Racism is not natural. But in America racism has become so common and accepted that it seems like part of the human condition, like love or poverty. Some do not even notice it except in its more extreme forms. But, as Malcolm X discovered in Mecca, racism does not have to be. It is not something we are born with.
Seeing racism as natural allows whites to believe there is little they can do to make society more just. Fighting racism would be like trying to stop the rain. It excuses inaction.
How do we know that racism is not natural?
First, racism is not built into human nature. If it were we would see it in the Bible, we would see it in the Greeks. Both the Jews and the Greeks divided the world into an us and a them, but neither used race to do it: the Jews used religion and the Greeks used language. The colour of your skin meant little to them.
Second, there is no reason for racism to be wired into our brains by evolution: coming across people of other races was rare till the last few thousand years. Not enough time to affect evolution. Europeans did not even think of themselves as “white” till about 1500: race as we know it is a side effect of ocean travel.
Even in America blacks were made into slaves at first because of religion: they were not Christians. Race as an excuse came later, not till the 1660s.
It was only when race became an excuse for keeping blacks as slaves and taking land from the American Indians, only when society was built on skin colour, that racism began to seem part of the “natural” order of things.
The races in America are not “natural” either. Most countries with blacks and whites see mixed-race people as separate, like in Brazil, South Africa or New Orleans under the French. But not in America. There you have the One Drop Rule: if you look at all part black you are seen as all black. So the “black race” has some people who are 90% white!
What Americans see as the races of man and how they feel about them is not something they were born with – it is learned from a society built by slave owners, by people whose relationship with blacks was a thing of whips and chains.
Even now, more than a hundred years after the slaves were freed, whites still look down on blacks like there is something wrong with them. Whites would rather hire a white man with a prison record than a black man without one; the police can still spend more manpower looking for a dog than for a black woman – or shoot an unarmed black man dead with 50 bullets and call it a “mistake” – and be believed! And on and on. This stuff goes against all common sense. It is not one bit natural.
– Abagond, 2009.
See also:
- Racism before 1400
- race is social
- What this blog has taught me about white people
- How “race” is different in:
- America: One Drop Rule
- New Orleans under the French: Creoles
- Brazil
- white people
- Romona Moore – less important to the NYPD than a rich white woman’s dog
- Sean Bell – unarmed black man shot with 50 bullets. By mistake
- The oneness of mankind – Malcolm in Mecca, etc
- The eight stages of genocide
i think what is most sickening about all this is just how proud white people are of this…obviously they are since they don’t really do anything to stop it…they condone it or do it themselves…
i seriously have no hopes for america…with the condition its in, its only going to get worse…and hopefully when its at its worse, this country will fall like the roman empire…and maybe those who are left with the ruins of it will for the first time ever, use their brain, and restart america for a second time more correctly.
its weird, in history we are learning about early colonial america and also the revolutionary war. and even though what the europeans did to blacks was wrong, it wasn’t nearly as bad as what those born within America later on did to the blacks.
america is too hateful and egotistical for its own good…
LikeLiked by 1 person
also, that picture reminds me of something i noticed in my lecture classes.
white people will not sit next to a black person unless they know them.
in one of my lecture classes, the back is full of white people, and is overcrowded. the rest is filled with pretty much everyone else. although whites do sit in other spots besides the back, they usually will only do it with a friend.
i noticed that a black person will pretty much sit anywhere a seat is open.
asians are not nearly as reluctant to sit next to a black person, nor are the indians or hispanics…it seems like whites are the most reluctant.
there can be alot of space open in the front, but with black people in it, and then there is the back with loads of white people in it and is really crowded, and a white person will choose the overcrowded back over the front…
usually i am hoping no one sits near me period, as i hate being in crowded areas, the only reason i want someone to sit next to me is because i know them, otherwise i really want my own space…i prefer to sit on the edges for a quick escape…
LikeLike
I go to a small liberal arts college in New England that prides itself on its “diversity”. Indeed, their motto is “Challenging Convention, Changing the World”.
The school has been known to prove this “diversity” in crass ways, like photoshopping, or including a picture of all six “minority” students of the class of 2008 on the front page of the alumni newsletter, as if to make an example of them, all too aware of its rather glaring hypocrisy. It comes down to the fact that private liberal arts colleges are essentially businesses, and don’t give two hoots about “diversity” unless they can profit from it. But I digress.
The school does, however, have a rather large international segment of the student body, most of whom come from South and East Asian countries, but also some from various African countries. The African students are often widely, if not a little patronizingly embraced by the status quo, whereas it’s pretty obvious for the most part that most of the white kids want nothing to do with American blacks and Latinos. There seems to be a lot of “exoticism” here, so that a black person from Ghana, for instance, is far more widely accepted than one from, say, New York.
@alwaysright101 – I’m not sure how PROUD some white people are about it, as much as they are 100% INDIFFERENT.
That said, self-serving biases, like “racism is natural”, exist because we’re trying, desperately, to preserve our pride, to intellectually forget about what we’ve been doing to the rest of the world for the last 500 years.
What makes American race relations all the more insidious is the fact that as the founding fathers defiantly pursued “liberty and justice for all”, they also defiantly believed in white supremacy. The European colonialists were ruthless, of course (that hardly scratches the surface), and fully aware of their ruthlessness.
LikeLike
abagond,
Thanks for continung to show everyone that racism is UNNATURAL and IRRATIONAL.
LikeLike
To Abagond:
Tribalism (as opposed to racism) was common among the Biblical Jews and to a lesser extent the Ancient Greeks. For all intents and purposes neither group had a substantial number of people from another race in their midst. But one could hardly say the Jews treated the Philistines with kindness or tolerance. Eqypt is the only ancient state that I am aware of that had what could be called, in a modern context, a multi-racial society. That said what I have read Eqypt did not have racial tensions.. at least not like we have today. Although given the geography of ancient Eqypt, there may have been (for the most part …) a racial gradient as one moved from Upper to Lower Eqypt although I know there were marriages of alliance between Nubians and people of Lower Eqypt.
As an aside you probably know this but the origins of the word racism referred to differences between European groups and not what are defined now as differences between races.
LikeLike
I don’t think whites have anything to be ashame of. Whites have made the greatest contributions the world over. There’s no reason for whites to feel guilty for being more successful at the game of survival than others. If blacks had had the means to colonize the world the way whites did, I’m sure they would have done so without hesitation, and they probably would have done it with a lot less compassion. All this talk about whites being uniquely evil and so on is just sour grapes from a bunch of sore losers.
LikeLike
@ johnny Wow you are a very ignorant person! shoo troll
LikeLike
@Johnny:
“If blacks had had the means to colonize the world the way whites did, I’m sure they would have done so without hesitation, and they probably would have done it with a lot less compassion.”
Are you for real? They would have done it with a lot less compassion?!?! Now that is laughable. Whites colonizing the world exhausted both human and natural resources. Not to mention, they paid little or no attention to the inhabitants of the places they colonized.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I don’t think whites have anything to be ashamed of. Whites have made the greatest contributions the world over. There’s no reason for whites to feel guilty for being more successful at the game of survival than others.”
surely you jest…usurpin the natural resources of third world countries and rapin other nations/countries of natural resources simply to supress a group in order to uplift another is not sucess that’s barbaric, you can uplift your people and still be civil to others at the same time.
LikeLike
“…in America racism has become so common and accepted that it seems like part of the human condition…”
That’s one thing that bothered me with the way the MSM handled the “does race play a role in the opposition to Pres. Obama’s health reform plan” debate. The way the issue was framed after Pres. Carter comments drove the media feeding frenzy… it was like racism directed towards Pres. Obama and racism as a very vocal and blatant part of our politics was acceptable as long as we were clear that most of the opposition to Obama’s health care reform plans wasn’t called racist.
“…racism is not built into human nature…”
Which is the very reason why I view the oft repeated “there will always be racists” line people like to throw out as an excuse, unwittingly or not, for inaction.
It’s as if people who express that sentiment confuse the attempt to secure raincoats or umbrellas with trying to stop the rain when the objective always was to not get wet and to stay as dry as possible.
LikeLike
Touche!
LikeLike
Johnny:
Whites have done some very good things, like modern medicine, but they have also done some very bad things, like genocide, colonialism, slavery and nuclear weapons.
“If blacks had had the means to colonize the world the way whites did, I’m sure they would have done so without hesitation, and they probably would have done it with a lot less compassion.”
I do not agree with the Savage Black Rule trope, but that is another post. I do agree that blacks would do terrible things with their power, but to say they would PROBABLY do it with LESS compassion I cannot agree with that at all.
LikeLike
Uncle Milton:
The tribalism stuff I agree with. The us vs them thing is very common in human societies and might even be wired into our brains. But NOT the racism that has been built on top of it in American society. That is cultural. And it has driven the division to a pathological extreme, the kind that could still lead to genocide:
LikeLike
I think that the Biblical Isrealites may have been tribal/racist. Moses’ sister Miriam criticized him for having an Ethiopian wife — I’m assuming she was Black — and as punishment, God gave her (Miriam) leprosy, which was described as turning her skin WHITE as snow! I guess that’s what God thinks of racists!
LikeLike
“…it has driven the division to a pathological extreme, the kind that could still lead to genocide…”
I consider Bush the 2nd’s war in Iraq (aka: war on Iraqis) to be an act of racist genocide.
The “fight THEM over there instead of over here” was the clearest racialized sign you could get. The gross disregard for the Iraqi lives lost, wounded, displaced or otherwise traumatized by the “shock and awe” and the conscious narrative that consciously write the impact of the war on Iraqi lives out of the story is pathology of the cold and calculated variety, IMO.
LikeLike
I love how white people try to excuse racism by saying “Oh if black people conquered the world you would have done the same”. ORLY? What makes you so sure?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Johnny,
‘If blacks had had the means to colonize the world the way whites did, I’m sure they would have done so without hesitation, and they probably would have done it with a lot less compassion. All this talk about whites being uniquely evil and so on is just sour grapes from a bunch of sore losers’.
Yes Johnny. If I’d have played ’56’ instead of ’65’ when choosing my lottery numbers, I would have been a multi-millionaire by now. ‘What ifs’ mean squat in the scheme of things. People can postulate as to what this person or that group would do in any given circumstance(s) until the cows come home. As for your claim that ‘All this talk about whites being uniquely evil and so on is just sour grapes from a bunch of sore losers blah blah blah’, methinks you doth protest to much. You constantly reinforce my impression of you as someone with an inferiority complex cloaked in an outwardly superior one. Anyway, back to picking my lottery numbers for the next draw, wish me luck!
LikeLike
people like johnny, rely on the achievements of those within in their race, and act as if they contributed to them…they have nothing of their own workings to be proud of, so they use race to fulfill that need of superiority…
pretty much what hernieth just said.
LikeLike
Noticing the differences between one another is in fact a part of our mental makeup as mammals. Thousands of mammals in the animal kingdom are proof of this, often singling out fellow animals with abnormal coloring or physical deformities. Majority acceptance of the “odd” ball is rarely documented. Humans, unfortunately have taken this coded response and implemented it in other forms of discrimination: Religion, Class, Socio-economic (Man made entities). Racism, along with gender and physical makeup are basic entities upon which discrimination was founded. So if you are dealing with a racist, he or she is very much a simpleton, unable to denounce their own natural instincts that cause hate and turmoil in our world. And if you are being discriminated against due to your religion or class, the person perpetrating the hate is hateful on purpose, by choice, not by lack of ability to control oneself.
LikeLike
To Alwaysright101:
i seriously have no hopes for america…with the condition its in, its only going to get worse…and hopefully when its at its worse, this country will fall like the roman empire…and maybe those who are left with the ruins of it will for the first time ever, use their brain, and restart america for a second time more correctly.
The fall of the Roman Empire (actually the Western Roman Empire.. the Eastern Roman empire with its capital in Constantinople lasted for another 850 after Rome itself fell..) was facilitated by multiple invasions.
The denoument of the US would probably look rather similar to what happened to the Soviet Union in the early 90s. Possibly it would entail an exit of all US troops from just about every part of the globe, a dramatic increase in crime, the US dollar would become worthless, the majoriy of people would have their savings and pensions wiped out. A more remote possibility would be the secession of Hawaii, Guam, and Peurto Rico and if it’s far into the future, the Southwest.
LikeLike
Wow… People have been enslaving each other since the beginning of time. Every race has been a slave before. Don’t hate on white people, racism is as natural as preference.
LikeLike
Racism is not natural. I think you said you use the definition of racism and not the other meanings so I will go by that. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
So I totally agree with your 2nd point. Who says that racism is natural? I seems like you have built a straw man and are debating against him. If you have actual quotes from white people, please remember that one man does not a race make. And I also, can’t say that since one black man hates white people, then all black men hate white people.
Not only do I agree with your 2nd point, I believe it to be true. But you are guilty of the very same things you are accusing white people of. You lose some credibility by doing so.
Oh and on a deeper level, if you are guilty of some of the same prejudices you accuse white people of(and you are), how can your opinions even be considered pure. Every opinion you state can be devalued by your own admission of prejudice.
LikeLike
Please abagond your using the Bible as a moral guide, I wont even get started on that.
Racism per say is not natural but prejudice is, early man had to learn quickly that outsiders or strangers were usually bad for the tribe. So dislike towards people outside your tribe is an evolutionary adaptation and has been observed in animals as well. The only problem is we have moved past tribe mentality, yet we still have that stranger danger thought process, assuming that different means bad. This is a social group mentality that most primates have; racism and many other negative and positive things stem from this natural process.
LikeLike
Africans enslaved other Africans before whites even showed up, the reasons I stated above probably have a lot to do with that.
LikeLike
I think this is one of Abagond’s most important posts. I get tired of people saying racism is just natural. If it were, you’d see it in young kids. However, young kids don’t seem to care about race, they will play with anyone. Only as they get older do they start to infer from a racist society that people should “stick to their own.”
Now I do think humans have an inborn xenophobia, a fear of that which is different from what they know. But that may include many things beyond race, such as religious or cultural difference.
LikeLike
…forgot to add, most xenophobia in history has been intra-racial. Europeans going to war with Europeans, Africans fighting other Africans, etc. People like Pol Pot killing his own race along ideological xenophobia.
LikeLike
I came across an excellent debate on youtube between anti-racist Time Wise and race realist Jared Taylor, needless to say Wise kicks ass and argue why racism isnt natural.
LikeLike
Wonderful! Thanks, Y.
LikeLike
>>I don’t think whites have anything to be ashame of. Whites have made the greatest contributions the world over. There’s no reason for whites to feel guilty for being more successful at the game of survival than others. If blacks had had the means to colonize the world the way whites did, I’m sure they would have done so without hesitation, and they probably would have done it with a lot less compassion. All this talk about whites being uniquely evil and so on is just sour grapes from a bunch of sore losers.<<
Europe was extremely lucky that Chinese racism was manifest by isolationism rather than world imperialism. Europe sure taught China a lesson about the perils of isolationism. And China has learned that lesson.
LikeLike
Tulio made exellent point there. Kids are not racist. You put a black kid and a white kid in the same sandbox and in a minute they will be playing together. White kid might ask from the black kid why you look like that and the black kid might answer: “my mother and/or father are black”, and thats it. On with the play.
When kids ask these questions, they just want to know why you are different from me. They have no hidden ideas or agendas, they just curious. I remember when I met one of my oldest friends some forty years ago. I asked him if he was chinese. No, my father is from indonesia, he answered. And that was it. We’ve been buddies for a long, long time since then.
Right now there are some kids from Russia, Afganistan (refugees), and from Finland playing soccer in the front yard of my homebuilding. Couple years ago some of those kids could not speak any finnish. Now they are all playing ball out there, screaming each other, calling each others with finnish “names”. They are just kids there. I feel sad already that in few years time religion, politics, racism and other shit is going to spoil their fun. And that shit comes from their parents and “teatchers”, you know, those “wise men” (usually) who tell them what is right and what is wrong. Makes me mad.
We all should give this race crap a good kick of goodbye. It’s been around long enough. I know that in USA there is a long way to go, but keep moving on! Abagond is doing great work here. Know the disease before getting the cure. One day we will be just humans, guys and girls, men and women, not races, which are biologically pure bulls**t anyway.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am not sure Racism is not natural. Perhaps the term isnt, but “ism” appears to be natural. Certainly and without question “other” is natural. “Us and them” is very natural. I dont necessarily like that it is Natural. I understand it from an evolutionary stand point. Because “other” is dangerous. That Big Cat is an “other” and might eat me. That man is an “other” because he speaks different than me, dresses different than me. The last time an “other” man came by he and his friends burned our village.
Native Americans were quick to point out the “other”. So were Jews, Greeks, Roman, Egyptians, Chinese, and any other goup. To deny this is to deny rain exist.
Sometimes we seek out the “other” sometimes we seek the “same”. Race and Racism is just another form of “other”.
If anyone in here really seeks to deny this, then I challenge each one of you to stop using terms, such as “black, POC, White, Asian” etc.. But none of you really believe in the Racism isnt natural. You wallow in it. Just as every American and most people in almost every state on the Globe.
Certainly, you can point out that “they” dont use the term “race” the way “we” do. But that is just symantics. Come on, so they use “untouchable” they use Bosnian, Christian, jew, or Muslim. But they Use “other” and they have a label for it, be it Race, Ethnicity, religion, or countless other definable differences.
Changing labels doesnt solve a problem, but neither does symantic arguements. “Race” and therefore “Racism” as a form used in describing “Other” is very very natural. It may not be pretty, we may not like it, but the fact is it is natural. We will be divided by something what ever it is.
Not and advocate just a realist. Why do all the Punk rockers hang out together? Why are they “other”? Why do all black highschoolers all sit together at lunch? Do they segregate by the shampoo they use? I am just asking. Or how about this one. “why do white people always say Racims is Natural?”
Racism is a new term for a Natural act. It doesnt mean I like it, it just means it is. Like deserts.
LikeLike
Heres one for your Rlee. If racism is so natural in human nature as your like to point out. Why don’t we see animals behaving in a racist manner?
To call a White cat racist because it went around fighting “other” no white cats would not make sense. Or would it in your view?
You haven’t really thought this through have you???
It may be natural for everyone to see and label “others” but is it natural to BELIEVE that you are BETTER or SUPERIOR to those “others” ???
You could just as well form the belief that you were INFERIOR to “others”.
Why not?
LikeLike
If racism was natural as in “law of nature” like the desire to eat, drink, sleep etc, how come so many people aren’t overwhelmed by it?
LikeLike
Kwamla,
Actually, I have thought alot about this. My point is you have labelled actions as “racist”. Of course the terms “Racist, Racism” are so fluid and change depending on who you talk to or what point is being made. It is the perfect enigma. But I cant compare what a cat does to what humans do. What is natural for a cat is not the same as a human. We have different natures. It is not even a good simplistic arguement. What I would say is this.
I can give you an example of almost any culture and “race” Dont really like that word. But any group of people in the world and show you that they. use Power, discrimination, dehumanizing language, prejudice, derogatory terms to demean, belittle, and marginalize others. We use the term “Racism” to ecompass that and at times so much more. But the acts that occur in this society occur in others.
But granted for us it is much more complicated. We speak of dialogue, but we only want to hear one side. The “truth” is whites dont want to dialogue, not atleast those outside of the upper middle class, liberal, higher education crowd that are truly responsible for racism. And they only want to dialogue so they can humble themselves and say sorry we are racist, because the protects their power and status. We get it. it is those nasty working class whites that are the real problem (can you say TIM WISE). Or use Anti Racist rhetoric to further their own power games. They have always used Race as a wedge between the common folk.
The real truth though is both upper class black, institutionally powered blacks, asian, whites, and browns use “Racism” when they come here to keep the mass of people in check.
As long as their is a demon WHITE, demon BLACK, demon, Brown, Demon yellow, they win. But lets get rid of “WHITENESS” is an obsurd, ridiculous construct by itself. You have to get rid of BLACK, WHITE, POC, BROWN any “OTHER”.
SO I stand firm, the things that constitute “RACISM” are natural. Ok maybe the term is new. But then again I also stand by the Constant shift in what is RACIST, what is RACISM and what is RACE. The term is too fluid to ever be tackled and we can keep this going to infinite. This is a wonderful fight to keep peopel busy without real solutions.
And yes Racism keeps the power in the hands fo the few, at the expense of the many. No I am not a Marxist or Socialist. I can still accept that concept.
Mind you nothing I have said, insuates I dont believe in Racims. But I also know that as part of the “White” group. I am not allowed to dialogue, I cannot disagree without being labelled “Racicst”.
Trust me I know it will come very soon even in this room. When that occurs, I will tune out. That is what White America does. I know it is frustrating to Blacks, African Americans POC what ever you choose to be called. But that is the fact. And the moment the words He is a Racist are uttered. I too will tune out. Without out Question. Because the truth is.. At that point I know we dont want to understand each other. We just want to be right.
I just dont think it is that simple.
LikeLike
Femi, Because we are stuck on the term instead of the concept of Racims. Can you show me one place on “GODS” green earth where, Prejudice+power doesnt exist? Or what ever the Definition De jour is for Racism. But the facs are you really cant go anywhere on the planet that some minority group is not being marginalized by some other group. that this act isnt being done with violence, discrimination or hatred.
Sorry, Yes it isnt called “Racist” but hell do you really care whether the guy or guys that are treating you that way or called “Racist” or “Muslim” or “Christian”. The acts are reallyt the nasty thing.
And it could be a simple as just the day to day treatment of you. I use the extreme but ask a person of Bhai faith how much discrimination prejudice+power they face in Iran. Which
LikeLike
What must be understood is that even when we speak of, or even if I think Racism or atleast all the components that make up the definition are natural, that does not mean I think it cannot be over come.
One point I must make is I firmly think that the very arguement that Racism isnt Natural is so dissengenous. If man is part of nature then everything man does is natural.
First, you would have to show me what part of man which is unnatural. Can we define what Nature is? I am of the opinion there is nothing and no act that is unnatural. Sorry this may be a bit in the realm of Metaphysics but lets atleast try to demonstrate what is unnatural. Explain how a creature of Nature, can do something “unnatural” I am at a loss for that.
to make a point infanticide is natural. Cats as the example was use commit infanticide frequently in the wild. Even domestic ones. However, we work dilligently to moderate the act in humans. Rightly so, but it is still part of nature. Morally, a very gruesome act. I have two very adorable boys and just could not do it. But there are many cultures that do it at different times.
LikeLike
@rlee
These two statements form you stood out for me in your “online ” self-analysis of whether racism is natural or not
Then this…
Lets examine the first one. Rlee it is not the “actions” themselves which we label as racist. Its the BELIEFS. We then go on to associate those beliefs with those actions.
Its easy to see how you might get confused with this. Ask yourself this:
Which happens first the ACT of racism?
Or
The belief there is racism?
It NATURALLY follows if you have a belief in something like racism (consciously or otherwise) that belief will be reflected in your actions accordingly. You could not instigate or carry out any type of action without first having formed so sort of view, opinion, thought…etc…
The very properties of racism which you describe as “fluid” and “changing” mirror the very nature of your own beliefs and their shifting status in this area.
This alone should provide you with a clue to the natural “enigma” your describing as racism.
Its NOT!!! Either natural or an enigma. That is once you’re able to openly and honestly acknowledge your own views and opinions in this area.
Another clue for you is in your belief of dissimilar natures. Those abilities or tendencies which we think of as natural we tend to see in all natures. So for example; it is natural, as Femi says, to…”desire to eat, drink, sleep etc,..”
We can see this reflected in the cats nature just as we can it reflected in the humans nature. We wouldn’t question it.
Anything which is not reflected in both natures would be considered “unnatural” and we would eventually question. Do you see this?
Do you see where your argument of different natures leads, particularly when applied to humans? It basically means we cannot all be the same…???
Maybe you already believe this. rlee?
Now lets examine your other statement about defining what nature is…
I hope I have already helped in that regard. But you’re right to pose the question of just what is “natural”. And YES!!! I would agree if man is part of nature then everything man does must also be considered natural.
However. And this is where you can get carried away if allow your beliefs to run amok unchecked. Not everything that man does is beneficial in nature.
By beneficial I mean does it enhance?, does it develop? and does it grow nature?. Allow it to become more and more of itself?
And does it do this in a way that benefits all that is a part of it?
Anything which acts against nature in this way I would consider to be unnatural. For example: Killing another human being for pleasure or sport
Back to your question about racism being natural. Does it
enhance?, does it develop? and does it grow man?. Allow him to become more and more of him/herself?
And does it do this in a way that benefits all peoples?
Well..??? .rlee your thoughts…???
LikeLike
@ Rlee
Until now, all I can base my arguments on is anecdotal evidence which everybody is of course free to dismiss. However, I still have my five senses and a brain. Apart from that I’ve been travelling on all continents except for Australia. My personal observations and those of my family, friends, colleagues etc are just not compatible with the claims that racism is natural. I’ve been to rural areas in Cameroon, Southeast Asia, India and Europe and encountered people at least once in every place who were not distrustful at all to strangers who don’t look like them, let alone hostile. People that were fairly sheltered from so-called modernity for all of their lives and that city dwellers would probably consider “uncivilised”.
I do think that the “exceptions” don’t confirm the rule but seriously challenge it. If it is not natural to every being, the odds are high that it is not natural at all. “Natural” as in everything that is not a man made construct.
I suppose those who have never experienced anything else than a fundamentally racist environment have racism already absorbed and are tempted to believe that it’s natural. Perhaps people need to get out more and experience for themselves, I don’t know.
You know what all those efforts in finding a natural, innate cause for certain human inadequacies, such as racism, suggest first and foremost? A convenient way out of the responsibility to keep analysing the social causes. It’s also a welcome explanation for those who don’t mind living surrounded by racism (because they might be racist themselves), for people who live in complacency as they don’t have much to fear, and perhaps for those who are potential targets but bury themselves in fatalism.
It goes against the instincts of survival of a species, especially those who can only thrive in a social context like humans, to reject potentially valuable man power based on superficial physical traits. Every healthy, strong, adept, skilled etc individual is needed for the survival of the species. It’s not plausible for nature to compromise this according to a couple of silly superficialities. Only a, at least partially, denatured species would do that.
If there really is an entirely natural cause for racism, it might as well be of the same character as pathological causes for mental illnesses.
LikeLike
@ Rlee
Would you say that Pamela Anderson has natural breasts because she’s a human being and everything we do is natural? You could argue that I suppose but I think Abagond’s use of the word natural fits the commonly accepted understanding of the word.
LikeLike
I am not allowed to dialogue, I cannot disagree without being labelled “Racicst”.
Say what you have to say and get on with it! People will respond or not respond. I have a question for you; Why is it that many whites have a strong aversion to being called racists there are many more worse names to be called, racist ain`t one of them. People call me racist, but instead of getting mad, I ask them why they think this. When they explain why, I then explain why I said what I did(try doing this with a serious face). Many are put off when you ask them why they asked to start(hilarious). It`s even more comical when you baffle them with an explanation far beyond their capacity to understand. You then express resignation at the fact that they cannot understand what it is you just told them. In other words, your opinion has no bearing on my reality unless your signing my paycheque!
LikeLike
What happens to kids when they meet different looking kids? This is before they have been told what is politically correct and what is racism and how they should or should not react.
They look at each other. Then the majority kids ask from the minority kid: why you are black/white? And this kid says: I don’t know, my mom and dad are black/white. Then somebody asks: really, are you all black/white? Yeah we are all black/white.
And then they play on. This is because they do not know yet that they should feel akward about each other.
One CP guy said on tv that he loves when kids come to ask from him “What is wrong with you” because they just want to know. And then he explains and kids are like, ok, and go on. Same thing happens with color of skin before we grown ups teach to our kids how big a deal “race” is.
LikeLike
rlee is just trying to confuse biology (natural) with philosophy (what is unnatural?). Rather failed attempt, if you ask me.
I think tribal behaviour should be disconnected from racism. As far as I understand it, collaboration is more important to the success of human race than competition.
LikeLike
I think there is a difference between natural human behavior and LEARNED human behavior.
The “us vs. them” thing is probably natural. However, “us” could be made up of people with different skin colors so long as there is a shared culture to bind “us.”
So I think racism is a result of a manipulation of a natural tendency. A perversion.
Even though the whole “it’s not race, it’s culture” thing doesn’t really hold up to scrutiny, I think we would all benefit and get along much better if we did have more of a shared culture.
When old school racists talk about the things they hate about the “other” they always use cultural differences as reference points and justification for their feelings.
If you asked David Duke why he hated black people he wouldn’t say “I just can’t stand black skin, skin that has a very dark color is wrong and bad .” Instead he would say something about values and the “things they do.”
LikeLike
I’m not convinced that even the “us vs. them” attitude is innate.
Imagine the following (fictional but conceivable) scenario. 2011, somewhere over a desert in central Asia. Two aircraft collide but half the passengers of each one survive, some injured. One airplane had mostly Africans and Europeans and the other one Asians and Middle Easterners on board. Both could save the same amount of water and a few useful items for survival from the wrecks. In the first group there is a medical doctor, a geologist and someone who is a specialist in finding water sources and in the second group a chemist, a psychologist and someone who is familiar with the region. Both groups have physically strong individuals but who tend to be a bit mentally unstable. Both groups have mentally resilient individuals who are not very strong physically.
The two groups meet. Watch the “us vs. them” dissolve in nothing…
LikeLike
Kwamla
Great post, and interesting take on “Nature” but I dissagree. I think the moment you place a judgement on “nature” what is good is natural, what is not good is unnatural, your lost. That is exactly what your doing. Grant it, you give some wonderful judgement, value based arguements for what is natural or unnatural. But the fact is, it just only stands up for value based arguements.
Now the concept of Value based arguements are good and right, but not in the context of Natural and unnatural arguements. Only in Value based arguements. It is wrong to kill for joy or sport, it is wrong to steal. Although I think both are from natural tendencies. But they are dangerous.
It is natural to procreate, but it is danger to over procreate. To breed beyond the capacity of an area to sustain. But this happens in nature all the time. It causes harm and destruction. But only momentarily in real terms of time.
LikeLike
Kwamla,
I am sorry, had to make sure this point is clear. We cannot place only those things which we deem good as Natural, and those things which we deem as bad as unnatural. A Valcano exploding and destroying a village is both bad and a natural act. It is not beneficial t anyone in the village in the short run. IN the long run it could be very beneficial. But to the ones who died it quick frankly sucked.
I too have travelled a bit in my life. It is much harder to use examples of Homogenious socieity to dispute racism.
You are right, Racism does not exist in a village in the rural, small village of Soumi, or in the quiet soft hamlet of rural Austria, or the smallest place you can find in any part of the world. Where everyone is the same. Racism cannot exist and you cannot use those places as examples of the lack of Racism in Humanity.
That is a poor example and an even poorer test. You can only prove to me Racism doesnt exist in a test tube where there are multiple races living, breathing and washing together, and of course one of the races has to be the majority. But not always.
Hawaii is a great example of this. There are lots of what would be perceived as either different ethnicities, and races in one spot. Under the surface it is not all that pretty there.
LikeLike
Hannu L
1st Not trying to confuse anyone. And how to separate out and important aspect of racism. Which is the Us and Them?
2nd. without any doubt collaboration appears to be much more important, although there are biological studies that show this may not be true on the micro level. Still I must agree working together seems to solve more problem.
But you confuse disagreement with an attempt to “Confuse”.
LikeLike
Femi
I like the Air crash example. But again I think it is short run. I say watch what happens after lets say 200 years on the island, and see how people have paired off in groups.
Then you will inevitably see a state of us and them. It is just to common throughout the world. I dont care what people say. Once you get beyond a certain population stage, once you get clearly out of a homogeneous society. Racism or some form of it rears its head and you have to fight it.
The worste you can use as Racism isnt natural. Is the example of how wonderful the black person was treated in Avesta Sweden. When he is the only black person there.
Wait until the Black person is 1/4 the population in Malmo or Gotenburg Sweden then we’ll talk.
Or vice-versa.
LikeLike
jas0nburns
Interesting question, but a more important question would be is anything about Pamela Anderson Natural? Sorry had to do that you just openned the door.
But in truth what I would say is this. Pamela Anderson purchases fake breast is very very natural. While her breast themselve are not natural. Her wearing them is. By the way, eveything in those fake breast is from nature. It may be manipulated material but it still al comes from nature. To be Unnatural, it would have to come from Un-nature. I havent found non-nature yet. I am looking for it though.
I do not buy the value judgements in nature. “Nature” is not good or bad. It just is.
Still no one has given me a sufficient definition of “unnatural” that is not value based. Value based definition of nature is not helpful.
LikeLike
May I pose a different questions with regards to Racism as natural or unnatural.
Is it unnatural only in the context that most argueing about Racism are argueing from a Black white standpoint and there for have a small world view?
Is it considered unnatural because they view it as only a “White” thing? there for an inferior act in the race and a Racist view automatically.
Is it unnatural because it is not a “good thing”?
Granted Race is a social construct, or so it is said. But I am not sure the word is not a social construct. The practice is pretty universal. “A rose by any other name”.
LikeLike
@ Rlee
You are mixing geology, biology, philosophy and socio-politics. What does a volcano have to do with the fact that certain humans judge other humans based on the colour of their skin, the shape of their eyes or their accent?
Btw there is no valuation in terms of good or bad when a volcano erupts. It just so happens and there are natural explanations for it. Nature finds its way on its own regardless. The bad thing in this from the human point of view was the decision to settle right next to it. Probably also due to lack of knowledge about volcanoes and their inherent dangers.
About the rural folks, you actually confirm my point. If the prevalence of racism varies with the ethnic composition of the community, it strongly suggests that it happens according to learned social factors. Hence it is not innate.
I think we can safely assume that the majority of people in the western world and in some other places know very well that racism exists. That was not the point of this post though.
Then your test tube analogy. It’s up to you, or anyone else claiming racism is natural, to deliver biological evidence. If the people who stick to their claim want to come up with scientific proof, they will have to find the genes which are responsible for it. It wouldn’t surprise me if there are already a few quacks on the case and come out with a multi-million bestseller (that will be debunked shortly after) anytime soon.
LikeLike
@rlee: well, what I have witnessed around this globe I’ve seen the whole race issue vanish like a fart to Sahara when things get real tricky. Us vs. Them works if one has adopted that ideology. Same with racism.
In reality, it does not matter who you are if somebody is in need of help or you are in need of help. If you can look somebody in the eye and not help him, you are sadist, a sick individual. You also may be racist, but that is not natural reaction. You will also not turn help down because the helpers are wrong kind. I guarantee you that.
When you really are in the spot, when it is another humans life or death, nobody says “Well, that guy is different race than us, lets not help him”, “That guy is wrong color, lets not get any help from him”. I saw it again and again during my younger years around the Globe in a situations where one would expect the race factor to kick in. I think it is a very basic human thing: we can not survive alone, no matter what you think, and we never will.
When you run out of water in desert nobody tells you to dry it out, that is nobody else except arseholes. The reason: it is our duty to help another man. We helpo him because we could be in the same jam one day. And most of us will do so if we can, no matter what we say now, in our easychairs and soda cans in hand.
How deep this is? How strong this is? Well, during the Rwandan genocide some guys hid the victims putting their own heads on the block with that. In Afganistan during the Russo-Afgan war, some russian guys were saved because some family or clan decided to save their ass. Just like that. In LA riots it was some black guys who saved those white victims from the chaos. What was that all about? They did not say: hey, let that honkey muthafukah die. They said: they are going to kill that man, I must save him. See?
And like I said before, kids do not know racism, race at all, untill they learn it from parents and adults.
LikeLike
Femi
You are mixing geology, biology, philosophy and socio-politics. Without any doubt I am mixing all of them. How do you separate them from our “Nature”. I just do not get that.
As you surely are smart enough to understand. My premise is correct. You even argue my point to a degree. Nature is what it is. It has no value by itself. Whether it is a Volcano destroying a village or a group destroying a village. The village is destroyed. It isnt pretty in either case. Now, what I would agree with is one “nature” we can control. (note I use the small (n) here. “natures” can be controlled and manipulated. “Nature” cannot.
But you want to separate the “parts” of racism from racism. Just doesnt work. Racism, is ugly, but it is natural.
“About the rural folks, you actually confirm my point. If the prevalence of racism varies with the ethnic composition of the community, it strongly suggests that it happens according to learned social factors. Hence it is not innate.”
How do you come to that conclusion? I am perplexed. Because a behavior is “Dormant” does not make it non-natural. The fact that rural cultures do not show states of Racism, bigoted, prejudicial behavior in no way confirms your point.
Dormant or being in a state of none action does not mean that once a thing becomes active Non-innate that it is now in a state of non-nature.
LikeLike
Sam wrote
“well, what I have witnessed around this globe I’ve seen the whole race issue vanish like a fart to Sahara when things get real tricky. Us vs. Them works if one has adopted that ideology. Same with racism. ”
You are right, I agree, in times of danger people will clinge to anything. You see a lot of this happen even without danger.
Still this doesnt negate Racism. It still exist, it still is. And it pretty much remains natural. I think the hardest part, or the scariest part is in saying that what does that say for ending it? The defeating of Racism becomes a bit more complex.
But we dont even really understand it.
Look at Abagond’s conceptualization of “Racism” between the Races.
I am going to paraphrase here but.
Racisms for White is because they hate.
Racism for Black is because they have been hated.
His dual definition is Racist in its very form.
But I agree it is because he is Racist, although I am not sure he would agree.
I am not sure I am not Racist. or that I am a Racist. I am certain than many things I may do that are attributed to racism are not.
But I dont disagree with much of his thought. I do, and am curious as to whether is in his arguements not very much an “Us and them” and racist in his approach.
95% of whites are racist, and 95% of blacks are racist. But I am not sure that the person saying that puts themselves in the 5%. “Just not me category”
LikeLike
@ Sam
You can’t ignore the bond and cooperative spirit that can be formed within a group once an outgroup is defined.
Think of the US space program pre cold war vs. post cold war.
Or USA patriotism post 911.
The feeling of unification a group adopts when under threat is automatic and very advantageous.
LikeLike
” And it pretty much remains natural. ”
Maybe it’s natural in the sense that it happens in the universe.
But in the sense that things would always shake out along racial lines in any situation eventually? No. It’s not natural like that. And their is no evidence to support the claim that it is.
Just because circumstances may have converged in such a way as to give birth to racism doesn’t mean that it must always be so.
LikeLike
@ Rlee
I think that perhaps what you’re saying is mostly semantics.
It’s like studying a plastic geranium next to a live one and declaring them both to be “natural.” In one sense, they are — if you simply consider everything in the universe to be a part of nature.
However, such a definition renders terms like “artificial” or “fake” or “unnatural” to be descriptive of nothing – such terms cannot mean anything because they are describing that which (by your definition of nature) doesn’t exist.
However, such terms DO exist, and we mean things quite specific when we evoke them. We consider termite mounds to be “natural” but not skyscrapers. We consider birds to be natural but not airplanes. We consider silk to be natural but not polyester. These words have a meaning to us that simply contradicts the “all is nature” understanding of things, and there is nothing wrong with that alternate interpretation.
But as for human behavior, I think all that was meant in the OP is that racism is not an inescapable and universally occurring human instinct.
LikeLike
Rlee. Allow me to help clear up a predicament you seem to have:
“…I am not sure I am not Racist. or that I am a Racist. I am certain than many things I may do that are attributed to racism are not…
I would say if you need to subject yourself to such detailed on-line self-assessment then its a good chance YOU PROBABLY ARE RACIST!!!
But you just don’t know it or want to acknowledge or accept it. Certainly the views you try to convey here are.
Again…allow me to show you…!
And there’s this…
And then there’s this…
I could go on and on. But if after making this point you don’t get it you never will. The point is FOR YOU TO EXAMINE YOUR OWN STATEMENTS!!!
To stop being so blinded by you own “all knowing beliefs” because that is how you are presenting them. This is a basic sign of arrogance which all would be racists stubbornly display.
Its not racist because I say it is so…
Its not natural because I don’t believe it is…
Its not a good definition for nature because it is value based and I don’t think it is so…
Your statements seem to follow the same typical racist logic: This is what I believe so this is how it goes or should go
Of course what you conveniently fail to appreciate or ignore is you are not the only one on this planet with a view or an opinion!!!
I too can say the same thing:
Its racist because I say it is so…
Its natural because I believe it is…
Its is a good definition for nature because it is value based and I believe it should be so…
You see that works for me. Now who are you to tell me it shouldn’t or isn’t so???
So who’s belief should we go with yours or mine?
Regardless of whether you like it or not or wish to accept or deny it. EVERYTHING COMES DOWN TO BELIEF
You cannot form any opinion or have a view without being influenced by a belief FIRST!!! GO AHEAD TRY IT !!!
You make…we all make… Value based judgments all the time. This may be lost on you because you are not yet self aware enough to know you are doing it!!!
This is why, as you say, your actions can be called into question as being racist. To you it just appears “natural” but to others who do not buy into the beliefs guiding them; it is not!
As Jas0nburns say:
“…Just because circumstances may have converged in such a way as to give birth to racism doesn’t mean that it must always be so…”
LikeLike
King said:
“But as for human behavior, I think all that was meant in the OP is that racism is not an inescapable and universally occurring human instinct.”
Right, it is not a part of human nature. If it were you would see it in the Bible and the Greeks. The Greeks and Jews did have the idea of “us and them”, but it was not based on race or even physical appearance. It was based on what we would call cultural differences – religion for the Jews and language for the Greeks.
The Greeks did know that people had different skin colours but they did not divide mankind accordingly. If racism were “natural”, a part of human nature, they would have.
So racism is not “pretty universal”.
Further, the “us and them” feeling is driven to extremes in America, to the degree of dehumanization, on the road towards genocide. That too is not common or “natural”. It is sick and diseased. But white people have got so used to it they do not see it that way.
LikeLike
Rlee:
1. I do not see racism as a form of hatred, though of course it can lead to hatred. Racism is the belief that some races are naturally better than others.
2. I am racist. Not that that makes it a good thing or something. Hardly.
LikeLike
Personally I feel that racism was created as a tool/excuse to exploit and scavenge the wealth of other nations/peoples/tribes. To justify your acts. To “civilize” people, who’s culture is so different that you don’t even recognize it as a civilization, because you’re in the position to define what civilization is…
The same happens in the army and especially in war propaganda. The enemy needs to be dehumanized in order to make them easier to kill. Because to most people, taking the life of an other human being (despite their “race”) is an abomination. And should stay that way.
LikeLike
And yes, I think there’s a HUGE difference with groups of people fighting over resources against another group of people. “Naturally”, they are enemies, but they are NOT naturally INFERIOR!
Like I said, racism is just a tool to justify atrocities in the name of wealth/profit.
The only good injun is a dead injun. Manifest destiny my ass.
LikeLike
Surprisingly enough, we’d have to clearly define the term “natural” first to have a common basis of discussion. (shaking my head)
Do all termites build nests? Yes they do, because it is innate to them, hard-wired in their DNA. It’s their natural instinct because that’s the only way their species can survive.
Do all humans build skyscrapers or sophisticated machinery and technology? No, because it is not innate to the human species to have to do that to survive and thrive.
Do humans need literature, art, sciences, philosophy etc to survive as a species? Very unlikely so, even in the 21st century.
@ Rlee
Define “dormant” in scientific terms in regards to racism. What precisely is the natural event that wakes the “dormant” trait up?
LikeLike
@Femi
Agreed. No big surprise there, tho. 😀
LikeLike
I think that racism is natural, but that it’s not an excuse to inaction, the same way that HIV, tetanus, leprosy are natural, or that plain rudeness, apathy, laziness and many other things are natural, be they failures of character or actual diseases or whatever.
Whites may not have called themselves so until more or less recently, but then they were also ethnically divided and racist among inner divisions. And not long ago they discussed almost equating countries (European countries) and races. Not unlike ethnic conflicts in other parts of the world.
By “natural” I don’t mean hard-wired, just being very easy to develop under the “appropriate” circumstances. Just like, perhaps, language. Perhaps even due to some hard-wired tendency to form prejudices to guide our actions. For an wild animal or a primate, it’s handy to make quick assumptions about other animals in the same habitat, and even other groups. Part of that would also seek visual differences and associate them with being good or bad. Racism is probably just that, the natural ancient instinct we inherited, acting in a situation where we should/may need to make a more active effort to use our frontal cortex instead.
Even babies, they do look preferentially to faces of females of the same race (not that they have innate knowldege of the same race, just happens that the mother usually is of the same race and the baby will get who’s his/her mother and eventually will be able to learn a racial pattern of features. Babies and/or children that are raised around people (perhaps more specifically women that handle them) will grow somewhat differently in these aspects. The more integration, the less likely will be that children will be prone to racism, but whenever it’s not possible, we still have plain education.
LikeLike
Human babies clearly recognise facial patterns only from about several months on. Before that they are mainly dependent on auditory and olfactory patterns that they learn to associate with visual patterns along the lines.
The mother-child instinct can develop even cross-species, as shown repeatedly in the most unintuitive combinations. Cats to birds, dogs to sheep, even geese to humans. Apart from that, brood parasitism is a common biological fact, the most famously among Cuckoos that lay their their eggs in the nests of other species where the breed gets accepted as their own.
LikeLike
Everybody with a child knows (or should know) that babies have a very limited vision of spectrum. They don’t see very well right after birth, and it takes a considerable amount of time for them to see well at all. There are individual differences, of course. They do respond to sound quite well. In my case, I did talk to my son’s mother’s belly, put my lips on it just to make sure he would recognise my voice after birth.
They do react to a simple “smiley” symbol. They care about the smile (affection/devotion/nurture), not about the color of the nurturer. The opposite would be totally absurd and detrimental to the whole of human race.
Some of you people are absolutely desperate.
LikeLike
My response was directed to “just some guy”.
Another handy pseudonym, I’m assured.
LikeLike
Co-sign @ Hannu
How would myself and my siblings have been able to recognise my mother? My mother is half African/half European and my father is European. We range from “light caramel” to “café au lait”.
Or how would my kids recognise my wife who is very dark but themselves are sort of medium brown? How would they recognise me as their father who is “light brown”?
LikeLike
@femi
The tactics of people like him are quite transparent to me. They are like bullfighters. They try to distract the truth with their veils/tactics. I often don’t even bother with these guys, because they are so transparent. The creationists of human genome. Craniologists.
LikeLike
You are right Hannu.
At the end of the day it’s quantity over quality anyway, isn’t it? 😉
LikeLike
@Femi
It really is, isn’t it.
Much love to your family.
LikeLike
Even babies, they do look preferentially to faces of females of the same race (not that they have innate knowldege of the same race, just happens that the mother usually is of the same race and the baby will get who’s his/her mother and eventually will be able to learn a racial pattern of features.
Care to explain Romulus and Remus? After all, they were raised by a she-wolf! Yet they didn’t grow up to marry she-wolves and created Rome! They may have had a preference for she-wolves but may have kept it to themselves and their respective she-wolves wives/paramours!
LikeLike
@Herneith
You can be my she-wolf anytime, lol! And I’ll be your Fenris, lol!
For some time I thought that this blog was un-infested by un-intelligent, un-openminded people… But I suppose the Steven Sailers of the world keep sailing the seas of cyberspace, lol. Sail(e)s fully blown by their own egos. Ke-ke-ke-ke….
This blog has taught me more about festering intolerance than any other blog could’ve done. It’s sort of sad, but on the other hand I’m glad that there are people who can still think straight.
And a lot of the regular posters here possess an immense amount of intellect. You know who you are. Cheers.
LikeLike
You can be my she-wolf anytime, lol! And I’ll be your Fenris, lol!
Sorry already taken!:
My hubby Tars! Seriously, these people, are right regular lunatics! They actually do serve a purpose as they provide endless comic fodder. They are hilarious! The ones I find particularly comical are the ones from days of yore who were phrenologists. Same sh*t, different toilet bowl, eras.
LikeLike
@Herneith
Lol! I suppose once you go green, you never go back… 😀
LikeLike
@herneit & hannu: diving ducks, queen of sheba. great song. goes something like this: you could be my queen of sheba, I could be king Solomon. 😀
LikeLike
Lol! I suppose once you go green, you never go back…
Plus the four arms come in handy whilst carting my shopping bags!
LikeLike
I’m ROTFFLMBAOPMP at the person(s) who claim that racism is ‘natural’!! Ye gawds, the ignorance and pseudo-insanity that dripped from those postings were positively tangible…
Kids definitely learn racism from their elders. I recall working at a day-care center in Alaska, years ago. The only question I would get from the kids was “Where are you from? It must be a hot place, because your skin is so dark!” I told them that I was born in Seattle, which was the fact; the typical response from them was “Wow, it must be hot in Seattle!” I still chuckle about that…
Racism is definitely NOT natural. Seeing someone as ‘other’ is one thing; believing that ‘other’ is vile, subhuman, and not worthy of existence, is quite another matter! 🙄 🙄
LikeLike
““Wow, it must be hot in Seattle!””
LOL.
“believing that ‘other’ is vile, subhuman, and not worthy of existence, is quite another matter! ”
I disagree. That’s the whole point of seeing people as the other in the first place. We have always done this all over the world from the beginning of time. Human nature is often not pretty.
However, that in no way indicates that racism is a part of human nature.
Just think of all the multi-ethnic American troops over in Iraq and Afghanistan who are at this moment taking the lives of “others” who they consider “vile, subhuman, and not worthy of existence.” Nothing like a common enemy to bring people together eh?
LikeLike
NO!!! Seeing the ‘other’ as separate and different from your self is not an innate part of human nature. It is a learned behavior based on a questionable set of beliefs. Just like the American troops fighting in the two wars you mentioned.
They have been taught to believe by indoctrination that they are RIGHT to be killing and abusing these Afghans or Iraqis.
“believing that ‘other’ is vile, subhuman, and not worthy of existence, is quite another matter! ”
Do you recall Abo grave ? Were the American and British soldiers just acting out their natural human tendencies when those pictures were discovered?
LikeLike
@Kwamla: I agree.
Like I said before: racism is a tool to justify the oppression and elimination of people competing for resources.
In military it’s just more blatant and obvious. The are the people we need to conquer; thus they are inhuman.
Military service is mandatory in Finland, so I know how this works. It’s ridiculous how they talk about “destroying” the enemy, instead of “killing” them.
LikeLike
@Herneith
I could think of more productive ways to use those four arms… and especially the fingers…
Namely, flipping four birds simultaneously!
LikeLike
“It is a learned behavior based on a questionable set of beliefs.”
I’m open to that possibility, but If that’s true than it just so happened to be learned by every civilization that’s ever graced this planet.
LikeLike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War
LikeLike
@jas0nburns
So? You didn’t prove anything. I’m sure everybody here understands the concept of war.
Of course every civilization on earth misuses the image of the “the other”, the enemy, to justify their demands of more land/prosperity/wealth.
Racism is just a TOOL to justify the buccaneering of other peoples wealth, a morally justified form of piracy. And yes, I do mean BUCCANEERING, because it was a legitimated by government.
LikeLike
“I’m open to that possibility, but If that’s true than it just so happened to be learned by every civilization that’s ever graced this planet.”
It depends on how you classify “civilization.”
I can remember accounts of Westerners making first with small people groups in the Pacific Islands who showed no signs of racism.
But I will agree that this is rare.
LikeLike
@Jas0nburns..
From that same wikipedia link I read this:
…Amongst humans, the perceived need for domination often arises from the belief that an essential ideology or resource is somehow either so incompatible or so scarce as to threaten the fundamental existence of the one group experiencing the need to dominate the other group…
Any type of behaviour acted out preceding from a belief or set of beliefs suggests it can be changed. In which case you have to question is it really ingrained or natural?
So for example examine those things we would take for granted as unquestionably all types of people do without needing a debate about the process:
Eating….
Sleeping…
Having sex…
Defecating…
These things we don’t have a choice in. We consider them “natural.”
There are equally civilizations which have existed in peace for many, many years. Is this an unnatural state of behaviour? Or a choice governed by particular beliefs?
Is peace unnatural if war is natural?
LikeLike
@ Kwamla.
…These things we don’t have a choice in. We consider them “natural.”
I think there is a great deal more that I would consider “naturally” human. Belief is one of them. Choice is another. Sometimes we choose war, sometimes peace. Either way we make that choice based on our own self interest or the interests of our group. History doesn’t provide us with any examples of any other type of behavior. Therefor we can safely label such behavior naturally human.
“Any type of behaviour acted out preceding from a belief or set of beliefs suggests it can be changed. In which case you have to question is it really ingrained or natural?”
What’s ingrained is self preservation. The ability to perceive a threat and act accordingly in your own interests. All the tools that have allowed humanity to thrive are the same ones that drive us to dominate one another.
LikeLike
“It depends on how you classify “civilization.””
No it doesn’t actually, use any definition you like.
And i’m not talking about racism, I’m talking about “othering” in general.
As I said above, I agree with Abagond that racism is not natural.
LikeLike
@ Hannu
Yes I know everyone knows what war is. But some commentors have suggested that the drive to dominate others is not a natural human trait. I disagree, and so does Wikipedia.
LikeLike
jas0nburns said:
“I disagree. That’s the whole point of seeing people as the other in the first place. We have always done this all over the world from the beginning of time. Human nature is often not pretty. However, that in no way indicates that racism is a part of human nature.”
Ooooooooookayyyyyyy….whatever! That’s what I basically said, so…..??? I’m not here to get bogged down in semantics with anyone, nor am I going to parse and dissect my entire paragraph to simplify it. If you don’t understand what I say, that’s fine – just don’t put words in my mouth. Disagree all you want – it’s a free gawddamned country! 😀
“Just think of all the multi-ethnic American troops over in Iraq and Afghanistan who are at this moment taking the lives of “others” who they consider “vile, subhuman, and not worthy of existence.” Nothing like a common enemy to bring people together eh?”
Well, I wasn’t speaking of wars or all of the other tribal, ethnic, religious, sexual, et cetera, ad nauseum, ad infinitum strife that human beings have inflicted on each other from the dawn of time. I was speaking of human nature in general. That when one is young, innocent, and unexposed to the evils of the world, hate and racism are virtual unknowns. Feeling happy, sad, hungry, tired, warm or cold are the basics that matter.
Are there people who wish to dominate others? Yes, there are – they are called ‘megalomaniacs’ and suffer from very grand delusions! Hitler was a prime example, and I always laugh at the cretinous swine who sup from the trough of ‘Mein Kampf’ – any person who takes the word of a syphilitic methamphetamine addict as the word of gawd has plenty of issues! 😎
LikeLike
I guess, in a lot of ways, it’s a difficult question in that one never knows which “human nature” we’re talking about.
LikeLike
@Jas0nburns
Please explain here how:
“…the drive to dominate others is a natural human trait…”
and
“…As I said above, I agree with Abagond that racism is not natural…”
are not two contradictory statements???
Do you really believe that racism is not natural? How so? If you also believe it is natural for man to dominate others?
Do you not see the simple incongruence expressed in your beliefs here?
LikeLike
The reason I linked the war wiki was this quote by Kwamla
“NO!!! Seeing the ‘other’ as separate and different from your self is not an innate part of human nature. It is a learned behavior based on a questionable set of beliefs.”
I submit that it is unquestionably human and in many ways defines us. Our propensity for war was the most obvious example.
The point I’m trying to make is that othering is just part of being human. We need to accept that and work within that framework.
We are designed to function within groups. To solidify as cohesive units. Not to interact with outsiders, because for most of our developmental history, there were no outsiders. We lived in isolated groups.
LikeLike
“Please explain here how:
“…the drive to dominate others is a natural human trait…”
and “…As I said above, I agree with Abagond that racism is not natural…”
are not two contradictory statements???
Not at all.
They aren’t really related. Breathing is a natural human trait, people are going to breath no matter what. So, if you put poison in the air people will breath it in. That doesn’t mean that breathing POISON is a natural human trait. Make sense?
Racism takes advantage of a natural human trait. Othering. But it is artificial. it’s an additive. an outsider.
LikeLike
“We are designed to function within groups. To solidify as cohesive units. Not to interact with outsiders, because for most of our developmental history, there were no outsiders. We lived in isolated groups.”
But if it were human nature, wouldn’t that simply mean that we would create the outsiders? I mean, that is all that has been done all along, isn’t it? The “nigger” the “wetback” the “chink.” “spic,” and “gook” were all inventions that created outsiders for mass consumption.
(I assume, that it will take a while for my comment to get through moderation)
LikeLike
“Breathing is a natural human trait, people are going to breath no matter what. So, if you put poison in the air people will breath it in. That doesn’t mean that breathing POISON is a natural human trait. Make sense?”
I think I like your explanation, Jason. Yes, I can accept that.
LikeLike
Don’t be too hasty to accept everything King!
The problem with this analogy Jas0n, which is the problem with any other analogy you could present, is the way you are perceiving it. How so?
Your are perceiving different human phenomenon, processes: war, etc… in isolation; as abstractions, by themselves. But they are NOT! They are all interrelated!
Jas0n do you recall posting this quote by MLK in the post about Black pathology?
You obviously agreed with this view. Or maybe not? So again lets examine your analogy of breathing…
“Breathing is a natural human trait, people are going to breath no matter what. So, if you put poison in the air people will breath it in. That doesn’t mean that breathing POISON is a natural human trait. Make sense?”
Breathing as an abstraction, in isolation, by itself is not what is happening. We breathe AIR and what is AIR composed of?: Oxygen, Nitrogen, C02, etc…and what specifically do we take in when we breathe?
Do you see this? Its not the breathing in itself but the breathing in of all those elements in similar proportions which is natural for life here on Earth.
You could simulate breathing in a robot or a dummy but would you call that natural?
So NO. Breathing in an access of C02 would not be natural and would soon risk death! Which is natural!. Except of course if you were a plant and had a plant’s metabolism!!!
Do you see and appreciate the connections here?
To say:
“…“We are designed to function within groups. To solidify as cohesive units. Not to interact with outsiders, because for most of our developmental history, there were no outsiders. We lived in isolated groups.”
is simply not true IF all life is interrelated and whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly…
LikeLike
@ Kwamla
I did say that “They aren’t really related. Breathing is a natural human trait…….”
But the “not related” part was a mistake. What I should have said is that the drive to dominate and racism are not the same thing but they are related. You can’t have racism without the drive to dominate. However, you can have the drive to dominate without racism.
as for this…
“Breathing as an abstraction, in isolation, by itself is not what is happening. We breathe AIR and what is AIR composed of?: Oxygen, Nitrogen, C02, etc…and what specifically do we take in when we breathe?
Do you see this? Its not the breathing in itself but the breathing in of all those elements in similar proportions which is natural for life here on Earth.”
I’m sorry but you totally lost me there.
LikeLike
@jas0nburns
Kwamla is telling you that an example does not make an argument.
that’s the reason you guys are bouncing back and forth all over the place and pointlessly.
LikeLike
The question is how denatured we as a human species have become. Humans are the only species (we know to date) capable of perverting nature itself, up front the so-called civilised world. I would hardly call that natural.
LikeLike
Femi said:
“Humans are the only species (we know to date) capable of perverting nature itself, up front the so-called civilised world. I would hardly call that natural.”
Co-sign! Very well stated.
LikeLike
“Humans are the only species (we know to date) capable of perverting nature itself, up front the so-called civilised world. I would hardly call that natural.”
Well, it all depends on your definition of “natural” of course, but if you assume the “EVERYTHING is natural” explanation, then you don’t really need the word, “natural” because there is nothing else to distinguish it from — there is nothing that is “unnatural.”
LikeLike
I am sorry, I have been away a bit. Sometimes travel takes me to places where things like internet and cellphones are a thing of the future. Ussually, it is brief and so I come back to lots of post.
I see tons good post and many good disputes, some not so. So forgive me and I do enjoy most.
I am still not convince of the natural/unnatural arguement. No one has given a sound description of the two. Yes, I often make the point and I must say in my mind there is nothing that humans do that is unnatural. That does not negate the concept of unnatural. Things can be unnatural, but the bringing in to existence of such a thing can be natural. At least that is the way I view it.
But if by chance I am right that Racism is natural (althought I think it is just a term). How about this.
Are the acts that define racism natural?
Why do some groups so called primitives refer to them selves as “The people” meaning clearly the highest form ad others as something other than “the people”.
It is interesting btw that even broaching this subject brings out worst world view in some. That perhaps there is some alterior motive. Instead, what if one is just curious about this?
For many many years Homosexuality is unnatural.
Many people today still see this act as unnatural. From what I have read it appears to be pretty damn natural. Yet it certainly goes against what we view as natures ultimate design which is to procreate.
And in many of the examples use it appears to not fit.
LikeLike
@Rlee
I too have a question for you…
If you wish to examine ulterior motives and you are curious, as you say, about discussions like these about what is and what is not natural and whether it applies to racism or not.
Why not examine your own?
What is your motive for wanting to continue to express this view that natural and unnatural cannot be adequately defined (I already offered you a way) and that you may be right that racism is natural?
This, I notice like any true “natural” racist, is the one thing you never focus on.
So what makes YOU think your right?
LikeLike
Btw…If I applied my definition of that which is natural. Then I would regard Homosexuality, along with Bi-sexuality and Lesbianism, as natural extensions of human sexuality. But that would be separate post/topic for discussion!
LikeLike
Whether homosexuality is natural is off topic, except as an example to make a point about whether racism is.
LikeLike
I don’t think we need to go back and define natural.
Here’s why.
From what I know of the scientific method when it comes to psychology, theories about people seem to be based on repeatability and frequency within test groups.
We can’t really test groups of people noways to see if racism is biologically ingrained because racism is here and everyone is affected by it. Unless we put a group of multi-racial babies on an island and kept an eye on them to see if race ever became an issue.
Barring that scenario, all you can do is go back through history and see where and when race was a factor. It seems like in the past there existed what we would now call multi-racial societies which lacked any concept of race.
This would lead me to believe that while the potential for racism has always existed as an option, (along with heightism, ageism, or any other ism based on any real or imagined trait) it is in no way a necessary result of a biological imperative.
(btw Rlee that’s my definition of natural in the context of this discussion “a necessary and direct result of a biological imperative”
LikeLike
Unfortunately your suggestion of applying the “scientific method” doesn’t really help here Jas0n. It will just be subject to confirmation bias.
As I have already stated:
“…Any type of behaviour acted out preceding from a belief or set of beliefs suggests it can be changed. In which case you have to question is it really ingrained or natural?…”
What you have said is no different from the argument of looking for the existence of “races” in biology.
Racism. Just like all other forms of “isms” are basically beliefs we can choose to accept or reject. The FACT we KNOW we can make this choice tells us its not a biological imperative. Whereas we can not choose NOT to eat, sleep or take a crap!!!
LikeLike
@kwamla
“The FACT we KNOW we can make this choice tells us its not a biological imperative. Whereas we can not choose NOT to eat, sleep or take a crap!!!”
It’s not that simple. Some claim that the the tendency toward belief in religion or the supernatural is in fact a biological imperative inextricably tied to our survival as a species. It occurs throughout the world in every society and has always existed. It springs up independently wherever you find people.
Yet it’s a belief that one can either accept or reject.
“Unfortunately your suggestion of applying the “scientific method” doesn’t really help here Jas0n. It will just be subject to confirmation bias.”
that’s what I meant by.
“We can’t really test groups of people noways to see if racism is biologically ingrained because racism is here and everyone is affected by it. ”
You couldn’t conduct a meaningful study of people today, but by looking at the past your essentially conducting a retroactive study. Because you can observe that different “races” lived together yet racism was not apparent. By observing that such a thing is possible you can reasonably conclude that racism is not a biological imperative.
LikeLike
Rlee said:
“Why do some groups so called primitives refer to them selves as “The people” meaning clearly the highest form ad others as something other than “the people”. “
That is unlikely to be a case of racism, of judging people based on inborn physical appearance. Because primitives cannot travel to different continents and see different races. They just see nearby tribes who look pretty much the same as they do in terms of race. The far more noticeable differences would be cultural, like language, religion, dress and custom.
LikeLike
What gives (some) humans the arrogance to declare everything they fabricate as natural? How can they seriously assume that everything they do nature would do on its own? It certainly is a convenient way to excuse their own failures.
Even though humans are a product of nature they have something that sets them apart from other animals on planet earth. It’s the ability for reasoning and to create things outside of biological necessity.
But that is exactly what raises one major point. With ability comes responsibility.
Humans have also been given the ability not only to dismantle their own constructs but also to manipulate nature itself. Why isn’t racism on top of the list, even if it was innate?
LikeLike
Some questions can only be answered by admitting that the answer is both yes, and no. Something is (except for when it isn’t) or isn’t (except for when it is.) Another way of expressing this is ti use the word “both.”
What is natural, and what is human nature? Both love and hate, justice and unfairness, kindness and cruelty, peace and conflict.
Both.
LikeLike
Its not as complicated as you want to make out Jas0n. It is much simpler. Which is why believing in religion or the supernatural is not fundamental to human survival.
Which is not say these things are not important in another way; in terms of enhancing the quality of life; but its unnecessarily complicating things to suggest they are fundamental or a biological imperative. This is also why your failing to see that “conducting a retrospective study” looking back through history for “races” is also still practicing your confirmation bias.
I would agree with Femi on making this distinction between nature and human nature:
“…Even though humans are a product of nature they have something that sets them apart from other animals on planet earth. It’s the ability for reasoning and to create things outside of biological necessity.
But that is exactly what raises one major point. With ability comes responsibility.
Everything we do is still a part of nature but will it be in harmony, in balance with nature? This is not a complicated question to pose and is one which we can all instinctively, intuitively and honestly answer.
So too what King says about “its both” can also be true. But who decides? We all do!!! Including what we define as natural or not. Nature also has a say in this by not co-operating when we fall short of our responsibilities. To understand this we only have to consider the environmental state of the planet!!! – including its peoples of course!!!.
Now. Pose the question is racism natural again. Is it really that difficult to answer???
LikeLike
Interesting.
the group forming section of the Wiki for biological imperative
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_imperative
takes you here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativism_%28politics%29
It’s a direct line from human biological imperative right to Nativism.
which goes right to zenephobia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobic
which of course leads you directly to racism.
I know it’s just Wikipedia but still. kinda creepy.
LikeLike
jasonflugum1 is me btw.
damn autofill.
LikeLike
Abagond,
That is unlikely to be a case of racism, of judging people based on inborn physical appearance.
Yes… And no. Here’s why:
Is “racism” defined as “judging people based on inborn physical appearance”? (Not sure if that’s the case). If yes, then by all means, you’re right.
On the other hand, grouping people into different “races” can be done using ANY criteria (be it about physical appearance or not). This kind of grouping creates the US vs THEM mentality, which can be found anywhere and anytime. Just check out Ancient Egyptians or Greeks. In that sense, “racism” seems to be universal. But it’s still difficult to say if it’s “natural” or if it’s a product or nurture.
LikeLike
“On the other hand, grouping people into different “races” can be done using ANY criteria (be it about physical appearance or not). ”
It can even be based on something totally intangible, like the Hindu caste system, one of the most oppressive social systems on Earth.
LikeLike
@Kwamla
I too have a question for you…
If you wish to examine ulterior motives and you are curious, as you say, about discussions like these about what is and what is not natural and whether it applies to racism or not.
Why not examine your own? That is part of why I am here isnt it. I certainly think one has to say why am I here? In all cases not just metaphysical.
What is your motive for wanting to continue to express this view that natural and unnatural cannot be adequately defined (I already offered you a way) and that you may be right that racism is natural?
Well I think unnatural and natural can be adequately defined. I think it is. I dont think Racism is adequately defined as either natural or unnatural. We do of course disagree greately on what is natural and unnatural for humans. But ultimately my reason for being here is to get wisdom.
This, I notice like any true “natural” racist, is the one thing you never focus on.
How is raising a question on a subject not focussing on it.
So what makes YOU think your right? Well, I am not absolutely sure I am right. It fits many evolutionary patterns. So i certainly think it is natural. It being racism.
But a couple of questions for you.
Is it more racist to think racism is natural or is it more racist to think racism is unnatural? Why
is it natural to call someone who disagrees with you a racist or does it just make you feel better?
LikeLike
@abagond
Whether homosexuality is natural is off topic, except as an example to make a point about whether racism is.
Certainly meant it only in that term and dont want to start a whole new arguement in that realm.
LikeLike
jasonflugum1
I don’t think we need to go back and define natural.
Jason, my concern is many in the post are doing just that re-defining natural to fit their needs.
Rlee that’s my definition of natural in the context of this discussion “a necessary and direct result of a biological imperative”
This can be pretty broad.
There is a hypothesis that Religion is an evolutionary tool. Two very good friends of mine, one is works at Clark Atlanta University specializing in DNA and One a physicist at Ga Tech/ both think Religion is a natural evolutionary human trait.
There have been studies to show the effect of imaginary beings and how children behave if they think imaginary beings are watching. it is pretty interesting.
I will give you one of the scientist views. His is that human evolved with an inclination to religion because of death. Specifically, death of children. Because the death of children was such an emotional strain on mothers, the concept of an after life came into being. This soothed the mother and gave her the will to live on. She could have more children. A mother who did not believe in an after life my become so emotioally damaged that she would either be unwilling to live or unwillig bear more children.
So mothers with a view of an after life had more children tha those who did not. This may be crazy, it is certainly incomplete, but it is plausable.
There are others but this is a pretty interesting one. If something like this is true. If Religions has roots in natural inclinations then it is part of our nature.
If religion is evolutionary, it maybe natural. certainly as questionable as Racism. But it is also changeable. AS i was raised in a very religious home and i am not in the least religious today. Cultural, teachable, and natural, all the possible.
LikeLike
@Femi
I am sorry, you made a post earlier. At least I think it was you. I think I made the point of something being dormant and still natural.
i am not sure where the point could be. Certainly racism came into being in America at the point where those in power needed it to control others. The others actually not being the africans but the multitude of dipossesed whites.
I love that line in Mississippe burning where Gene Hackman is driving down the road with oh god the other actor. He says something to the effect that “Hey yeah we were poor white trash but atleast we werent N*gg. That was such an ahah moment for me.
I think that is probably where MLK;s points about poor whites and poor blacks having more incommon thant they thought. More along the lines of poor whites not really knowing what a mess Racism had them in.
The fact that a whole system had been set up to dupe a group into buying into the shame. There has to be a natural element in there somewhere.
Understand, I dont woship the idea that racism or the elements that lead ot racism or natural. I fear that, because if that is true. If racism is a natural, occurance,, makes the fight harder.
You do realize that whether your in Japan, India, France or U.S.A. There are those who are viewed is subhuman or lesser than. IT is global and that does not make it suck less.
LikeLike
rlee,
On the issue of defining natural:
Well I think unnatural and natural can be adequately defined.
No, they can’t, at least when it comes to human beings, and they are of our interest here.
Nature vs Nurture is a complex and ongoing debate in anthropology, and if we’ve concluded something, it’s that you can’t say what part of human behaviour is truly natural. To an extend, EVERYTHING is cultural, even the basic biological needs (they are natural, but are also culturally constructed – for example, when you need empty your bladder, you don’t do it in the middle of a crowded street, I presume).
It’s a silly example, but it does illustrate my point.
LikeLike
This is even more slippery ground. I’m already looking forward to the first publications, particularly biological explanations for the high number of non-religious people in many parts in this world (in some parts over-proportionally more than in others).
It speaks volumes that the starting point in all these researches is based on superficial plausibility. Apparently on the thought that grown sociopolitical complexity can always be boiled down to a simple equation that everybody can be expected to blindly accept. All those efforts could certainly succeed in inciting complacency, fatalism and obedience but first and foremost, they deliver excuses for continuing the old ways and for neglecting efforts to improve where improvements are not only sorely missed but fairly easy to achieve. I repeat myself, effort is the key word.
After the racist gene and the religion gene, what’s next? The genetic correlation between religion and “race”? The war gene? The anti-intellectualism gene? The anti-socialism gene? The anti-health-care-for-all gene? The money-is-everything gene? The energy waster gene? The greed gene? The desire-for-plastic-surgery gene? The megalomaniac gene? The genes-explain-everything gene?
LikeLike
Infants don’t have any problems doing “their business” just about anywhere. It’s learned behaviour to use facilities.
You can even see it with intoxicated adults who have no qualms whatsoever on crowded streets – at least in Western Europe.
LikeLike
Well, that just proves a strong cultural component of biological functions with adults.
I understand what you’re saying. But observing infants or mentally disabled, or intoxicated people can’t give us an accurate answer on “what’s natural”. Namely, it can’t give as an answer on what percentage of culture there is in anything human do. You can’t observe infants to get all the answers, maybe you can’t observe them to get many answers at all. One of the strongest debates since, well, forever, was whether gender roles/gender behaviour is natural or culturally constructed. There were many experiments with babies, but they failed to give any solid results.
I’m one of those anthros who believe everything is cultural to an extend; and that you can’t really say which part of it is natural. There is usually some natural component to it. In case of racism, some authors proposed (not that I necessary agree) that racism can be rooted in the aversion towards radically different physical appearances that might resemble illness. So just like people – this has been proved – have an aversion towards, say, individuals without limbs, or dwarfs, they might have had the same aversion towards people of radically different skin tones when they saw them for the first time (why is his skin so light, he must be ill!)
However, this argument – even (and it’s a big even) if there’s some truth to it – fail to prove that racism is natural, at least because of two reasons:
1. Infants don’t seem to have this aversion (not just towards people of different races, but also to physically or mentally disabled individuals).
2. We have historical sources describing first contacts between people of different skin shades in different historical periods. None of those written before the colonization period describes this aversion. Physical differences were noted, and yes, authors usually didn’t miss a chance to say their physical appearance is more attractive, but that was all.
LikeLike
@rlee
Were you bringing up religion independently? or did you notice that I mentioned it in response to one of Kwamla’s posts?
I read this book on the subject awhile back.
LikeLike
@abagond
Rlee:
1. I do not see racism as a form of hatred, though of course it can lead to hatred. Racism is the belief that some races are naturally better than others.
I cant really argue with that. It has certainly been a tool as well.
For better or for worse I think the Armed Forces of the U. S. have been a great tool in the past 40 years to negate that belief. Unfortunately, not enough serve in them to make a huge change. But my experience is that those who serve in the military over all come out changed in their views about other races. I know examples can be brought to say not so.
But if you eat, sleep, shower, bunk and live the totallity of your day with different races, cultures, and ethnic groups, you do change.
2. I am racist. Not that that makes it a good thing or something. Hardly.
If the definition of racism is as you define it. I can say I am not. I can say that I was, but having travelled, having served in the military for 8 years. Living in that time on a, Navy base, Army base, Airforce Base, and a Coast Guard base, I came to see us as quite similar.
You shower with anywhere from 30 to 100 men on daily basis, eat with them, sleep in a crowded room, depend on them. You lose a lot of preconceived notions. I see far more Racism in the outside world when peole dont have to live together.
But then again Prisoners do the same thing and you will find no better racial division than in prison. But that is perhaps where Racism becomes a great tool.
It has shaped some of my views on how to supress Racist tendencies. I dont think they can be killed, if they are natural to us.
Some use there brief travels as experience to come to terms with their point of view. I dont mind that, I do it too. I do however think you can not really understand a people or whether they are Racist or not by visiting them for 30 days. People tend to put on their best behavior for visitors.
For me, none of the negates nature. It just means it can be overcome.
LikeLike
I wanted to go back and look at the two words Natural and Unnatural. So I read the American Heritage Dictionary definitions.
There are couple of interesting parts to both definitions. I am not sure that one cannot pull out something from both to argue for Racism being either Natural or Unnatural. In truth it didnt help me much. I just left the door open to choose the one you want. I dont like that.
Unnatural as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary.
adj.
In violation of a natural law.
*Inconsistent with an individual pattern or custom.
*Deviating from a behavioral or social norm: an unnatural attachment.
Contrived or constrained; artificial: smiled in an unnatural manner.
*In violation of natural feelings; inhuman.
Natural as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary.
adj.
Present in or produced by nature: a natural pearl.
Of, relating to, or concerning nature: a natural environment.
Conforming to the usual or ordinary course of nature: a natural death.
*Not acquired; inherent: Love of power is natural to some people. (hate of something) could be too, My words)
Having a particular character by nature: a natural leader.
*Biology. Not produced or changed artificially; not conditioned: natural immunity; a natural reflex.
Characterized by spontaneity and freedom from artificiality, affectation, or inhibitions. See synonyms at naive.
Not altered, treated, or disguised: natural coloring; natural produce.
Faithfully representing nature or life.
Expected and accepted: “In Willie’s mind marriage remained the natural and logical sequence to love” (Duff Cooper).
Established by moral certainty or conviction: natural rights.
Being in a state regarded as primitive, uncivilized, or unregenerate.
Related by blood: the natural parents of the child.
Born of unwed parents: a natural child.
Mathematics. Of or relating to positive integers, sometimes including zero.
Music.
Not sharped or flatted.
Having no sharps or flats.
n.
One having all the qualifications necessary for success: You are a natural for this job.
One suited by nature for a certain purpose or function: She is a natural at mathematics.
Music.
The sign (♮) placed before a note to cancel a preceding sharp or flat.
A note so affected.
A yellowish gray to pale orange yellow.
Games. A combination in certain card and dice games that wins immediately.
An Afro hairstyle.
LikeLike
are you people retarded, before you say racism is not natural , go to take a course in evolution. then try to make a decent argument. until then remember this ‘birds of a feather,flock together ‘
LikeLike
@ Dan.
“There seems to be a lot of “exoticism” here, so that a black person from Ghana, for instance, is far more widely accepted than one from, say, New York.”
—-
You nailed it. As a matter of fact, your entire comment nailed it.
LikeLike
Do you know how many questions there are on the internet asking if racism is natural? Do you know how many people respond by saying yes? Racism isn’t natural; it’s nurtured. Noticing someone looks different from you is not racism. That is natural. Thinking you are superior is learned.
LikeLike
I have white skin, and I think that many people despise white people and think that we are greedy, evil, racist ect. and that is just as racist I think, it makes me feel sad, cause its not about saying: “black people arent so bad after all”
its about not thinking about or judging by skin-pigments, we dont judge people and history by eye colour, right?
so dont blame whites for slaughtering millions of people, I mean I havent killed anyone, so ALL white skin in this world should not be considered evil.
Also I think its bullshit that “whites are more succesfull at life”
africans, asians, americans and europeans all have created amazing things and cultures. YES even africa has a great history! we just NEVER EVER learn about it, its a part of racist society, and it is a “Divide and conquer” strategy I think. people make profits of us fighting eachother.
LikeLike
Whites are not the only people who have “done” nuclear weapons–
the Chinese, North Koreans, Asian Indians and Pakistanis have also
“done” nuclear weapons, and all (except North Korea which may have
got the designs from Pakistani AQ Khan) independently of one
another. They are the very WORST thing ever invented by humans,
and could cause the death of the human species, and perhaps all
higher forms of life. The insects will then take over.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on The Racist and Unoriginal Anglo-American Entertainment Industry.
LikeLike
[…] The “racism is natural” argument […]
LikeLike
Just found this quote which was applicable to my last comment here which I came across recently from some years ago…
Of course definitions of racism have since moved on from these elementary offerings…. 🙂
LikeLike
I thought this clip was appropriate for this thread. Racism is unnatural indeed.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMlKX3ZE6NA)
LikeLike
[…] Racism is universal, natural, part of human nature. […]
LikeLike
Tell it to the American Indian
LikeLike
I think racism is kind of natural, (not the meaning society gives the word) in a evolution point of view the fear of the “other” is a part of human nature, we can’t deny that, but it’s also true that humans are very capable of ignoring they nature, so racism is a BIG problem, someone being racist is totally his/her decision not because it’s in the human nature.
Basicly, racist are assholes
LikeLike
@G
You know, I’ve only ever heard White people express that “fear of others is part of human nature”. I wonder… is it really? I’ve theorized that myself and then wondered if I’m just projecting my own fear of others onto everyone else. Perhaps it is not nature, but nurture. Meaning that it is culturally ingrained in people of European descent as is the arrogance to assume everyone else must feel the same.
LikeLike
[…] Racism is a universal, natural, part of human nature. […]
LikeLike