If you accept that racism strongly structures American life (a Coates‑style view), the practical political response is to de‑emphasize race in messaging and policy framing to build broader coalitions. This means welcoming converts (e.g., ex‑Republicans) and foregrounding universal, classed policy rather than identity appeals.
— It reframes progressive electoral strategy by arguing that effective anti‑racism in politics requires lowering racial salience to win majorities.
Jerusalem Demsas
2026.01.12
92% relevant
The podcast centers on Matthew Yglesias’s core claim that liberal policy and messaging shifted from judging individuals to grouping and collective moral blame — precisely the contention summarized in the existing idea that accepting structural racism can make the pragmatic political stance to 'de‑emphasize race.' The episode is a direct public articulation of that policy tradeoff (actor: Matthew Yglesias; format: influential podcast).
2026.01.06
65% relevant
Both pieces treat moral framing as a strategic, coalition‑building problem: the article’s point that accepting structural moral claims can make political strategy favor de‑emphasizing race maps onto the existing idea’s suggestion that acknowledging systemic racism may counsel lowering racial salience in messaging to build broader coalitions.
2025.12.30
85% relevant
Asiedu argues for de‑emphasizing race‑first narratives and warns that framing all moral questions through 'melanin' corrodes relationships — an argument that closely mirrors the existing idea's claim that effective politics may require lowering racial salience and reframing messaging to build broader coalitions.
Matthew Yglesias
2025.10.03
100% relevant
Yglesias cites Ta‑Nehisi Coates’s truth‑telling stance and links it to MLK/Rustin/W.J. Wilson’s race‑deemphasizing approach, then points to Geoff Duncan (ex‑GOP running as a Democrat in GA) and Andrew White (a moderate 'Independent Democrat' in TX) as tent‑expanding examples.