I'd submit that someone with the name of Aaron Kunin is unlikely to be a fascist.
From the essay:
"Last year when I proposed to teach a seminar in which the syllabus would include essays by Ralph Ellison, two of my colleagues wrote to the Curriculum Committee, as well as to the dean and the president of the college, objecting that it would be “literary blackface” for me to study Ellison."
Here we have professors talking like children, and this is an example of what Kunin complains about.
Also, Ellison was a great writer, but bringing attention to his work doesn't really advance the Cause.
The whole point of Invisible Man is that Ellison doesn't want to be reduced to a dehumanized representative of some collective. He is a person in his own right.
If you're an activist, the kind of thinking represented by Ellison is actively counterproductive. It's old-school Liberal stuff -- "outdated". It interferes with building the proper Consciousness.
Hence the objection to someone, and in particular a "white" person, working to advance Ellison without enough criticism. Instead you need someone who can "properly contextualize" Ellison, which is to say, to treat him with a little surface respect, but ultimately to make clear to readers that his work is somehow misguided. Nobody will go so far as to say "Uncle Tom" or "counter-revolutionary", but that's the subtext.
I wouldn't call this "talking like children", because the people are highly-educated adults and they understand exactly what they are doing.
From the essay:
"Last year when I proposed to teach a seminar in which the syllabus would include essays by Ralph Ellison, two of my colleagues wrote to the Curriculum Committee, as well as to the dean and the president of the college, objecting that it would be “literary blackface” for me to study Ellison."
Here we have professors talking like children, and this is an example of what Kunin complains about.