Everything that everyone does is ultimately rooted in the self preservation of ones interest and values. In other words, everything that everyone does is selfish, in that the choice or action is taken to maximize a person’s interest and or values, culminating in a reward. One can be seen as a Saint, as in the case of Mother Teresa, for their apparent sacrifices made on behalf of others. However, the actions of Saints are equally as selfish as those of callous sinners. The only difference being their hierarchy of values and subsequent rewards based upon choices emanating from those values. This all works to the benefit of the first law of nature, which is self preservation. Now that we have established a selfish motive for everything humans do, we must note the fact that humans are a socially and economically interactive and interdependent creature. Thus, it is the norm that our interests are often at odds with the interest of other humans, while in concert with the interest of yet others. This invariably leads to the creation of competition and alliances whose ultimate functionality is the promotion and success of individual member’s shared interest. If two or more males have an interest in one alpha female, the natural resultant is a competition. If two separate population groups expand to the borders of the others territory, then a competition will result over the land, because it is the land that is providing the individuals from both groups the ability to survive. In light of all this, it should be fairly obvious as to why we humans affiliate ourselves with groups. Everyone is part of some group, either by choice, by birth or by both. These groups then often become a way for individuals to compete with other groups for the goal of maximizing the individual interest of its members. The reason being is that there is strength in numbers and individuals often can further their individual interest more effectively by joining with those of similar interest and or needs. Also, an individual, by virtue of birth and or choice, may be a member of several different groups, some in conflict with others. In such a case, that individual will rank the memberships in order of their ability to promote whatever the individual values most. Our group memberships are a strategy designed to promote the offensive and or defensive needs of individuals against other competing human groups whom we feel either threaten us or have something that we covet. Consequently, we divide ourselves by nations and borders, religion, political systems, economic systems, political parties, ethnicity, race, tribe and far lesser affiliations, mostly for the purpose competing for the actualization or preservation of our interest as individuals, which are shared by the group. More often than not, our interest and values are learned. Often we simply inherit them from our families, communities and nations. It is often part and parcel with socialization and acculturation via emulation. Thus, more often than not, interest and membership becomes self perpetuating through birth. However, people do break the mode of their environments training, but it is generally an exception to the rule. Also, propaganda from a powerful source can shape individuals beliefs and values, by appealing to certain emotions that triggers the need to become offensive or defensive to another group. Not all groups are morally equivalent however. As I mentioned before, some groups arise as a defensive reaction to offensive actions by other groups. The black struggle or the Pan African struggle cannot be viewed in the same moral light as the Aryan or skinhead movements. The former being the defensive reaction to centuries of offensive racial oppression and attacks from others, while the latter being a movement to preserve the status gained from past offensive attacks against others. In other words, one is a movement to defend and uplift itself up from inferior treatment and status, while the other is a movement to preserve itself as a privileged superior entity in juxtaposition. In spite of this huge difference, people often try to draw a moral equivalence between the two. One does not have to be a proactive member of a group in order to receive the benefits or detriments of group membership. There are many whites who are not proactively white and offensive or defensive toward now whites. However, that does not mean that these whites do not enjoy the benefits created from past and present group activities. Indeed, the true test of character can only truly be measured during stress. Thus, many whites who are not proactive in white membership may become so if the point in time comes where they see their selfish interest not being meet due to the rise of another race that it sees a threatening to its previous superior raking and lifestyle. So, are these groupings and competition a good thing? Yes and No. In nature, competition or resistance produces advancement, through adaptation, mutation and evolution. Thus, the absence of competition produces stagnation. Hence, it can be argued that this division and competition is actually advancing humanity (via exploiting and harming humanity). However, “too” much competition becomes destructive and ultimately threatening to humanity. Therefore, competition needs to be infused with its opposite phenomenon, which is cooperation, in order to create the proper and most efficient equilibrium for humanity. Cooperation requires placing a high value on collective interest. In order to increase the value on collective interest of humanity, the trade off must come from reducing the value and emphasis placed on individual interest. The only way that this can be done, since humans can only be selfish beings, is to convince the masses that it is ultimately in their best interest to do such, if they are interested in the world that their descendants will inherit in the future (fat chance?). Ultimately too many competing groups (the natural consequence of promoting individualism) and not enough cooperating groups will sink humanity. A key aspect of cooperation is that those with the most need to help promote those with the least, in order that they can gain the ability to compete. However, it must be recognized that such threatens the absolute and relative status of the elites, who can currently only remain elite via the existence and juxtaposition with those with less, in a relative world.