No, I think not. Look here:

> When you form a student-led committee on anti-bullying but mysteriously exclude all the victims

That's, what's the right word, changing the analogy into madness.

I said like this: "Not only group X can have good ideas about something"

and you seem to believe that that means: "X must be silenced" -- that's weird, to say the least.

I never said that, and I don't think that, and I feel surprised, maybe a little bit ill, that you somehow misinterpreted what I wrote, that much.

> They are more dangerous because they often see themselves as kind, empathetic and intelligent - often believing that they can detect and solve deeply complex, emotion-rooted problems such as racial discrimination simply by thinking about it

I suppose there are such people.

> have been silenced and told to shut up

I feel sad for the cases when that's happened to you and others

> our voices do weigh much more than yours

That's odd, you start writing "our" and "yours" as if you now believe that I'm in some antagonist group, just because I said "not only X can have good ideas".

I'm happy that my friends who look different than me, different skin color for example, don't think like that. We think about each other as "we" together, not as "us" and "them".

I think it's good to end the conversation here. In any case I'm probably not replying any further. And if you did reply to this, I think that that reply would misinterpret something I wrote, but I wouldn't reply and point out what that misunderstanding was about.