity politics to colorblindness? I ask not because I seek to shame Kirkpatrick for his views, but because I was under the impression that VDARE.com wasn't a white nationalist website, but a brutally honest civic nationalist one.
James Fulford writes: We feel that the system is currently prejudiced against whites, who do better, even as Second Class Citizens, than other citizens who may be second-rate. And while we are not white nationalists, we see nothing wrong with politicians appealing either implicitly or explicitly to the interests of whites as a group.