Others have pointed out that this is the epitome of shallow understandings of racism - that being called a racist is worse than actual racism - but it’s also about who can be angry & speak angrily in the public sphere. https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/singh-stands-by-calling-bloc-mp-a-racist-after-being-removed-from-house-1.4988470

Anger is often seen as divisive in democratic politics. New or transitioning democracies, in particular, try to focus on healing and reconciliation of traumatic or violent national histories in order to protect fragile democratic consolidation efforts.

But in places like Canada & the US, the ability to be angry in public is a function of power. So BIPOC (but esp Black & Indigenous) outrage at racial injustice is dismissed as inherently divisive, while white dude anger is politics-as-usual.

But anger - especially when directed at injustice or white indifference to injustice- can be productive and disruptive to racial formations.

Here’s a whole article that I wrote about this exact topic.

https://read.dukeupress.edu/south-atlantic-quarterly/article/116/3/457/129668/An-Exoneration-of-Black-Rage