i went on to say that i was "not saying he’s consciously and intentionally trying to assert his superiority. I’m just trying to point out that his language is typical of that (white) journalistic voice which presupposes the (white) journalist’s authority."

i wasn't calling him a racist, i was saying his writing voice was needlessly paternalistic and presumptuous and that these qualities are typical of a type of journalism that is largely written by white people about black people. i never said he wasn't allowed to talk about rap, he's a grown man, he can do whatever he wants, i was just pointing out the problems i had with *how he wrote this specific article.* i'm sorry that if by attempting to say something even mildly nuanced about race i'm going so far over your head that you have to dismiss it as a "post-colonial jerk-off session."

paternalism aside, you seem not to have noticed that my main argument was that his terms were vague and inconsistent and that the argument of whether or not "hip hop is dead" itself seems moot.

if you want to critique my shit then actually read it.