Hey everyone! My name is Beymer and I am the author of the newsletter “Figuring Things Out”. This is my second article on psychology, which like my previous series on Music and Religion, is a subject I know little about. Refer to my first article for a much more thorough disclaimer. In this article, I write about racism and mention its close relative religionism.
Introduction to Human Categories (formerly known as Race)
Wikipedia defines race as follows:
“A categorization of humans based on shared physical or social qualities into groups generally viewed as distinct within a given society”
If you want to be thoroughly confused about the term race, be sure to read the Wikipedia article “Race (human categorization)”. Having grown up in the sixty’s, the term then seemed to be much simpler: A person was considered to belong to one of the major race categories: Caucasian, Negroid, Mongoloid or rarely, some combination of these categories. Each of these categories was well-known and there was no difficulty involved in determining which category to place a person based on their physical attributes. Nowadays, unless you’re the government, a health provider, a government-related service, using these terms is no longer politically correct. Even the use of Euro-American or White, Afro-American or Black, and Asian-American (don’t use yellow … it’s racist to do so) subjects the user to accusations of racism. Of course, again, it’s ok for the government, health providers or government-related service providers to request and use such information. The concept of political correctness has taken a firm foothold in the sciences with regards to the categorizations of humans (formerly known as race). Biologists, anthropologists, psychologists, geneticists (and genomic researchers), and others have reached differing conclusions over the years about such terms as race, subrace, and other terms that serve to partition people into different classes. Geneticists have found there to be more genetic variation within a race than between races, concluding genetics is not a good factor for identifying a particular race. The American Association of Biological Anthropologists have rejected the concept of race as an effective representation of human biological variation. The US Government coined the terms Hispanic and Latino, in effect defining them to represent another race, but in truth, these terms refer to people of a geographical location (Latin America, Mexico, Cuba, etc…) who are actually a mixture of previously defined human categorizations formerly known as races. Of course, this is not obvious from the demographic data collected and reported by the government. The fear of being labeled as racists or Nazis in this era of political correctness has proven to be a powerful factor in what is researched and more importantly available funding for such research. As a result of all this, the terms "populations”, “ethnicities”, and “communities” have emerged as more politically pleasing terms to refer to different human categorizations or races.
Assignment of People to Human Categories
Now that we know not to use the word “race” or any of the derived terms such as “subrace” and to instead use “human categorization”, or “ethnic groups” or better yet “communities”, how do we describe the members of these communities? Well, that’s the easy part! Or is it? Suppose you were asked about the “race” (still used even though frowned upon) of someone. Was the person white, black, Asian (can’t use yellow!) or Hispanic/Latino (of course, this is pseudo race invented by American government)? How does one decide which “community” to associate with a person? Well, that’s where the concept of phenotype comes to the rescue! You know, the set of observable characteristics or traits that distinguish these communities. These characteristics include skin color, height, head shape, face shape, nose size and shape, lips size and shape, eye color and shape (e.g., eyelids and epicanthal folds), nose size and shape, hair, and body shape. Hold on though, what about those individuals who belong to a particular community but don’t clearly exhibit the physical characteristics associated with that particular community? You know, it could be someone with parents from different ethnicities or perhaps some genetic variation associated as an outlier in the community. There exist scales to classify someone based on skin color, but application can be problematic. When phenotype application is not helpful, then only cultural (i.e., clothing, preferred music, hair style, unique foods, jewelry, speech, swagger, etc...) characteristics are available to classify the person. Sometimes none of these classification methods are helpful and the person may be associated with a community that she does not claim. I’m not talking here about case of the delusional white woman who changed her physical and cultural appearance because she “identified” as a black woman. Rachel Dolezal (Google her for an humorous, interesting read) fooled many in the black community and her masquerade was only discovered when her white parents spoke about her in public. It’s not that difficult to classify most people as belonging to a particular community; however, for others, it can be difficult if not impossible.
Demographics of USA
According to the US Government Official Website, “United States Census Bureau” the population breakdown according to human communities is as follows:
Interesting! Apparently, the white population, if it continues to decrease, may soon no longer be the majority population. If the trend of the rapid growth of the Hispanic population continues, the often stated “browning of America” will result in a much different America than that of the past. Will the USA “officially” become a bi-lingual nation; that is, even though the Spanish language has become an integral part of commerce and government documentation, primarily for financial reasons, Spanish has fallen short of “officially” being declared another language for the USA. Will the new “population of privilege” become the Hispanic population, leaving the White population in some questionable state of privilege? Will the Black population fare better or worse in a “brown” America? The times are changing and who knows what changes will occur.
Here, in the USA, the White community is larger than all of the other communities totaled together. This begs the question if the size of the White community was closer in size to the other minorities (say, for example, the Hispanic and the Black communities), would racism decline or would it expand? That, what if the Hispanic and Black communities grew to become percentages of the total population equal to that of the White community? Would racism get better or would it be worse? I suspect it would get worse, because this would transform the USA into a three-party system, with each party having their own agenda focused on their respective community wants and needs. The present system with the Democrats representing the minorities and the Republicans representing the majority is not much better but obtaining bipartisan support for bills helping all citizens is much easier than obtaining Tri-partisan support in a three-party system. Getting three parties to agree is far more difficult than getting two parties to agree!
Attitudes Towards Other Human Communities
I don’t know if any studies or surveys have been done to determine the general or collective attitudes of a community toward another community. In this section, I will make up data that reflects my opinion of what such a study would reveal for the ethnicities or communities here in the USA. Here is the partition I made up that divides the members of an ethnicity or community into four groups based on their attitude towards other ethnicities or communities:
The Supremist: Members believe their ethnicity is the chosen or supreme community and all other ethnicities are inferior. Members of this group advocate discrimination against, control of, management of, or eradication of other ethnicities. Members of this group preach and practice segregation. Members of this group have the potential of committing violence against members of other ethnicities.
The Segregationist: Members do not believe their ethnicity is the chosen or supreme community. Members of this group accept that other communities have equal rights in society. Members of this group tolerate other ethnicities and interact with them as needed (e.g., workplace, retail stores, government offices, health care, etc…), but choose not to socialize with other ethnicities in their personal lives (e.g., romance, social outings, church, etc…). Although not politically active in their opposition to interracial marriage, they are not shy about expressing their opposition to the mixing of ethnicities. This group is not sold on the benefits of racial diversity, and some may allow prejudice to influence their decisions in both their personal and work life. Such actions would not be based on supremist beliefs; instead, they would be based on preserving or supporting segregation. This group rejects any claims of their ethnicity being privileged (if they are the majority population) or any claims of being non-privileged (if they are the minority population). Members are not likely to be easily manipulated by unscrupulous members of other communities trying to shame them into taking actions to prove they are not racists. Members of this group are against any legislation that attempts to provide more opportunities to another ethnicity at the expense of members in their ethnicity. This group does not advocate violence against other communities based on ethnicity.
The Peacemakers: Members accept all ethnicities as being a vital part of society and are sold on the importance of diversity in all aspects of society. Although not against sexual relations or marriage between differing communities, members do not actively seek such relations; however, they would not be opposed to such relations. Although not against integration, members may not choose to live in an integrated neighborhood for a myriad of reasons. Members are against violence of any kind based solely on the race of a group or individual. This group is more easily convinced of being privileged (if they are the majority population) or more easily convinced of being non-privileged (if they are the minority population). Members are more easily manipulated by unscrupulous members of other communities trying to shame them into taking actions to prove they are not racists. Members of this group support any legislation that attempts to provide more opportunities to another ethnicity, even at the expense of members in their ethnicity. This group does not advocate violence against other communities based on ethnicity.
The Delusionist: Associates and attempts to identify with a different ethnicity. Members immerse themselves within the culture and lifestyle of the identified ethnicity. This immersion or integration within their identified ethnicity often leads them to belief that they are members of the identified ethnicity; that is, until they are reminded of their true ethnicity. These members are often publicly active in their support of the identified ethnicity. Members of this group adopt the views of the group within the ethnicity they chose. Only under rare circumstances would they be accepted into the Supremist group; most likely, they would be accepted into the Peacemakers or perhaps the Segregationist. It all depends on how close their phenotype is to that of the identified ethnicity and how well they have mastered the lifestyle of the associated culture.
I believe this collection of groups offers good insight into the attitudes towards other ethnicities within an ethnicity and provides some insight into the foundations of racism within an ethnicity. These groups apply equally well to all the communities, whether it be a majority or a minority community. The only differences between the different ethnicities are the percentages of a community belonging to each group. In the table below, I have proposed membership percentages for each group according to the ethnicity’s size relative to the overall population.
Racism
The online Merriam-Webster Dictionary definition of racism is as follows:
“A belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. The systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another.”
I took this definition and modified it as follows:
“A belief that ethnicity is the fundamental factor which decisively affects the nature or outcome of human traits and capacities. In addition, the belief that a particular race, usually the believer’s race, is superior to the other existing races; furthermore, it is the responsibility of the superior race to regulate, supervise, control, or in extreme cases eradicate the inferior races.”
This modified version suggests using the word ethnicism as a synonym for racism. I looked this word up and found the following in the Wiktionary:
“An emphasis upon ethnic identity. Prejudice based on ethnic origin. Heathenism and pagan superstition”
Think about the implication of these definitions. Racism (or ethnicism) is a belief (you should read my previous article on belief). It is something that someone has accepted as being true: It is something someone is confident is true. So, anyone who has this belief is a racist. It does not matter if you choose not to act upon such a belief, you’re still a racist. It is common in recent times to restrict the definition (not done so in this definition) of a racist to a member of majority ethnicity or community. In the USA, such a restriction would mean only White people can be racist. It is not politically correct to label a Black person or a member of another minority as a racist, even though she may believe her race to be the superior race. This, of course, is ridiculous. Any person who believes their particular race is superior to other races is by definition racist. Also, anyone who is prejudiced against or discriminates against another based on race is by definition a racist. It is just as probable that a Black manager would tend to hire more Black applicants as it is for a White manager to tend to hire more White applicants. Both are exhibiting racist behavior by discriminating against applicants of a different ethnicity.
In the previous section, “Attitudes Towards Other Human Categories”, I partitioned a given human category (or ethnicity, community, population) into groups based on their collective attitudes towards other groups. So, which of the groups defined within a community would be classified as practicing racism (ethnicism) and labeled as racist (ethicist)? Here is what I think about each group:
This is obviously a racist group. No further comments are necessary.
This is not necessarily a racist group. There could be some marginal racists in this group, but this would be a minority. Preferring to be with your own ethnicity is not racist. Not liking the phenotype of a particular ethnicity and not wanting your children have that phenotype is not racist. Not wanting to associate with someone from another ethnicity is not racist. Racism occurs when you believe another ethnicity is inferior to your own race: It occurs when you believe that ethnicity determines the true value of a person.
This is not a racist group. I think this is pretty obvious. However, the whole-hearted, blind support of anything to help other ethnicities to better their lifes, financially or otherwise, could possibly be considered racist. If you truly believed that another ethnicity was equal to your race, then why would you support legislation that made the other ethnicity more privileged? The only possibility here is that this group believes the other group is inferior. They feel guilty for being more fortunate and are willing to make special concessions to this inferior ethnicity.
This oddly is a racist group. The attraction to and attempted identification with the other ethnicity is due to their belief that it is a better ethnicity. If accepted by the identified ethnicity they may develop racist beliefs against their true ethnicity. On the other hand, if rejected by their identified ethnicity, they may develop racism beliefs against their identified ethnicity.
Essentially, the Segregationists and the Peacemakers are the only non-racist groups of an ethnicity. Some may question the Segregationists being non-racist based on their attitude towards segregation, but as I said earlier, segregation is not part of the definition of a racism. Some may question the Peacemakers being non-racist because of their guilt-based charity towards other races, but this form or racism could be considered good racism, especially if you are the target of their guilt-based charity.
Assuming this analysis has some merit, then one could conclude that any social or government programs that reduce the sizes of the Supremist and Delusional Groups of all ethnicities, human categories or races, would in turn reduce racism in society.
Thought Experiments on Racism
Let’s consider some hypothetical experiments to better understand racism. Suppose that overnight, upon the blink of God’s eyes, magically, there are no longer any phenotype differences between the various human categories (i.e., communities or ethnic groups). However, there are still cultural differences such clothing, hair styles (but all humans now had the same straight blonde hair … imagine that … all humans being blondes!), music preferences, speech (accents, language idioms, slang, etc.). Even though everyone now has similar bodies, they still speak differently: They dress differently: They act differently: They are still different. In addition, assume God made no changes to their memories, so they remember what they looked like the day before and they remember their previous interactions with other communities. What do you think will happen next? Will all tensions between communities immediately cease? Will everyone love their neighboring communities, and will all be happy? I say no! Actually, I say hell no! I say that although many people think that the physical differences are the primary reasons for the unfavorable interactions between different communities, and this may be true for younger or for immature older people, I believe cultural differences are a more important cause of unfavorable interactions between different communities. Even though all communities now look the same with respect to their naked bodies, the cultural differences make them as different as day and night. There will be an adjustment period for everyone to get used to everyone having the same phenotype, but eventually all communities will resume their original roles in their communities and the negative interactions between communities will be restored to their previous states. Now, suppose God blinks His eyes once more, resulting in not only everyone having identical phenotypes but also all communities having the same culture. Everyone now loves Chinese food: Rap is the most popular music: Everyone dresses like Beaver Cleaver: Everyone practices the Baptist flavor of Christianity. So, how about now? Will everyone be nice and love one another? I say no! In fact, things will get worse soon! There is probably no greater hate than that for a close relative or friend. Hate for an enemy is just hate but hate for someone you have loved that has wronged you in some way is far more intense! Why? This will be made clear as I next describe the remnant force from human evolution that I believe is the cause of racism.
Evolutionary Enforcer: There Can Only Be One (A Highlander?)
Racism or ethnicism is the belief that a person’s or group’s value or worth is determined by race or ethnicity of that person or group. What about the analog of this in religion. Define religionism as the belief that a person’s or group’s value or worth is determined by the religion practiced by that person or group. That is, it matters not the individual achievements or traits of this person; all that matters is the religion that this person practices. Suppose you practice the Baptist flavor of Christianity and a person you know practices Atheism. Assume further neither you nor the person advocate violence, but instead advocate helping others. Given the opportunity, would you or that person allow prejudice against the other to influence choices regarding the other in the workplace and other situations. I think it would be a struggle to fight the influence of prejudice. You would consider the Atheist to be evil or an enemy of God. The Atheist would consider you to be an irrational cult member. The effect here is the same as in racism. You believe you are superior to this heathen: He believes himself to be superior to you, an irrational cult member. In some cases, religionism may be more disastrous upon society than racism. Regardless of the type of difference between two communities, wars based on such a difference have been waged throughout history and continue today. The interactions between the Neanderthals and Early Modern Humans ultimately ended in the extinction of the Neanderthals as a community. Holy wars, the Crusades, and the Dark Ages of Christianity are all examples of religionism exhibiting Supremist behavior. Considering the big picture of racism and religionism, one can only conclude that these beliefs and the subsequent violent interactions between differing ethnicities and religions can be explained as a product of the evolutionary process described by Charles Darwin. In Darwin’s theory, ethnicities with traits more amenable to survival fared better than those with poorer survival traits. I conjecture that racism and religionism served as metaphysical enforcers of survival of the fittest in a society of multiple ethnicities. In other words, nature enforced survival of the fittest by instilling a hatred for those who looked different or worshipped differently. This hatred resulted in wars in which the better warriors won, ensuring the survival of the victor’s phenotype, culture and religion. That is, the feelings, beliefs, hatred, and violence between differing communities are caused by this innate programming in the primitive regions of our brains to subdue or eradicate others that differ from us. This was necessary during the beginnings of the human species to evolve into what we are today. As we evolved from an ape-like creature, it was important that the “fittest” prevail at every stage of our development. As mentioned earlier in this article, mankind today has evolved to the point where there is no significant genetic variation between ethnicities, so this innate programming is no longer needed, just as we apparently no longer need an appendix at the beginning of our large intestine. Unfortunately, this innate evolutionary driver is still there urging us to manipulate or eradicate different humans we encounter. Fortunately, our intelligence has evolved to the point that we have appeased or suppressed this urge through the development of local, national and world sports and competitions where the champions claim superiority. Although the early games were quite violent, at least the violence was directed towards a few chosen gladiators. The presence of the Supremist group described previously is a remnant of this strong, innate, evolutionary-fitness force that has transformed them into what we now call racists or religionists. To eliminate racism and religionism, we must eliminate this evolutional urge, which fuels the hatred of the Supremist group in every ethnicity.
Conclusions
What message am I attempting to convey in this article? Well, here is a list of thoughts I have on the subject.
Hate or undesirable interactions between different communities always results when there are one or more differences between the communities. It could be differences in phenotype, differences in culture, or differences in belief.
The more differences that exist in phenotype, cultural practices, or religious beliefs between two individuals, groups or communities, the more likely there will be undesirable interactions.
All racism and religionism results from innate evolutionary programming in our psyche that urge us to destroy those who differ from us in beliefs and behavior. This occurs between ethnicities and also within ethnicities. This urge pits one ethnicity against another with the ultimate goal of promoting the “strong” and eliminating the “weak”. It’s all about survival of the fittest. This evolutionary driving force will always be present in humans. The urge can be redirected towards sports or competitions. This may be enough for some humans; however, for some, in particular those members of the Supremist group of every ethnicity, sports and competitions are not enough to satisfy this powerful urge to violence against those who are different.
Who knows, perhaps the chemistry folks will discover a drug that eliminates this evolutionary urge to eradicate those who are different. Maybe neurosurgeons will discover the section of the brain that hosts this urge. Maybe geneticists will discover the gene that makes people Supremists.
Should the “Browning of America” continue unto the future until only a community of brown people populate the USA, then all unfavorable interactions due to phenotype, and cultural differences will cease; however, humans will still be humans: They will fight over lovers: They will fight over wealth: They will fight over power and control. You know what else will happen? The desire to be unique or to stand out from the crowd will motive the non-sheep to be different, and new cultures will develop. Before long the united brown people of the USA will no longer be that united: Brown First Baptists will be fighting with Brown Southern Baptists: Brown Republicans will be fighting Brown Democrats: Trump will die his hair black and replace his orange complexion with a more pleasing brown, while vowing to “Make Brown America Great Again”. That’s assuming of course he lives that long … ok, maybe one of his sons then! (LOL).