That's the equivalent to the "colorblind" approach
Edit: since this is downvoted, I mean colorblind in a negative way. If you are "colorblind", you're basically ignoring racism which is better then being actively racist, but not anti racist either. You can't act against racism if you don't see it and you can't reflect your internalized racists either. "I'm not a racist, I just don't like the way you talk and act. Nothing to do with the color of your skin."
It's not intentional for sure but that's what happens effectively. That's a critique from PoC.
And the analogy to the post is quite good, I think. If you don't take race into account, do neither take into account what is socially associated with race. People intuitively like people more that are similar to them, that's not necessarily optics but music taste, accent, shared experiences; all more or less directly linked to race.
I think how much people favor people of their own races is probably a function of how safe they feel interacting with other races, which is itself a function of how dangerous a racial faux pas would be, which would be inversely proportional to how color-blind a society decided to be.
Increasing sensitivity to racial microaggressions and other involuntary grievances, and increasing the social costs associated with those things, increases the potential danger of an encounter with others of other races.
That’s my prediction at least. I’d love to see data to know whether it’s true.
If you work culturally and politically to make race a personal minefield, racial diversity becomes a threat. You multiply that natural human xenophobia into an inability to connect. You increase divides.
If you want to educate yourself on the topic, I recommend the book "Why I'm no longer Talking to White People about Race". It's very insightful and not too long.