I’ve been a bit reluctant to write this as it might be seen as me wanting to argue, I don’t. But I think you may be missing something. It has to do with what is race and what is being ascribed to it as meaningful.

A very small part of our genome carries physical characteristics common to subsets of humanity referred to a race.

When my wife first came to America I was stationed in the state of Georgia, my first experience living south of the Mason-Dickson line. A white woman in my presence said, “They all look alike to me” with reference to black people. She could be an ID witness in a trial! I mentioned it to my wife and she stunned me by saying, “White people look alike to me.” That seemed astonishing to me, but now I get it.

The white lady, at a time before black people commonly being on TV and in movies in the segregated south and my wife, fresh out of Southeast Asia had something in common. They were overwhelmed by the common physical (visual) characteristics of a group (race) that they had little exposure to. In my wife’s case, although she is very brown skinned, it wasn’t the whiteness. It was the lack of characteristics that were a part of her norm; straight black hair, high cheekbones, eye shape, smaller size, etc.

Just as she, and now I after 50+ years of close proximity to Asians see subdivision within the group called Asian; Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Southeast Asians, Indians have subset physical characteristics within the larger group. I grew up at a time when the subset differences in “white people” were more commonly thought of. The fair skinned blond, the freckled ginger, the olive-skinned Southern Mediterranean, etc. “Race” as a dominant set of physical characteristics is not as simple as black, white, or brown. The differenced are not exclusive. My wife was mistaken for Navajo by a Cherokee (the subset of interest to the American Indians (they call themselves that)). Since I have little exposure to Africans where “black” is a norm, I am not inclined to see the differences that I suspect that the racial subgroups there see other than Pigmy vs. Somali, etc.

There is no reason to assign a value upon any of that. A collection of physical appearance characteristics that are highly noticeable. The trouble starts when people notice cultural/subcultural differences which they choose to assign value (this superior/inferior to that) which is neither because of racial characteristics nor superior/inferior by a universal standard. But they try to make it about that.

Race, as a set of dominant physical characteristics of subsets of humanity does exist. Since there is no reason to rank them on a totem of superiority/inferiority, it should be, in my opinion, not be of importance in our view of each other. It is a real thing that only becomes a toxic issue when cultural tribalism rears its head.

𝐀𝐬 𝐈 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐢𝐭, 𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚 𝐥𝐢𝐞, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐢𝐬. I agree with your thoughts with regard to Steve’s, but from a perspective that is a bit different. You don't need to pay good money to understand why my opinion is different from yours.