Wait a Minute...

From FF: "Someone is unrelentingly waving their relationships with First Nations people in the conversation, to distract from the fact that she seems to think that if a handful of First Nations people disagree with a particular First Nations activist (who is of the same ethnicity), she's not going to say it out loud, but that means he's wrong. Which is racist, because it implies that all people of the same ethnicity are expected to adhere to the same set of politics."

I think FF is officially off his rocker. I'm almost ashamed at the fact that this argument needs to be debunked, but as long as FF is spewing these inherent falsehoods I will persevere. Before I argue I need to lay the conditions on which FF's argument is formed:

(a) Person Z believes in some principle/organization/thing/whatever
(b) Persons B, C, & D disagree with person Z on said subject
(c) Persons B, C, D, & Z are of the same race
(d) Person A presumes that person Z is wrong about said subject

Given the above conditions... 1) is person A making the assumption that all people of that particular race should hold the same opinion on the selected subject? and 2) is person A racist because of this presumption?

In both cases the answer is obviously no. The biggest fallacy to FF's argument is that there is no condition stating why person A disagrees with person Z. It could be because person A has heard the arguments from both sides and determined that person Z is on the incorrect side. It could be that person A is friends with person B, C, and/or D and is taking their side because of that relationship. It could be because person A doesn't like person Z and is being intentionally contrary. Or it could be because it's a Tuesday and that is what person A has decided to believe for the moment. Whatever the reasoning, it is illogical to take the above conditions and draw the conclusion that person A is being racist.