the "white" population is already full of black white people, ie: passing blacks and white looking people with significant black ancestry. Whiteness has already been redefined many times (especially in America)..the irish, italians, greeks, and even white jews somewhat, have been added to the white mix where they weren't before. <P>people keep talking about interracial marriages changing the problem of racism but if south africa is any example, this fading out of the white aesthetic hierarchy won't happen. Its more likely that you'll have a distinct "colored" segment that serves as a buffer btwn pure white and black. Already, there is a segment of biracial community that's fighting to be considered (by the government) as seperate & distinct group from those labeled as "black" (though 85% of black americans are racially mixed). How will this affect our numbers, etc. when these types of figures determine (in part) which communities get what? <BR> Plus, the numbers/stats are showing that complexion can be linked to economic success...the majority of wealthy blacks being "light" with the majority of poor blacks being "dark'. This is not to say that darkskin blacks can't achieve but that generally there is a bias (inside & outside our community) in favor of the blacks that are closer to the white aesthetic and this affects opportunity. <P>It won't challenge the system if the hierarchy becomes closest to white aesthetic mixed race person at the top of the totem pole with darkest complexioned, non keen featured, nappy headed black at the bottom. Our community was forced to included mixed raced black/white children as part of us and we did it mostly with love (though the issues are still there). At some point in time, we all may have to consider abandoning the concept of the 1 drop rule (it really doesn't make sense to call a white looking person "black"), redefine what 'blackness' means.