I'm sorry if I just misunderstand what you are saying, but you seem to contradict yourself to some extent. Here you write that we should "Get Past the Idea of 'Race'", but in that other article about Nadler, you say "Nadler is a brilliant honest guy, who makes me proud to be a Jew".

So aren't you actually embracing the idea of race as in identifying with other, similarly people?

Or do you view your Jewishness not as a racial but a cultural etc issue?

No offense here at all, just something that strikes me as odd.

Evolution has proceeded apace since the ice age, leading to substantial differences between inhabitants of different continents; and likely even to significant differences between the geographically isolated English-Irish-Welch-Scots and the socially isolated Jews and other nearby peoples.

I believe that large segments of our global society are finally moving beyond race as a dividing issue. The main force that is making racism go away is, quite simply, the prevalence of racial blending that has resulted in success stories such as Mssrs. Obama and Woods among others. The success of these role models in their fields have in turn made racial blending socially acceptable to most educated people of the world, and that acceptability also tends to be stronger among our youth, as you noted. This trend shows that as a species, we humans continue to evolve socially as well as in other ways, and that to me is very encouraging in terms of our chances for surviving on this planet.

Anyone who has studied world history should recognize what a huge turning point this kind of social acceptance represents for the future of the human race. It is an attitude and outlook that is largely unprecedented in most societies throughout history, and it makes the evolutionary argument presented by Commenter #2 largely a non-issue for the future, even though his comments are historically and scientifically accurate as far as I know.

So how does today's "blurring of the races" affect our separate and unique cultural identities and ethnicities, as alluded to by Commenter # 1? That's an interesting question and worth debating in my opinion. I think it will relegate a lot of our ethnic (and potentially even our religious) differences to history. When you look at all the atrocities that have been committed in the name of ethnic superiority and/or religion, I'd say that day couldn't come too soon.

An example for racial considerations still influencing people in high places, reportedly Eva Mendes was chosen for the female lead in the movie "Hitch" because the producers thought it would be unsuitable if Will Smith had some white chick to set his nasty eyes on.

Anyway.

This blurring not only of the races, but of different social backgrounds in general will in many cases lead to some kind of identity loss. I can't say wether this is in general a good thing or not. But I want to let everybody have the freedom of prefering to live with people of his social background.

As long as nobody proclaims his identity superior over others (you're totally right on the issue of having a history full of havoc wrought in the name of superiority), in my view he has the right to maintain his identity and not let it be blurred beyond recognition. Of course just as long as this identity doesn't collide with basic human rights. Saying it is your identity to cripple all girls or all boys is criminal for example.

As to our identities, German Reader, I would rather my identity be tied to my own personality and character rather than some kind of ancestral baggage others may want to saddle me with. And I'd rather choose my friends among people with a variety of backgrounds and thought processes rather than some homogeneous social or ethnic agenda that I'm conforming to for no known reason other than tradition.

Most of our prejudices today have little to do with race and much more to do with social class. Personally, I doubt those prejudices will change much, any more than the prejudices we bear against people whom we consider upon first glance to be unattractive or who make us uncomfortable in some way. The Internet has become somewhat of an equalizer in that respect, or at least, buys us a little time while we try to express our true colors with these words…

"As to our identities, German Reader, I would rather my identity be tied to my own personality and character rather than some kind of ancestral baggage others may want to saddle me with."

Me too, me too. I'm actually of Indian heritage, but I do not feel myself strongly associated with other people of that heritage. I do feel myself associated with people I like from whatever background they have, just like you do.

I'm just saying that I'm not that much offended by someone who says he wants to have a white wife or whatever, as long as he doesn't beat up non-whites.

So I don't have a problem myself with this blurring of identity, but I think others have and to some extent I think they have the right to feel that way.

There is no legal reason in most towns why whites and blacks live in different parts of town, but they do.

For example, Prince George's County near DC has morphed from almost all white to almost all black.

North West DC (DC is the most liberal jurisdiction in the US) is almost all white, while the rest of DC is almost all black.

It has been extensively shown by Monte-Carlo statistical simulation that if persons want to live immediately surrounded by 50% or more of people of their own race that this will lead a completely mixed population inexorably to solid blocks of single races.

Most people would think that someone willing to have 50% neighbors of a different race was fairly progressive, I think.