Race war inevitability discussion

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter GRB 080319B
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Race
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
Sign up Log in
124 replies · 20K views
GRB, you need to post what is in the links and what about them you wish to discuss. Just posting links is not allowed.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Char. Limit said:
' Take pride in yourself, maybe your nationality, but not your race.

Have you ever noticed that whenever people take pride in anything other than themselves, they can more easily get defensive about critical comments about the identity they identify with? This could be a nation, race, family, school, or branch of science. The question is why people attack and defend on the level of establishing validity for an identity category instead of just attacking people indiscriminately for misbehavior, regardless of group identity.
 
guys with us around there will be no race war

after i read the post and its reply i believe that there will be none
 
guys with us around there will be no race war

after i read the post and its reply i believe that there will be none
 
hagopbul said:
guys with us around there will be no race war

after i read the post and its reply i believe that there will be none

If you think about it, though, any group identity including race holds the potential for instigating and organizing wars. What is war usually except organizing two or more factions of individuals into collectivist ideologies of hate and mutual destruction or domination? Without group identities, people would not be able to organize into factions (at least I don't think it would be possible otherwise) and without the ideologies of difference between factions, you couldn't convince people that people of other factions represented characteristics that they find negative and avoid in themselves.

The question is why people propagate ideology that promotes factionalism and the potential for collective violence? Yes, there is the idea that having an externalized enemy threat builds solidarity "internally," but this never really works because it's never really possible to control the hate and limit it to the enemy. Hate festers in people and seeks expression. If they can't find the enemy they blame, it comes out in other ways.

Another reason might be that if you can instigate groupist violence to a certain level, you can cause people to organize themselves into separate territories, which makes it easier to "divide and conquer." I think some people globally reflexively fear what they perceive to be big powerful nations and such people have an interest in those nations being plagued with internal factionalism. If people would just accept that ultimately even the nations are just factions that prevent people from orienting to life and each other on an individual basis, I don't think the fear and instigation of faction-forming and war would be necessary - but maybe this is naive and there are other functions of war - i.e. factional war as opposed to diffuse wars like wars on drugs and terrorism - i.e. wars that organize people into collectives and pit the collectives against each other such as international wars and interracial (race) wars.