You pose an interesting idea. Subconscious racism is based on fear of the others—fear of darkness is innate for very valid reasons. There is nothing to be gained by demonizing and attacking those who are afraid.

You can’t eliminate fear of darkness but you can, through habituation, rid yourself of the fear of people with dark skins. Black children, for example, are as much afraid of the dark as anyone. White children who grow up with Black playmates quickly lose their fear.

Through habituation not only are our subconscious fears tamed, but our negative judgments of the others, based on ignorance, are replaced with knowledge and respect.

Yes. And you may also like to think about the use of 'black' and 'white' in this sense. I have never in fact seen a truly white person, the palest are cream or off white, while most are pinky beige, neither have I seen a black person, a very dark charcoal grey with hints of tan being the darkest I know of. Why therefore choose words which push the polarity to the extreme, beyond reality, if the people who created the language's conventions did not have and extremist agenda, and a desire to polarize.

This is an interesting thought, though I suppose that a compelling argument could only be made if black people were, in fact, always called "black". Were they, though?

Or are you going for something even deeper here? Are you saying that once a negative association with a color has begun, it doesn't really matter what we call people - the association is there regardless?