The psychology of racism

[LeBrok]

The key is to be inclusive to all peoples, and teach our children that we all belong to one group. Will it work,...theoretically yes.

 

[himagain]

Racism, the attitude that some are somehow better than others and, have the right to torment those who are not
like them. This is taught and perpetuated by the culture around both groups. It is harmful to be racist, and even more harmful
to be on the receiving end of racism. This intolerant state of affairs can, and should, be changed.

 

[ritageorge]

Racism could be owing to cultural factors inculcated from childhood, certain religious principles that do not tolerate certain groups, other times its perpetuated by ignorance, fear, a desire to control and inferiority.

 

[albanopolis]

Racism could be owing to cultural factors inculcated from childhood, certain religious principles that do not tolerate certain groups, other times its perpetuated by ignorance, fear, a desire to control and inferiority.

Racism is biological! In an experiment at CNN there was exactly the same graphic girl painted in 7 different colors. Among the colors there was black as well. The picture was offered to 2 or 3 years old white kids. They don't know what racism is. They were asked: "Which is the ugly girl?". They all pointed to the black colored one. The same one was offered to black kids. They did not necessarily pointed to the black one but seemed that they were confused. They did not name the white one as ugly.
This shows that racism is not a social construction. We are born with certain instincts. Let say to go from point A to point B we all go in a straight line, not in a curbed one. We are also born with certain attributes of what is beautiful. Certain races do not fit in our biological construction of beautiful. Of course this ideas are transmitted from parent to child as an important knowledge the same way we teach farming or science.
I believe in the future before the people get married will require each other a DNA test to avoid miscegenation.

 

[LeBrok]

Racism is biological! In an experiment at CNN there was exactly the same graphic girl painted in 7 different colors. Among the colors there was black as well. The picture was offered to 2 or 3 years old white kids. They don't know what racism is. They were asked: "Which is the ugly girl?". They all pointed to the black colored one. The same one was offered to black kids. They did not necessarily pointed to the black one but seemed that they were confused. They did not name the white one as ugly.
This shows that racism is not a social construction. We are born with certain instincts. Let say to go from point A to point B we all go in a straight line, not in a curbed one. We are also born with certain attributes of what is beautiful. Certain races do not fit in our biological construction of beautiful. Of course this ideas are transmitted from parent to child as an important knowledge the same way we teach farming or science.
I believe in the future before the people get married will require each other a DNA test to avoid miscegenation.

I pretty much agree, racism/nationalism seems to be a genetic trait based on evolution of group protection mechanism. However there is a social learned aspect of racism. The selection, the identification of the group you belong to. For example you can adopt a white european kid into a family in Kenya. He will grow up loving Kenya and treating black Kenyans as their own kind. Perhaps even dreaming about being black to fit in even better.

 

[albanopolis]

I pretty much agree, racism/nationalism seems to be a genetic trait based on evolution of group protection mechanism. However there is a social learned aspect of racism. The selection, the identification of the group you belong to. For example you can adopt a white european kid into a family in Kenya. He will grow up loving Kenya and treating black Kenyans as their own kind. Perhaps even dreaming about being black to fit in even better.

I suggest you another example. Suppose in soccer world cup, a black player from your team gets in fight over a ball with a white player of the opposite team. Normally the white players of your team will go in defense of the black player and beat the white player of the opposite team. This does not mean the white players who defended the black player did it because staying together they changed the view about race. Race is an obvious biological difference and we perceive our world through our vision. Races have different views of what is beautiful or valuable and what is not. As an example: Arab architecture is quite intricate and distinct when you compare it to North European architecture. But it was never embraced and replicated in Northern Europe. Because the way Northern Europeans perceive the elegance is different and has to do with biology of the brain.
What am I trying to say is that biology is the prime cause of racism. Society has a role on how severe racism is.
In societies that do fight racism then its expression is subdued but it does not mean is cured. We areborn with that syndrome.

 

[kamani]

race is a social concept. It does not exist if you grow up in a mixed society where everybody sees everybody else as equally close human beings. But once you start differentiating among people and forming in your head different ethnic and racial groups, you become automatically racist. As an example, a black person in the ghetto that starts every other sentence with "Black people...", is actually very racist. Once people identify themselves with a racial group, you have automatically racism. So to make it less damaging, there needs to be no constant talk about races and no "stick to your own..." between people. The problem is a lot of people among the most powerful group in a nation, actually like the apartheid system (why would you want equality if you have the power?!). On the other hand, a lot of minority spiritual leaders also like the apartheid system, because they base their existence and social importance on "fighting" it. So unfortunately, we're never getting out of it...

 

[oriental]

Race is a recent concept especially with the invention of photography. With photography people could see masses of people from far and near and notice the physical differences. Most people before modern times never traveled far from their towns or villages and tales of travelers, merchants, adventurers were thought to be farfetched or exaggeration. People from beyond the hill were thought to be monsters or devils.

 

[MtDNA]

Not anyone is immune to the effects of racism. Sure, wanting to protect people that have similar phenotypes is good, but when it crosses a certain line, it can become troublesome. Take for example, if there is a white guy. He sees two strangers hanging from a cliff: a white disabled (mentally and physically) man, and a black healthy non-disabled man. Of course, based on logic, one must choose the healthy one to save. However, imagine if the guy is racist. He will choose the disabled man. This not only applies in these situations, but reproduction too.

 

[LeBrok]

Not anyone is immune to the effects of racism. Sure, wanting to protect people that have similar phenotypes is good, but when it crosses a certain line, it can become troublesome. Take for example, if there is a white guy. He sees two strangers hanging from a cliff: a white disabled (mentally and physically) man, and a black healthy non-disabled man. Of course, based on logic, one must choose the healthy one to save. However, imagine if the guy is racist. He will choose the disabled man. This not only applies in these situations, but reproduction too.

I understand your logic, though the example might not be the right one. Here is why for couple of reasons. Even if the pulling white guy is racist, he could decide to pull up black guy first or only if there is one choice allowed. It is easier to walk to safety, work, play and live with a healthy fellow. Second reason, if slavery is allowed in this hypothetical world scenario, he might decide to acquire a healthy slave than a crippled white guy to be a nurse to.
I would design this experiment differently. It happens in today's Canada, two guys are hanging off the cliff, both healthy and same size, one black on white, and assuming the rescuer is not gay to go for a beautiful one, lol. The white rescuer comes from one side, see both guys hanging, and the black guy is the closest to grab. Oh, and there are no witnesses to influence politically correct outcome.
Who would you guys pull up first? I don't expect the answers, just a self test.

PS. This test might not work for Oriental. Change white hanging guy with oriental looking one.

 

[epoch]

The term "racism" has become so bastardized and consistently misused in the modern-day Western World that I can no longer even take the term seriously much less engage in a conversation where it is the focal point.

I third that.

 

[MtDNA]

I understand your logic, though the example might not be the right one. Here is why for couple of reasons. Even if the pulling white guy is racist, he could decide to pull up black guy first or only if there is one choice allowed. It is easier to walk to safety, work, play and live with a healthy fellow. Second reason, if slavery is allowed in this hypothetical world scenario, he might decide to acquire a healthy slave than a crippled white guy to be a nurse to.
I would design this experiment differently. It happens in today's Canada, two guys are hanging off the cliff, both healthy and same size, one black on white, and assuming the rescuer is not gay to go for a beautiful one, lol. The white rescuer comes from one side, see both guys hanging, and the black guy is the closest to grab. Oh, and there are no witnesses to influence politically correct outcome.
Who would you guys pull up first? I don't expect the answers, just a self test.

PS. This test might not work for Oriental. Change white hanging guy with oriental looking one.

The example could be used for any race, but there needs to be a distinction for ability.

There is a person of 'racial group A'. Xe sees two strangers, same gendered people hanging off a cliff. One is a disabled (mentally, physically, intellectually) person of the same race, while the other is a healthy (in all three ways) member of 'racial group B'. You can only save one.

The logical, Eugenist solution would be to choose the healthy person of the other race.
The illogical, extremely racist solution would be to choose the disabled person of the same race.


When this basic template is applied to reproduction, it describes why, in certain populations, certain disadvantageous genes tend to survive, and be passed on to many offspring, despite the presence of healthy individuals in that same area and time frame.

 

[LeBrok]

The example could be used for any race, but there needs to be a distinction for ability.

There is a person of 'racial group A'. Xe sees two strangers, same gendered people hanging off a cliff. One is a disabled (mentally, physically, intellectually) person of the same race, while the other is a healthy (in all three ways) member of 'racial group B'. You can only save one.

The logical, Eugenist solution would be to choose the healthy person of the other race.
The illogical, extremely racist solution would be to choose the disabled person of the same race.

This example will test which feeling in a person are the strongest. The feeling of racism or feeling of eugenics. Ability of people to hold both feelings at the same time will render this test imprecise. For example, a person could be racist but also have stronger eugenics feelings, will pick a black person to save, therefore racism in this person won't be discovered.

In the test, from my post, we only test feeling of racism in a person, for that reason all other variables must be the same.

When this basic template is applied to reproduction, it describes why, in certain populations, certain disadvantageous genes tend to survive, and be passed on to many offspring, despite the presence of healthy individuals in that same area and time frame.

Certainly, to make matter more complicated, in the past, it was more about choices of parents than the newlyweds. We had arranged marriages for at least as long as civilization itself. Even Jesus was teaching contemporaries that a slave should know his/her place in society.

 

[kamani]

The logical, Eugenist solution would be to choose the healthy person of the other race.
.

In practice, 99% of Eugenists are also racist, so he would save neither of them. That's why having a disability is just as inviting of discrimination as being a minority.

 

[Theodorik]

Eugenics in the 21st Century
http://whatwemaybe.org/
This book may be downloaded free of charge at this URL.
Recent discoveries in DNA and genetics have emphasized the importance of genes in determining, intelligence, health, happiness, crime, aggressiveness, and mental illness. The old liberal idea that "We are all created equal" has been destroyed forever. Old Communist and liberal theories that social problems are caused by racism, capitalism, sexism, poverty, or Christianity have now been disproved beyond any doubt. The only way to solve the world's problems and build a better world is through eugenics. Eugenics should not be confused with euthanasia. The word eugenics comes from the Greek "good birth", whereas euthanasia comes from the Greek "good killing." Of course euthanasia is wrong except where it prevents unbearable suffering, such as with cancer patients who request it. Eugenics need not be forced. It should be voluntary and based on incentives. The idea of eugenics was first proposed by Plato in his book THE REPUBLIC. This is the basis of all modern democracy.
This valuable book has been translated into English, Russian, French, German, Hebrew, Arabic, Italian, Norwegian, Chinese, Farsi, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Spanish, and Urdu.

[h=2]Executive Summary of The Most Widely Read Book On Eugenics Ever Written[/h]

"Evolutionary selection has been radically relaxed in the human species as a result of the development of civilization, science in general, and medicine in particular. While these advances have hugely benefited current populations, they have to a significant degree released the species from the biological process which created it and maintains its viability. Formerly, natural selection took place largely as a result of differential mortality, but now that most people survive well beyond their child bearing years, selection is determined largely by differential fertility. Aside from genetic illnesses, this new selection is also characterized by a negative correlation between fertility and intelligence–the core of eugenic concern for over a century.
​

"Eugenics views itself as the fourth leg of the chair of civilization, the other three being a) a thrifty expenditure of natural resources, b) mitigation of environmental pollution, and c) maintenance of a human population not exceeding the planet’s carrying capacity. Eugenics, which can be thought of as human ecology, is thus part and parcel of the environmental movement. Humanity is defined, not as the totality of the currently living population, but as the number of people who will potentially ever live. This is a book about the struggle for human rights and parental responsibility.
​

"John Glad is a retired professor of Russian studies, having taught at Rutgers University, the University of Chicago, the University of Iowa, and the University of Maryland. He is also the former Director of the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies in the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, in Washington, D.C. A Guggenheim grant recipient, he is the author, editor, or translator of twenty books, some of which have been honored in the American Book Awards. Future Human Evolution is part of his long-standing work on behalf of human rights, in this case of future generations. According to the Russian “Electronic Dissertations Library,” just in the period 2004-2010 his work was cited in 144 dissertations (123 CANDIDATE’S dissertations [recognized as the Russian equivalent of a Ph.D.] and 17 DOCTORAL dissertations [the equivalent of promotion to Full Professor] in exile and human rights studies, plus additional citations to his more recent work dealing with sociobiology, bioethics, and eugenics in two DOCTORAL and two CAissertations.) The data base indicates that roughly half of these dissertations cite him multiple times—even in the dissertation abstract"

shttp://forums.delphiforums.com/eugenics1
​

http://forums.delphiforums.com/chromosome
http://forums.delphiforums.com/racism13
http://forums.delphiforums.com/biohistory
http://forums.delphiforums.com/nordichistory4
http://forums.delphiforums.com/truthseekers23

 

[albanopolis]

In practice, 99% of Eugenists are also racist, so he would save neither of them. That's why having a disability is just as inviting of discrimination as being a minority.

Only Hitler hated disable people. I think he committed genocide against them, but since they were racially white for most part, it is not mentioned as often among his many crimes. But society as a whole do not look down on them. Society sees disability as work of nature and shows sympathy for them. But large sections of homogeneous societies do not sympathize with other race. White race has had severe race struggles but should be noted that other races are racist too. I know Japanese are racists against whites. I don't know Indians. Most Asians I think sympathize with whites for their technological achievements not necessarily for their looks.
So, I am reemphasizing my view that racism is biological and because of biological construction of the brain we tend to see things differently.

 

[oriental]

I remember reading that Greeks drowned or left deformed babies by the river and Romans let the deformed in the woods for animals to eat them. In the old days people were not so nice. There wasn't the comfort of today. It was more survival as wars and starvation were common.

Modern days where rich women checking the unborn to see whether to abort or not. Yes in Audrey Hepburn's autobiography she did such a check and luckily the baby was fine.

 

[MtDNA]

In practice, 99% of Eugenists are also racist, so he would save neither of them. That's why having a disability is just as inviting of discrimination as being a minority.

As a Eugenist, I find your statment offensive. True Eugenics and and true Racism are not compatible with eachother. Eugenists care about ones who have good genes, while racists care about only one race. By saying they can coesxist, you are feeding the notion that "some races are better than others".
Sure you can have a natural affinity to your race even as a Eugenist. But, that connection needs to stay within boundaries. You must inheritely know that preserving healthy genes is much more important than preserving your race.

 

[Yetos]

I remember reading that Greeks drowned or left deformed babies by the river and Romans let the deformed in the woods for animals to eat them. In the old days people were not so nice. There wasn't the comfort of today. It was more survival as wars and starvation were common.

Modern days where rich women checking the unborn to see whether to abort or not. Yes in Audrey Hepburn's autobiography she did such a check and luckily the baby was fine.

true but not all Greeks,
Spartans did that they throw them from a mountain cave a hole καιαδας keadas

http://www.anthropologie.ch/d/publikationen/archiv/2010/documents/03PITSIOSreprint.pdf

In Athens they were used as special abilities workers such as sellers, message carriers, artisants, but with limited rights, since they could not help in a war.
major class that time was the able ones who could take part to a war,

 

[kamani]

As a Eugenist, I find your statment offensive.

Well then you are offended by reality, because most 20-th century and later eugenism has been associated with things like: fascism, nazism, anti-semitism, war against the weak, anti-immigration, racism, aryanism, and all that crazy stuff.

Eugenists care about ones who have good genes.

Who are we to decide who has the good genes and who should procreate ?!