The author does make somewhat of a point. Though not the one she intended to.
She claims that leftwing methods see oppression as systemic. Presumably meaning that no actual cases of oppression need be cited to prove it exists. This allows them to create “solutions” for problems without first demonstrating their existence.
If you get down into the dirt with actual cases, like UVA, Zimerman and Ferguson, your claims can be disproven with facts.
Much better to stick with, often false, statistics and anonymous anecdotes. Those can’t be disproven.
The astonishing history of recent hoax racist incidents ties into this, of course. If you can’t find actual incidents of racial oppression, you’re perfectly justified in inventing some to illustrate the “deeper truth” you are sure exists.
IOW, what she’s saying is that the Left presumes a problem exists. Actual evidence of individual cases is and should be irrelevant.
The Right works from actual evidence in individual cases to deduce whether a problem is real or not.
She is the classic example of an ideologue.
Excellent analysis. Thanks!