You aren't paying attention. Listen:

- I know that you want unity between races.

- I know that you consider this black vs. white debate to be harmful and "stagnant."

- I know that you want to have a discussion about colorblindness and how we are all equal.

So far so good?

Here are the problem that you are refusing to acknowledge:

1) That's not the discussion.

2) That will never be the discussion.

3) You will never be in a position to determine the discussion.

Check this out. It's way up at the top:

White people read this rant and think to themselves that they've never participated in oppression. That they have contributed nothing to the negative outcomes that they acknowledge the minority experiences. They see that the situation has been made awkward and they don't like it. They know they can do nothing about it, yet they have the urge to try. So they attempt to reframe the argument in such a way where they are not personally culpable for the pain without recognizing that it's not an argument.

I can't say this any plainer: you don't get to determine the terms of the discussion. So you've got a choice:

A) have this discussion on "their" terms

B) accept the status quo.

There is no third door. There is no outside the box. Race is being discussed in the united states in terms of oppression of minorities by the majority. You can join in, you can opt out, but you can't say "let's change the subject."

That doesn't sound like "a justification for racism." By the way - how on earth did you think that calling my speech racist would further the dialogue? Has that ever worked?

Here's Mirriam Webster on pragmatism:

a reasonable and logical way of doing things or of thinking about problems that is based on dealing with specific situations instead of on ideas and theories.

Here's Mirriam Webster on idealism:

a theory that ultimate reality lies in a realm transcending phenomena.

Idealists get martyred. Pragmatists make history.