From: den Otter (otter@globalxs.nl)
Date: Sat Aug 02 1997 - 09:54:39 MDT
Warning: no scientific basis for any of the following, just musings.
(vaguely in response to "meme supremacy" mailings).
Discrimination 1---The simple kind of straightforward xenophobic "I hate
you because you look (are) different" stuff, popular with kids and other
mentally underdeveloped people. When consequently applied to people of
(vaguely) the same genetic stock also called "racism".
Discrimination 1b---Same as 1 except for the fact that the "offender"
"knows better" (knows that the "target group" isn't really weird & creepy
but picks on them anyway out of pure malice. Common in all race and age
groups.
Discrimination 2---comparing looks and memes and concluding
that they're different, and depending on the standards you use,
that some are better than others (superior/inferior if you will). It
can sometimes be observed that a certain meme occurs more frequently in (a)
certain group(s) of people who clearly (looks, geography etc) share the
same genetic background. Now if this meme happens to be bad by the
particular standards that you use this means that in this field at least
certain (genetic) groups as a whole will rank lower on your scale than
certain other (genetic) groups. This could be called "scientifically based
racism". This
kind of "racism" does not hate, it just observes and concludes.
It is a logical consequence of man's curiosity.
Unfortunately it does happen quite often that emotionally unstable
people or people of limited intellect confuse racism/discrimination 1
with racism/discrimination 2, and thus react with rabid ferocity to
neutral observations. It's even worse when people who can see
the difference clearly, pretend to confuse the two in order to gain
(cheap) status with the really blinded individuals and their peers.
This is the kind of behaviour favoured by politicians and (other)
community leaders. In many ways it is even more repugnant than
the "dumb" no 1 racism and at least as bad as 1b, for it is
sneaky and manipulative and devoid of any honest emotion.
Of course, in everyday interaction each person should be judged
seperately, and not be unduely stereotyped, yet this is exactly
what those (alledgedly) well-meaning anti-racists ("equalists")
are doing; if you're branded a racist (iow *dared* to say something
negative about a race (other than Caucasians) and negroes in
particular than automatically everything you say (on whatever
topic) will be deemed crap and those kind, peaceful and tolerant
people all of a sudden turn out to be not-so-kind, tolerant & peaceful
at all. It appears they have plenty of exceptions to their general
"humanistic" rule...
All very understandable of course. Man, having evolved from an
upright killer ape, couldn't have lost his violent primal urges
overnight (on an evolutionary timescale). They're still in there,
often well hidden and carefully suppressed, but there nonetheless.
The "peaceful" hippy/liberal/humanist way is probably a very
unnatural state of being for an originally agressive and opportu-
nistic creature like man. That's why communes etc. seldom
work. In fact, they seem to accelerate mental degeneration to
an almost cave-man like state (the clan led by the Alpha male).
Consequently, extropians also must vent their "primal anger"
sometimes, and what better target than a "racist"...Well, glad
to've been of service :)
Btw, you should see the movie "The Forbidden Planet" (60's I
reckon). It shows what could happen to a (extropian-esque)
society when it loses touch with (or: denies) it's more primitive
side. Although the movie isn't much as a whole (though mildly
entertaining), the point is clear for those who want to see it.
Denial killed the cat.
Your black neigbor may very well be your mental equal/superior, but
the culture linked to his forefathers is inferior to the culture linked to
*your* forefathers if you measure by things like technological
advancement, personal safety and possibilities for growth
(although *both* sets of cultures were and are highly inadequate
by transhuman standards). This does not mean you should look down on your
neighbor (just for this reason) because he isn't responsible for the
actions of his forefathers (or those of his contemporaries of the same
race). Consequently, you are not responsible for the actions of *your*
forefathers (like slavery or genocide) so there are no flagellant guilt
trips (like German youths "apologizing" for the holocaust), and (if you're
being consequent) no such things as automatically returning "sacred land"
to Indians
or paying damages to the grandchildren of slaves. These are after all
things of a long gone past, and today's generations cannot be held
accountable (assuming one argues within the realm of rationality). Every
person should only be accountable for eir actions unless party in an
"agreement" that states otherwise. Right?
DdO
~~~Transhuman from Hell~~~
o :)
/ \
/ \
] :(~~~~):[
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:41 MST