The record is set straight in the first sentence of the letter, which explains the intended role of the things presented : In response to those who defend The Bell Curve (“Defending The Bell Curve,” Opinion, Oct. 24, 1994), please use the following theories and observations to assist you in your search for truth regarding the genetic differences between Blacks and whites.

From your own link: Later, in an interview with The Crimson, Clarke suggested that "The information [contained in the letter] is not necessarily something we believe, but some information that we think those pursuing a true understanding of The Bell Curve theory should either address, ignore or refute."

So it's false to say she is only addressing the matter now; she responded to questions about it at the time.

While claiming to have been unable to detect any irony in the letter co-authored by Clarke, the Crimson editorial is pseudo-objective at best, and at worst comes off as an example of insincere concern trolling.

Does this sound ok to your ears? If this was a white supremacist, we would all correctly be shouting about how it's a dog whistle and not an acceptable response.

I wish more people would read 'How to Be an Antiracist.' I believe he's absolute right in that the only way forward is to call out racist beliefs from everyone, not selectively. Selectively excusing racist beliefs from "our side" will only open the door to more racism.

“We” is not the same as “I”. She was speaking on behalf of a group, and a group which may not have even discussed their actual beliefs on the truth of the “theories and observations” presented, as that was not the purpose for which they were (explicitly, in the letters own terms) presented.

OMG! You're right! And Terry Pratchett went to his grave prostylizing a flat earth model because he never officially made a statement that his satirical novels were just that - satirical.