I am a bit concerned that I wouldn't oppose racial segregation in the south, because "separate but equal" and "shouldn't we make public spaces that accommodate this very common preference?" and "is it really right for us northers force our moral opinions onto some other country; that's sounds like colonialism" kind sound of convincing to me.
it's hard to maintain racial segregation without violence; people already have racial affiliations in their communities, but actually preventing any fraternisation or integrated businesses requires more than just a preference it requires intimidation and violence, and those aren't acceptable and nor can they ever be "equal".
the problem with colonialism wasn't forcing better laws on people, it's that the colonists didn't follow their own laws, robbing and murdering with impunity; colonialism was bad because (again) it involved great violence towards the dispossessed.
"Separate but equal" never is.
If their "preference" is to not see or interact with humans with different skin tones, origin, religion, ethnic traits (etc) then they are a racist and a bigot, full stop.
If they need it explained why bigotry is bad, they are not engaging in good faith.
i think anon might do well to learn more about to learn more about what segregation in the american south actually entailed. and i mean that very kindly.
like, the case of Rosewood, FL might be instructive.
