It seems that Armando's challenge has provoked quite a response lasting over several days. Good! I have only been skimming, and in fact not reading at some days so forgive me if this point was made somewhere in the thousands of comments that have since come up. I have a lot to say about the roles of "white liberals", "minorities", "bigots" and everyone in between, but I've said it before, and other people have probably said it better. So here's a point that seems to me to be underexplored, though fairly obvious. Most of our discussion has centered on the U.S. and the problems of race in the U.S.--but doesn't it seem that the relative stature of different "races" in the U.S. quite exactly mirrors the stature of those races in the larger global community?
That is to say, if you took the body you were examining to be the world, rather than the U.S., what's the status of Europe vs. the status of Africa vs. the status of East Asia vs. the status of Mexico vs. the status of Latin America vs. the status of the middle east? To overgeneralize: Africa is a mess. Latin America is poor. Asia is hard-working, worth a grudging compliment, but alien. The middle east is poor and home to terrorists etc. etc. This is starting to sound familiar...
It seems to me that one of the reasons why it's difficult for Americans to break out of stereotypes is because those same generalizations exist on a global level as well. And they are not just "stereotypes"--they are in many case true generalizations. So while it's true that in many individual cases the American "system" does allow non whites to achieve much more success than they would in the countries of their origin, we are much more tied into the international hierarchy of nations and races than we realize. People do not "melt" (even after generations) nearly as much as we think they do--although it seems there is still generally more "melting" in the U.S. than in many other countries.
And what of the comforting thought that the Irish and Italians and Jews, once reviled, are now firmly ensconced as part of the U.S. majority, and that other groups will get there too? I always thought this was likely--until I realized that if you look at the status of Ireland and Italy, and for lack of a better parallel, Israel--those countries are now prosperous and firmly "first world" (OK in the case of Israel, there are still problems--but some would argue that in the case of Jews in the U.S. there are also still problems). Would Irish-Americans be so well ensconced if Ireland were still considered an impoverished backwater? Who can say? Will true acceptance of minorities as equals have to wait until their countries of origin lift themselves up as well? I don't think any of us will live that long...
This thought offers no solutions really, except to say that the problems are probably more deeply rooted than we even realize, and certainly not limited to the U.S. Also, when you consider how many "minorities" are within a generation of having been "immigrants", there is a lot of "international baggage", so to speak, to be overcome on all sides.
It is not a cheery thought. But this is not a cheery subject, for the most part. I think the best we can do is know and define what we are up against, and take each victory one at a time.