Thanks so much for your post PE! Its worth remembering that obfuscating meaning is one of the key elements of supremacist politics. Walter Benjamin writes about this in “the work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction.” One has a moral obligation to be informed so as to function in civic life without unconsciously harming others. Passing judgement on the past and the present is therefore a moral obligation we have to each other, but the obligation comes with a cost biblically gestured to as the sword of Damocles. To give up on judging our peers (historical or otherwise) is to allow and even beg for domination (and not even in a fun way). All that said, calling out individuals is rarely productive because of the above dynamics except in the worst cases. Describing systems or environments as supremacist or whatever is productive because in the best sense it allows people to realign. This is why hanlon’s razor is also bunkum. The difference between a malicious act and an ignorant one only matters to the individual conscience, to the wider group of people the effect is cumulative and undifferentiated. Look at Edward Said’s “Orientalism” as a classic on this point. As for that letter from the 70s. Its clearly fucked considering the political environment of the day. Whether or not the individual actor also wears a klan hood in his spare time is irrelevant; his letter is evidence of a larger environment that we know full and well was a racist one (latter day civil rights movement). The same goes for the goings on throughout this board. Individual actors might not have been this or that, but the cumulative effect was pretty nasty.