Race relations meeting goes about as expected

About a week ago, a series of roundtable discussions on race issues held in Worcester under the guidance of the Department of Justice wrapped up.  It was a train wreck:

WORCESTER – "Dear white people," started Joyce McNickles, a local activist who was allowed to share her reflections on the city's seven discussions on race at Monday night's final meeting. "I want you to know the most frustrating thing about these dialogues about race was the reluctance to admit that racism actually exists."

It seems that some of those crackers had the white-privilege nerve to disagree:

Etel Capacchione described mixed reactions with many "painful moments" when comments from people of color were "dismissed, attacked or redirected."

"How can you have a dialogue if you can’t speak open and honestly?" Questioned Wanda Alvarado-Eaton.

Let’s have an open discussion about your hateful comments, whitey.

But wait: it gets better and/or worse depending on your viewpoint.  In 2015, the great threat to civil rights is anonymous bloggers:

In talking about her reactions to Worcester's series of talks on race, Wanda Alvarado-Eaton talks about being attacked online by anonymous blogger Turtleboy Sports.

"We need to address issue of this blog," Alvarado-Eaton said. "The people associated with the blog need to be addressed. He and anyone associated with it need to be prosecuted for libel, defamation of character and inciting a riot or race war, as many of his commenters have talked about. It's inappropriate and ultimately a hate crime."

Uh-huh.  Well, I would dispute that but I don’t want to cause “painful moments.”

After seven meetings of fruitless and circuitous chatter, a big flipboard was set up asking this question: “What action will you take as a result of these dialogues?”  Virtually every answer was some variation of “more dialogue” except for one honest soul who wrote “go on vacation.”