I take issue with her desire to leave race out of the discussion. That's precisely the problem with race in America: race is a decent first-order approximation of class, with all the bad that entails. If we could address that head-on, if people didn't automatically assume that others of the same race are 'like them' and others of a different race are 'unlike them,' and not have those things be true, then racism would be a thing of the past — or, at least, no worse than the silliness one sees about redheads/gingers. The colour of one's skin has no more effect on one's worth as a human being than the colour of one's hair: the day that it's seen as no more important is the day racism is dead. But as long as race and class are conflated, that day won't come.
> The ban on smoking in restaurants – which, let me be clear, I am wildly in favor of, being someone who can't patronize a business with cigarette smoking in it
Can't? Given that tobacco smoke contains no allergens, methinks the mot juste would be 'won't.'
> I empathize when social classes not mine find themselves on the short end of the stick, such as in the above account of smoking regulations, but that doesn't mean I'd do anything to change that outcome. Like, "Wow, it must suck to have your class' norms so disrespected by a change in the law like that. Welp, I'm off to buy a burger in this now refreshingly smoke-free burger joint, and discuss with my class-peers how else we can change public policy to make it more support my class' norms – even, if necessary, at your class' norms' expense."
What was wrong with the previous policy, which meant that some places catered to the author's class and some places catered to other classes?