i once heard chomsky describe angela davis as "reasonable", and she subsequently avoided much of the criticism he'd level at a zizek or a foucault. as much of an icon as he is on the left, he seems to be more of a pragmatist than an idealist (and he'd no doubt whisper-yell at me for saying that, as true as i think it is).

so, she was reasonable enough to organize with.

he's described richard dawkins using precisely the same language.

in the context of the united states specifically, as well as in south africa, her system makes quite a bit of sense; it's a reasonable deconstruction of american or south african slavery. it's when you try to extrapolate it that you end up making a fallacy called generalizing the specific, and that's where i tend to push back.

so, yeah - that framework makes oodles of sense in the specific context of the united states, which is where it was developed, and where it was intended to be applied.

i'd just suggest that you need to be exceedingly careful about extrapolating her ideas beyond that very limited scope, because there's always a history geek around to poke holes in your argument when you try to make that specious jump to generality.