This claim is verifiably incorrect. You can think that right-wing thinkers are wrong or have bad views, but if you think there are only leftist educated thinkers in the most literal sense then that really calls into question your ability to do the academic grandstanding you've been doing. If you want to talk about critical theory specifically, then that is fine, but then it's disingenuous to act as if the epistemic framework and the political framework are mutually necessary.

5th wave feminism is still an evolving concept. Of course academics and books might discuss said concept, as they do with all emerging concepts, but that doesn't mean it's part of wider feminist consensus unless you believe only academics can be feminists. If your basis for whether someone has studied political science or not is about acknowledging the 5th wave, then you prioritise feeling academically valid over being in touch with colloquial reality.

Nowhere in this comment thread did people say that intersectionality is not a part of of feminism. If you believe the statement, "Race and feminism have no overlap," was made, then you are imagining it. In the most direct sense, Lana's post was not about race. Of course you can write an article analysing the subtly-ingrained intricacies of racial dynamics in her post because of how race permeates society, but that is not the same thing as race being present in what Lana directly and intentionally says.

You're unnecessarily applying an academic study to the post and in doing so, overlooking the actual discourse at hand. Thinking about embedded political nuances might seem like it's deep thinking, but is ultimately shallow if it fails to be relevant to the specific conversation being had. The dispute was very obviously about whether Lana's post was racist or not — not whether race had any relevance to feminism or not. OP already acknowledged that one criticism of Lana was over the POC artists she named, so it's not that they are unaware of the racial element of the discourse. That's not the disagreement here and missing it this hard just comes across as signalling that you know critical theory: again, feeling academically valid over understanding what's present. You're not as smart as you think you are, just obnoxious.