Basic Dimension
(405) The Racism Equation
Preface:
Racism is a natural process that arises from a sexual instinct of bipedal primates. It is clear that this process can derail in the long run. The longer it stagnates without converging into integration or assimilation, the more difficult it is to untangle its terrible sequential interactions. Ultimately, the whole process breaks down into partly integration, assimilation and segregation. It is no longer possible to analyze this mess properly afterwards. We see this, for example, in the United States. The main problem of racism is identity politics, which is the evolutionary meaning of racism. The second problem is to take no personal responsibility for life and to demand equality of outcome which ruins every society, instead of equality of opportunity which removes racism in the long run.
Assumption 621: The Archetype of Racism:
The first bipedal hominids relied primarily on inbreeding for survival. Then inbreeding became tribal identity. Much later tribal identity led to religion: The Inbreeding Cult which is still alive. The first bipeds did not die out easily from inbreeding because of their varied genome like chimpanzees. But extensive inbreeding in many places created a variety of different looking subspecies. And so, they checked passing hominids for tribal identity by looking to their outward features. In this way, 'racism' arose as a way of allowing strangers into the tribe. This archetype of racism therefore only looked at outward appearances and not at psychological characteristics projected into races or subspecies.
Assumption 622: The definition of Racism:
Racism is an approach in which individuals of a particular race or ethnicity are identified on the basis of alleged group characteristics projected onto them.
Assumption 623: The intent of Racism.
Racism tries to achieve symbolic balance between cultures, between tribal identities, bringing races or ethnicities into the cultural harmony of integration and assimilation. And of course those are almost always unpleasant corrections from both sides:
Assumption 624: Outwardly features led to 'racism'. The first bipedal primates were interested in outwardly features of aliens to determine whether they belonged to their species. Then it was decided whether they should be admitted to their tribe or exiled. So, outwardly features were cues regarding tribal identity, which identities had to match. Because the first bipedal primates had a lot of genetic variation in the same species, checking facial features was a meaningful substitute for tribal identity, especially since they could not talk yet. Also, no difference was assumed between individuals and their tribes.
Assumption 625: Tribal identities.
Cultures are defined by their tribal identity from which religions are derived.
Assumption 627: Identity politics:
Identity politics is a political approach wherein people of a particular gender, religion, race, social background, class or other identifying factor develop political agendas based around one or more of these categories.
Racism is an approach in which individuals of a particular race or ethnicity are identified on the basis of alleged group characteristics projected into them.
Racism/discrimination is part of identity politics.
The first bipedal primates assumed that the appearance of individuals of a certain subspecies could be equated with their (deviating) tribal identity. Therefore, they easily confused the individual with his group based on external features.
Assumption 628: Identity politics is a policy of Woke Hominids to manage the people by projecting alleged group characteristics into naïve individuals.
Ultimate goal of racism
The ultimate goal of racism is to achieve symbolic balance between cultures. To that end, the racial balance seeks to bring races or ethnicities together in cultural harmony. And of course those are almost always unpleasant corrections from both sides:
(Racism x First culture) against (Racism x Second culture) gives cultural balance
(Racism x First culture) - (Racism x Second culture) = 0 (symbolically balanced)
(R(sec) x First culture) - (R(first) x Second culture) = Balanced different cultures.
This cultural balance is a snapshot on the way to integration, assimilation or segregation. As long as racial weights are used, we speak of an unstable (dis)integration process. And without these weights, the process has stabilized in either assimilation or segregation.Cultures are defined by Tribal Identity from which religion is derived:
Racial weight Natives (a) times the Tribal Identity of immigrants:
(Ra.w(second) x Trib.Ident(first) - (Ra.w(first) x Trib.Ident(sec) = Balanced different cultures.
There are several effects that play a role in racism:
1: Tribal identity is protected by racism.
2: Integration usually starts with mutual racism.
3: Integration can also be enforced by one-sided racism.
4: Assimilation doesn't have to be always mutual assimilation.
5: Assimilation can be enforced by one-sided racism.
6: Assimilation can also be offered unilaterally through cultural surrender.
7: Segregation starts when racism stops.
8: Civil war starts when segregation stops.
The Racism Factor
- Mutual Assimilation means corresponding tribal identities (No racism).- One sided Assimilation means partly cultural surrender (Racism possible).
- Integration means balanced by racism, without equal tribal identities.
- Segregation means no longer racism.
- Civil war means no segregation any more.
Integration starts with mismatched tribal identities:
When Slave tribal identity and Master identity do not fit:
a x Slave identity = 1 x Master identity (a = Master racism)
When Slave tribal identity and Master identity do not fit:
a x Slave identity = 1 x Master identity (a = Master racism)
1 x Slave identity = b x Master identity (b = Slave racism)
a x Slave identity = b x Master identity. (Mutual racism)
a x Slave identity = 1 x Master identity (a = Master racism)
(R(MA) x Slave identity) = (1 x Master identity). Balanced different cultures.
Slaves have no problems with Master identity.
1 x Slave identity = b x Master identity (b = Slave racism)
(1 x Slave identity) = (R(Sl) x Master identity). Balanced different cultures.
Master has no no problems with Slave identity.
a x Slave identity = b x Master identity. (Mutual racism)
(R(MA) x Slave identity) = (R(SL) x Master identity). Balanced different cultures.
Both parties have problems with the other culture.
Assimilation means no racial weights applied upon the other party.
Mutual assimilation means matching tribal identities:
Then the Racism factor is 1 at both sides:1 x Slave identity = 1 x Master identity.
Slave identity = Master identity.
Master and slave tribal identity match when RF = 1 for both sides:
(1 x) Slave identity corresponds to (1 x) Master identity, (No racism,
assimilation achieved).
Assimilation can also be enforced by one-sided racism:
Integration process towards assimilation:
a x Slave identity = 1 x Master identity, (Balanced one sided racism: a = Master racism)
1 x Slave identity = b x Master identity, (Balanced one sided racism: b = Slave racism)
a x Slave identity = b x Master identity. (Balanced by mutual racism)
Segregation means no racial weights applied upon the other party.
Segregation also means not matching tribal identities:
Then the Racism Factor is 1 on both sides, by definition for this inequality:
1 x Slave identity ≠ 1 x Master identity.
Slave identity ≠ Master identity.
Master and slave tribal identity don't match with segregation.
BASIC MODELS OF RACISM
The Master-Slave model shows a sado-masochistic relationship between master and slave. In this, the slave race or ethnicity is incapable of defending itself against the master. It is the racist-antiracist model. This model always falls apart eventually.
Slave and Master remain functionally fixed in their former sado-masochistic relationship from (Mod 2:MS), which was expected to evolve into the general sadist-sadist mode of (Mod 1:NI). But it failed. This process possibly stalls in disintegration before segregation:
The Insincere Anti-Racism model is nested in the general Native-Immigrant model (Mod 1:NI). In this model (Mod 5: IAR), there is a more or less undefined political actor (GA), which takes the lead while invoking systemic anti-racism as ideology and confirming former slaves (SL) and Mixed Race (MR) in the injustice that has been done to them, and fair enough, but at the same time inciting the public into counter-racism through outright aggression against the former Master race or ethnicity (MA). This is not peaceful anti-racism, but malicious and highly aggressive racism, which wouldn't be a problem if it was frankly spoken.
There are two basic models of racism in the evolution:
1: The Native-Immigrant Model (Mod 1:NI)
In the Native-Immigrant model different races or ethnicities compete for the same land. This model follows a mutual racist-racist model, called a sadist-sadist relationship.
The ultimate result of this armed peace might be the integration of groups towards assimilation:
Mutual racial integration process:
a x Immigrant Identity (II) = b x Native Identity (NI) (Balanced by mutual racism)
(R(NI) x Immigrant Identity) = (R(II) x Native Identity). Balanced different cultures.
Both parties have problems with the other culture.
------------
- The evolutionary goal of racism is to manage conflict on an individual level to prevent intergroup civil wars:
- Assimilation is difficult but not impossible in the Native-Immigrant model (Mod 1:NI) and is dependent on the similarity between races or ethnicities.
- Through assimilation, one's own identity is integrated into the new combined identity, which can be unattractive for parties. Therefore, assimilation is more likely for individuals living among members of the other group than for populations as a whole. However, forced mixing at the individual level nearly always leads to severe racism and discrimination. And deliberate merging of whole races and ethnicities is disastrous, where crossbreeding can cause major identity problems. And the very prevention of the demise of tribal identity is exactly why 'racism' arose.
- Integration may eventually be possible between races and ethnicities in (Mod 1:NI).
Integration involves adherence to the laws of the country, but retaining one's own culture. Integration seems the highest attainable way of living together with fairly different races or ethnicities.
- Without integration, parallel societies will develop where segregation can become a breeding ground for racial unrest and ultimately civil war.
- The evolutionary goal of racism is to manage conflict on an individual level to prevent intergroup civil wars. This goal is already achieved with parallel societies if they are stable in nature.
2: The Master-Slave Model (Mod 2:MS)
The Master-Slave model shows a sado-masochistic relationship between master and slave. In this, the slave race or ethnicity is incapable of defending itself against the master. It is the racist-antiracist model. This model always falls apart eventually.
Further, there are two non specific general models of racism:
3: The Cultural Segregation Model (Mod 3:CS)
The Cultural Segregation model can be a combination of the Master-Slave model and the Native-Immigrant model after slaves became free. In this combined model, slaves do not integrate further into the master culture after liberation.
Segregation means no racial weights applied upon the other party.Segregation means not matching tribal identities:
Then the Racism Factor is 1 on both sides, by definition for this inequality:1 x Slave identity ≠ 1 x Master identity.Slave identity ≠ Master identity.Master and slave tribal identity don't match with segregation.
Another way of looking at it is that the former sado-masochistic relationship from (Mod 2:MS) evolves in mutual symbiosis in the Cultural Integration model (Mod 4:CI). But this model will eventually disappear into the Mixed Race variant:
4: The Cultural Integration Model (Mod 4:CI)
(Mod 4:CI) can be the follow up model of (Mod 1:NI), but not easily of (Mod 2:MS), unless the functional fixed relationship from (Mod 2:MS) becomes the satisfying cultural equation for integration between Master and Slave culture, which ultimately could evolve into assimilation, which is rather doubtful:
Mutual symbiosis by racism (Integration):
a x Immigrant identity (II) = b x Native identity NI) (Balanced by mutual racism)
(R(NI) x Immigrant identity) = (R(II) x Native identity). Balanced different cultures.
Both parties have problems with the other culture. But eventually assimilation could be achieved.
But in the case of (Mod 2:MS) races will eventually be completely absorbed into the Mixed Race in a few thousand years.
------------
Still another way of looking at it is that the former sado-masochistic relationship from (Mod 2:MS) evolves into mutual symbiosis by forced one sided 'assimilation' into the Master culture of (Mod 1:NI):
Assimilation can also be enforced by one-sided racism:
a x Slave identity = 1 x Master identity. (Balanced one sided racism: a = Master racism)
(R(MA) x Slave identity) = (1 x Master identity). Culturally balanced currently in integration.
The next step could be that slaves no longer have problems with the master identity and both transition into assimilation. In which case the situation removes to the Cultural Integration Model (Mod 4:CI). But without racial mixing, this is a very unstable solution, just like (Mod 2:MS). Well, that is, with racial mixing, the mess will be complete. So, what is the effect of racial mixing, that is the question. We try a screenplay.
General rule of racism: The only realistic possibility in the Cultural Integration Model (Mod 4:CI) is integration while preserving mutual racism at the individual level to avoid clashes between races or ethnicities. Thus, assimilation is questionable.
But it is more likely that 3 racial or ethnic groups arise from (Mod 2:MS), which means that a Mixed Race (MR) has to fulfill a bridging function to integration. If not, parallel societies may still arise in the Cultural Segregation Model (Mod 3:CS).
Adding the Mixed Race (MR) to the equation:
Racial Interactions = aMA + bSL + cMR + dMASL + eMAMR +fSLMR + gMASLMR
The Master-Slave descendants:
The Mixed Race (MR) might enter a malicious symbiosis with the gang (GA):
The Mixed Race is stunned and disappointed by the adaptation of former slaves (SL) to the Master culture (MA) and will not accept this 'docile' attitude. Although this
functional fixed adaptation from former slaves to the Master culture apparently benefits both cultures and could therefore be most practically continued, this looks unpalatable to the newly developed cultural identity of the Mixed Race (MR), because they naturally want to be on an equal footing with the Master population. As a result, they are annoyed by the benevolent attitude of former slaves towards former Masters, and propagate peaceful anti-racism, which seems the real driving force behind their movement:
That means peaceful anti-racism may be sincerely meant as core ideology of the frustrated Mixed Race.
But there is a specific Predator Model in racism:
5: The Insincere Anti-Racism Model (Mod 5: IAR)
The Mixed Race (MR) lost tribal identity and can be manipulated into the wrong direction (segregation) by a Political Gang (GA):
Racial Interactions = aMA + bSL + cMR+ dGA
Combinations:
A B C D
AB AC AD BC BD CD
ABC ABD ACD BCD
ABCD
5: The Insincere Anti-Racism Model (Mod 5: IAR)
And that's at odds with the so called "anti-racism" of the core ideology of the Gang (GA). This is not a fruitful path to integration, if that was the intention. But then, what is their intention? That's the question.
Many times in the evolution tensions between races or ethnicities have been hijacked by political gangs that took advantage of a hopeless stalemate between parties by
expulsion or massacre of one of the parties. So, it is not especially the Master-Slave model (Mod 2:MS), which is the victim of external powers, but any hopeless situation can seduce a third party to incite civil war.
Well, racism-racism is exactly where (Mod 1:NI) is for, so counter-racism is not bad here in principle, but certainly by honestly informing the people that they will be provoked into the right direction of counter-racism with looting and arson under the heading of anti-racism. That would be ethical and sincere.
And it must be said (Mod 1:NI) is generally intended to achieve integration and better not to segregate. "Anti-racism" from pushing gangs thus abuses the functional fixedness of the former sado-masochistic relationship in (Mod 2:MS), which has since evolved back into a sadist-sadist environment through the liberation of the slaves (Mod 1:NI).
Thus, "anti-racism" (Mod 5: IAR) interferes with the functional fixed racist-antiracist relationship from (Mod 2:MS) nested in the racist-racist model (Mod 1:NI). Which relationship converges in a kind of (one-way) assimilation into the Master culture.
"Anti-racism" of (Mod 5: IAR) is therefore in parasitic symbiosis with the racist-racist model of (Mod 1:NI). The aim of this kind of anti-racism is to claim endless penance for the past and at the same time to aggressively demand more and more privileges without consideration. In effect, citizens are being held hostage by this misunderstood external actor. It must be emphasized that there is of course also genuine anti-racism.
So, insincere anti-racism is initiated by an outside party (GA) with an interest in breaking the status quo, where natural two sided integration is not obvious anymore. This because slaves (SL) already extradited their cultural identity to the Master race (MA), which situation is unsustainable in evolution and soon will be torpedoed by the Mixed Race (MR).
Assimilation by one-sided racism:a x Slave identity = 1 x Master identity. (Balanced one sided racism: a = Master racism)(R(MA) x Slave identity) = (1 x Master identity). Culturally balanced currently in integration.
Gang is breaking the status quo:
Where normally in the evolution racism works to reconcile cultures, now the gang (GA) is violently accusing the Master culture (MA) of incompatible immorality.
The gang is empowered by looting and arson, misinforming former Slaves (SL) and Mixed Race (MR) about its evil nature.
Well, it is complicated and somewhere they maybe right but that does not matter. What matters is their insincerity to all parties. Their aim is to stall the integration process before working on to segregation or worse civil war. This all under the misleading systemic racism from "anti-racism".
Systematic racism is just a tool to arrive at wealth and prosperity, which is the core of the ideology. But systemic racism is part of the ideology itself. Nazi Germany was a systemic racist ideology to eliminate other races or ethnicities. Political gangs as referred to in this article have officially anti-racism as their core ideology, which must be redefined as malignant racism with potential effect of extinction of the other race. This ultimate conclusion is justified because their core ideology is deliberately misleading, so that any sincerity can be questioned.
Resume:
But as said before, Model (Mod 2:MS) could have found some genuine assimilation of the former slave culture into the master culture. Then the real meaning of (Mod 5: IAR) could only be to disrupt assimilation in (Mod 4:CI) and achieve segregation and ultimately civil war. This by using the Mixed Race (MR) as a lever.
And in principle counter-racism would be no problem in (Mod 1:NI) if former slaves (SL) and Mixed Race (MR) understood the real intention. However, the intention looks to worsen the relationship from Cultural Segregation (Mod 3:CS) to (Mod 5: IAR) by pretending to aim at integration from (Mod 4:CI).
So, (Mod 5: IAR) could intend to disrupt 'docile' assimilation in (Mod 4:CI) and achieve segregation and ultimately civil war. In any case, it is risky to drag a group into an adventure that the majority of former slaves apparently does not aspire to.
The bottom line is that the newly created Mixed Race (MR) from former slaves (SL) and masters (MA) actually facilitates the gang (GA) and takes great responsibility for it. And they can't have everything in life, but they definitely can destroy everything of value:
Discussion:
Technically, a species is a population or groups of populations that can potentially interbreed freely within and among themselves. Subspecies, on the other hand, are subgroups within a species that have different traits and are defined by scientists
https://askabiologist.asu.edu/questions/human-races
What’s the difference between race and subspecies?
A long time ago, the words race and subspecies were used to mean the same thing in biology. This was before we knew how much or how little genes could differ between animals. Now we only use subspecies to refer to living things that aren’t human. We only use race when we talk about humans. We often try to group humans by race based on how they look. While humans may look different on the outside, our DNA looks very similar.
So, gorillas are a different species than hominids.
Assumption 240: The development of racism.
1: In the animal world groups accept only members of the same kind so they can propagate. Hence, a group of gorillas will not accept a female chimp. This is discrimination between species. Later in the evolution, a different form of discrimination emerged, but now as discrimination within species, called racism in case of humans.
(Chimps developed a protein to ward off gorilla sperm, which protein now makes humans vulnerable for red meat.)
Humans deny what the first bipedal primates already knew. Outward features reveal the group from which the individual comes, which was equivalent to tribal identity for the first hominids 14 million years ago.
The first hominids of our species looked like subspecies by extreme inbreeding over millions of years. But they did not die out easily, because they had abundance genetic variation like chimpanzees to prevent autosomal recessive disorders:
So their outward appearance was very different and bipedal primates had to determine from which tribe an individual was and thus to estimate tribal identity, which much later led to 'religion'.
Note that tribal identity doesn't necessarily mean individual identity, but outward similarity was the best bet for people who couldn't speak yet.
So, 'racism' or what we would call it, prevented clashes between whole tribes on the same ground by preventing individual strangers from entering the tribal area:
Today, racism still works quite well to force groups into integration, assimilation, or segregation. It's the same, identical mechanism. And this ingroup/outgroup decision rule has been applied to individuals for 14 million years to prevent tribal conflicts that would otherwise have destroyed entire subspecies.
In the evolution nobody bothered about the individual and all were measured along identity politics.
So racism still functions adequately as an ancient bipedal primate instinct. But it is unsuitable for judging individuals, as they may differ from their race or ethnicity. Identity politics has therefore increasingly become an improper racist instrument. Unfortunately, not everyone understood that.
So, the instinct of racism still works quite well to avoid clashes between tribes at the expense of the well-being and just assessment of the individual.
We also know that racism is a latent instinct, which must be genetically turned on. The rationale for activating racism seems to be specific individual behavior that appears to be characteristic of his race or ethnicity, thereby activating the gene. And now racism really gets complicated, because then it might still be functional in the evolution, while it is seen unethical in our era. And please, again, be fair and don't shoot the messenger.
Then the question becomes: can races and ethnicities coexist on the same ground without this abhorred racism? I'm not kidding, it's a real question. And if you think this must be entirely possible, then you're probably pointing to integration and assimilation. But that's just circular reasoning because you have to prove first that racism didn't accomplish that, which you can't.
Are we perhaps reshaping reality to our contemporary hedonistic desires in which everything must be linked to pleasure? Then the call for anti-racism could develop into
segregation and ultimately into civil war.
And then the ultimate conclusion could be: without racism different cultural identities cannot united on which races or ethnicities would segregate or worse...
Could racism be the hard lesson from the evolution that we stubbornly don't want to see anymore? And are we confusing same DNA between races with same cultures, the same cultural identities? And have we forgotten that same DNA can be disproportionately selected by inbred cultures over millions of years? So that the composition of races and ethnicities changes over time? Homo naledi was probably a fairly closed and remarkably balanced inbreeding culture for 2.3 million years.
segregation and ultimately into civil war.
Racism actually aims at culture, at tribal identity, and not at race in particular, which is only an observable intermediary cue and that's what we can learn from the evolution. With all our intellectual development we are on the wrong track, while first bipedal primates were right: cultural identity is tribal identity which leads to religion. Our second mistake is that we have no religion if we do not believe in God anymore. If only life could be that simple...
No comments:
Post a Comment