"Pretty new in the overall historical record,..?" What? I suppose if you consider the overall historical record as being the last 2,000 years, then maybe anti-black racism is "pretty new." Otherwise, come on. 1619 isn't the beginning. The Portuguese were enslaving Africans in the 16th century.

Now, a question for you. Uber-wealthly blacks, like Barack Obama or Oprah Winfrey would definitely not trade their place with any other person, black, white, or other. However, would most random white people trade their place with Barack Obama? They would not! They prefer being poor, undereducated, and under-represented and white, to being uber-class and brown or black. Why is that? What is the difference between the two questions?

You cannot be white and be "racist" against other whites for the mere reason that you are both white. You can be classist. You can be prejudiced. However, as you are both white, you enjoy the same skini privilege which you can exercise on anyone brown or black because the power doesn't rest with wealth; it rests with hue.

Please don't talk to me about ordinary people, especially black ones, furthering class divisions by focusing on race. No, you need to save that speech for the white people who constantly cheat themselves of benefits because they are afraid the "undeserving poor," aka black, will get them too. They're the ones who need their tattered coats pulled.