The Solar Eclipse Was Racist According to Law School Professor

Think you’ve heard it all? Just wait. Here’s a story that’ll knock your socks off: A liberal law school professor claims that the solar eclipse was racist because its path did not cast a shadow on enough black people.

Actually she felt so strongly about the eclipse being racist, she wrote a 4,544 word article about it in The Atlantic.

She does realize that the sun and moon literally cannot have racial preferences, right? They shine on everyone same.

The Daily Caller reports that the article does not appear to be “satire.”

Concerning “the Great American Eclipse,” Brooklyn Law School professor Alice Ristroph writes in the rapidly deteriorating magazine, “there live almost no black people” “along most of its path.”

The Atlantic’s longwinded law professor assures readers that “implicit bias of the solar system” is “presumably” not the cause of eclipse’s failure to affect enough black people.

She said, “Still, an eclipse chaser is always tempted to believe that the skies are relaying a message.” She goes on to explain that the eclipse will first be visible in Oregon where it is “almost entirely white.” “There are very few black Oregonians, and this is not an accident.”

Trending: Every Natural Right Protected in the Bill of Rights Is a Property Right? Here’s Why

Right, because the dang moon decided exactly where it would cast a shadow.

After an extensive discourse criticizing the U.S. Census, The Atlantic tells readers that the eclipse will travel through Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa and Missouri. In this section of its essay, The Atlantic manages to drop the names of Bruce Springsteen, Jesse James, Eminem, Chelsea Manning, Michael Brown and Howard Zinn (a shallow socialist writer panned even by most serious socialists).

“There are too many damn facts,” The Atlantic also complains.

After considerable whining about the Electoral College and the way Congress is organized, The Atlantic moves on to southern Illinois, Kentucky and Tennessee. There’s substantial discussion of the Ku Klux Klan in this section — and, of course, slavery.

So basically, she says it’s racist because not enough black people were in the direct line of sight. Nevermind the fact that nearly everyone in the United States could witness it, or travelled to witness it. OR how about the fact that it did cross states that have many black people living in them.

For example: Georgia.

Liberals will bend ANYTHING to fit their narrative

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Send this to a friend