I'm of two minds with @SL Xpress 's comments above. On one hand, I recognize the dichotomy between say, the MLK approach and the Malcolm X approach, and the apparent effectiveness of the "kids gloves approach" of the former compared to the latter. But then on the other hand I wonder if anything less than a full throated catharsis in approaching these issues will ever resolve the matter fully. For most of my life I've sided with some of the reasoning SLX appeals to above, but to what end? How effective is it really other than just cloaking the ugliness beneath? I don't know, maybe reaching my mid 40s and the past 15 years of American political life has just made me more reluctant to continue soft shooing these issues, but I'm tired of pretending that everything is cool with how things are.
And I disagree with the notion that our genetic makeup resulted in the racial dichotomy that we have here today. Any surface level reading of history, be it the era of reconstruction, or even the remedial study of poverty stricken, multiracial neighborhoods of 1960s Chicago will show that there were numerous instances throughout American history where people were able to overcome their "genetic predisposition" for racial conflict and work together for the greater good. The powerful used race as a wedge issue back then just as readily as they use it today. Had they used some other issue to wedge up disagreement among the masses we'd be divided using different categories today rather than race.