> Colorblindness is the only way to live in a multicultural society.
No, it's not.
> How does it ignore the experiences of 'black' people?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/26/do-not...
No, it's not.
> How does it ignore the experiences of 'black' people?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/26/do-not...
Colorblindness advocates that while you may subconsciously classify people into different groups, you shouldn't let that classification get in the way of evaluating a person as an individual.
The problem with tribalism is that it doesn't allow me, someone trying to view another as an individual, to do so. It asserts that we can only view each other as faceless expressions of 'our' groups. This is counterproductive and the essential problem with identity politics.
Wow, that escalated quickly.
> What are the merits of basing everyone by the hue of their pigmentation?
This is a strawman; it's not what I'm advocating. What I am advocating is to recognize that black people have a different lived experience than white people. Colorblindness erases that.
> Again, these ideas only serve to segrate groups and will likely lead to create civil strife.
Like racism isn't causing civil strife right now?
There are many problems in many communities (poor rural white, inner city black, etc.) that are caused by the actions of those in the communities themselves, rather than by oppressive outside forces. Attitude and behavioral change within those communities is necessary for any lasting improvement in the lived experience of it's members.