To me, color blindness is a double-edged sword. Let’s take what was firstly introduced in the lecture on of this week, the idea “whiteness as such” as a example. This idea basically talks about the cultural feature of whiteness doesn’t stand out, which tends to be an explanation of universal equality as we learned in the previous weeks. This really helps to improve race sameness and somehow changes public general idea of racial reality. Although O’Reilly‘s idea that no color in the United States and Collbear’s “Evolved beyond race” may be a little extreme, I believe the part that “races are equal” they insist appears rational.
However, when we combine the individualism and color blindness together, things are quite different. We all know that America is a individualism country, and by definition, individualism is the belief that the needs of each person are more important than the needs of the whole society or group or the conception that all values, rights, and duties originated in individuals.So individualism tends to make personal will and ability heavier upon others, so when the idea color blindness involves, it has easily been mistaken by the concept of universal equality and “ignoring all other races, all races are whiteness”, which tragically ignores the variety of diversity of race around the globe and indirectly become racism. Let’s not forget the example described within the lecture two, when two individual groups of white and black went to the job market for opportunities, the black group always treat unfairly with less chances to get a job than the white, meanwhile, the managers consider such circumstances as ” individually lack of ability”, which indeed involves racism with the cover of Individualism.