Black reverse racism: Guilty regardless of innocence

Some time back, Dr. James White took a lot of flak by certain Social Justice Warrios (SJWs), especially some blacks who evidently see everything according to their racial lenses and falsely accused Dr. White of racism when he made a legitimate observation. The supposedly "Reformed" Reformed African American Network (RAAN) posted an attack piece by Ms. Ekemini Uwan, a black student at Westminster Theology Seminary Philadelphia, an attack piece that made wild and false accusations against Dr. White, an ordained minister of the Gospel. It didn't take a long time, but evidently Dr. White saw that article and decided to respond to it, posting a much better and more thorough critique of it than me.

The problem with black racialists is that whoever stands condemned before the SJW lynch mob is guilty until proven innocent. Or maybe we should say guilty regardless of innocence. As Dr. White succinctly puts it:

But for these folks, all of that is irrelevant: racism has been redefined so that everyone who does not embrace your “lens priority” is liable to be accused, and convicted, without benefit of trial. It is presuppositional.

While nobody is suggesting that Uwan and RAAN are liberals, the ridiculous tactics of playing the victimization card and of taking someone to be guilty regardless of actual innocence is are taken right from the playbook of liberal SJWs. The same kind of faux shaming, the same kind of strident calls for denunciation regardless of the facts, all these have no place in true Christian conduct. So why are supposed Christians engaging in them?

The first act of any proposed accusation is to adequately represent what the other person is saying. It is ludicrous to create a strawman and charge a person with all manner of evil based upon the strawman one creates. That is just basic courtesy and respect and honoring the truth. But such a basic step is totally ignored in SJW sham trials, and in this attack against Dr. White. Even if one thinks Dr. White is guilty, and even if Dr. White were actually guilty, shouldn't you be correctly representing his position? Instead, what we have in Uwan is bearing false witness against a minister of the Gospel. Where is the basic respect one should give to another person? Uwan is studying at Westminster. Presumably, that should have obligated her even more to basic Christian conduct. So why the lies, Uwan? Why the willful distortion of the actual facts, just to prop up your narrative? Yes, I actually know why: because the narrative is treated as axiomatic and everything must conform to that narrative. But is that what a Christian is to do? To lie in service of a narrative because one identifies with said narrative?

To an outsider, someone who is neither white nor black, it is so abundantly clear what is actually happening here. This form of racialism and racism is ugly, very very ugly. I have been put off by people who do it on Facebook, and I will be put off anytime I see anyone does it, even if the person who does it were to be a minister in a Reformed denomination. There is no "race" where slander and lies should be acceptable "as long as they serve the narrative." Away with such false paradigms! Christians ought to have their minds transformed by Christ, not held captive to false paradigms!

Uwan, RAAN and others like the Southern Baptist Russell Moore owe Dr. White an apology for spreading lies about him. I of course hope that they repent, but my experience has been that SJWs are irrational, think they are always right, and will not accept correction of any sort. In the words of Scripture, they love darkness rather than light (Jn. 3:19).