Ironically, introducing the idea that "master" invokes or functions as a reference to race-based slavery, or that "blacklist" relies upon a supposed derogatory reference to skin-colour, is bringing in a racial context where there was none before. Is that really a step forward?

Allowing people who have an inadequate grasp of how human language functions to declare new areas that all right-thinking people should be offended by will not solve problems; rather, it will open the door to whole new categories of them. If you allow linguistic illiteracy to set the terms, then there'll be no end to it.

So, if "whitelist" is supposed to imply or insinuate a doctrine of white supremacy (really, whoever thought that before they were told that it's what righteous people think?), then presumably everybody who continues to use such a term must be at the very best ignorant. If they persist in their belief even after being "educated", presumably they're malevolent and action should be taken against them? Where will this take us? Or if someone fails to promote the language changes with sufficient enthusiasm, they could be suspect; perhaps the witch-hunt should turn to focus on them. This sort of change implicitly announces open season for this sort of McCarthyism.

Are the majority of pixels on this website white because the proprietors are white supremacists? Does the "about" page say that they want "enlightening discussions" because they think that darker skin is associated with ignorance and that anyone with above average melanin in their skin should buy skin-lightening products to look more beautiful? Are these questions a) the silliest ones you've heard for a long time, which only someone who sees all of life through the lens of race (how can that be healthy?) would take seriously, or b) ones people will be taking seriously in a short while or c) both? Who can say? It doesn't appear to be reason or a sane grasp of how languages work that's driving this.

English is a world language, not a parochial North-American possession. Cultural spasms and insecurities amongst 21st century North-American liberals should not lead to a drive to pollute the language for everyone else. There's something ironically paternalistic about a particular sub-group of the world's English speakers making these arbitrary declarations about how these terms really work (in contradiction of how the rest of the English-speaking world, including the Anglophone parts of Africa and Asia, previously understood them) and then demanding that the rest of the world must now confirm to them (whilst supposedly doing it on their behalf). The people of Lagos, Nairobi, Cape Town, Delhi, etc., being told "American liberals have determined that these terms are offensive, and that you were being oppressed by them, even though you never knew it - you should be grateful!" will be a very strange place to end up.