Civilizations have been wiping out other civilizations since the beginning of humanity. This is not a new phenomenon and it is not unique to the west.

Your question is absolutely right on target. Is it beneficial for either the "winners" or the "losers" for two distinct groups to be forced to live among each other?

On a more personal note, I - as an individual - am genuinely color-blind. With regards to any individual with whom I come in contact, I judge that individual based on the interaction we have. If a group looks dangerous, I stay away, whatever their color or creed. I've seen dangerous-looking groups of young white men; I've seen dangerous-looking groups of young black men. As a white man, I fear the black groups more, because angry black men are more likely to direct their anger on me simply for my race than are the white men. That dynamic works both ways, of course. Black men feel more nervous around groups of dangerous white men.

I repeat my original theme: is the "melting pot" actually the most harmonious way to design a society, or would it make more sense to acknowledge genuine differences among races and ethnicities, allowing different societies to form independently from each other, each following the traditions and capabilities of its homogeneous group?

And would such an idea even be possible or is it logistically simply never going to happen because peoples interbreed, and to think otherwise is simply a waste of time?