A Darwinian perspective of "anti-racism"

"Anti-racism" is not the noble cause it started out as (a response to genuine, ugly racism, e.g. Apartheid, Jim Crow, and above all, Nazism) and is still made out to be, but primarily a means of claiming a spurious "moral high ground" for oneself and for a proprietary and mercenary state seeking to assert its traditional, but false claim to nationhood, authority and power over an increasingly multi and mixed ethnic population.

"Anti-racism" no longer simply means opposition to genuine racism, but also the demonization of any assertion of ethnic identity amongst Europeans (i.e. white people), as if this natural propensity itself were racist and therefore evil.

Why, a "Darwinian" perspective?

Because it is an expression of man's continuing (though misplaced, perverted, rationalized, and thus largely unrecognized) primordial struggle for survival and (reproductive) "success" in the artificial environment of human society itself, where, next to material wealth, a successful claim to the "moral high ground" and the social status that goes with it, is the most important advantage one can have.

The ideology of "Liberal Statism", its unchallenged claim to the "moral high ground" and political power

LINK to Daily Telegraph article, Our human rights culture has now become a tyranny, by Charles Moore.

Charles Moore makes some very good points, but what he is criticizing are mere symptoms of a disease inherent to the state, which in the past we were generally blissfully unaware of, and even now are only beginning to wake up to. It is the state's need for moral authority, in order to justify the immense power it wields (to raise taxes, make and enforce laws, to send its men folk to war, etc.), which it used to derive from its preferred - varying according to circumstance - interpretation of Judeo-Christian scripture.

Until quite recently, the people of these Islands were not free to choose their own beliefs, but were coerced into accepting Christian dogma, which the Church, through the state, that it was instrumental in creating and running, used to exercise its power over society, from the highest noble to the lowest peasant, and from which, of course, it derived huge material advantage for its, especially higher, members (a lot better to be a shepherd than a sheep).

 The precipitous decline in Christian belief in the past century has left a partial moral power vacuum, which has been increasingly filled by secular (overwhelmingly liberal-left) morality, itself virtually the exact, but almost equally extreme, opposite of Nazi morality and ideology, which, of course, its rise to power  was largely an - at the time, understandable - overreaction to, as well as to the injustice and inhumanity of Apartheid and Jim Crow.

This liberal-left ideology, which Jonah Goldberg poignantly refers to as Liberal Fascism, now represents the "moral high ground", which everyone (including those on the liberal right) must accept the validity of - or be dismissed and condemned as a rightwing extremist, neo-Nazi or "racist", which are the modern, liberal-statist equivalents of the medieval Jew! Heretic!, Heathen! or Non-Believer, i.e. "not one of us!"

The IDEOLOGY and POWER politics of multi-ethnic society

In response to the same Guardian article as previous post.

We need to recognize and develop an understanding of the POWER politics of mass immigration and multiethnic society, which isn't just about the provision of cheap foreign labour for state and capital, but also about the imposition of a racial IDEOLOGY (the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology) which the STATE uses to claim a spurious "moral high ground" for itself, in order to facilitate its control of society, just as Christian ideology (theology) once was, and as Islamic ideology (theology) still is in most Muslim countries.

It is the ideology of "one-human-race-ism", of "colourblindness", of "indifference to ethnic difference", of "race doesn't matter", i.e. is of no social or political significance except to evil "racists".

But far from being of no social or political significance, race and ethnicity have always been, and still are, of central importance to any deep and meaningful sense of personal and group identity (because we evolved as TRIBAL animals), vital to a genuine sense of nationhood (as opposed to statehood), the natural extension of our original TRIBE, and social solidarity, which cannot possibly arise spontaneously (except towards individuals) in a multi-ethnic society, but has to be imposed by moral imperatives from above, which the state then uses - is using, massively! - to control society for its own ends.

The problem is that so many people (currently, the vast majority) identify with the STATE, and are rewarded for doing so.

Religion in the context of Darwinian civilization

LINK to Guardian article by a couple of atheists, Russell Blackford and Udo Schuklenk, arguing against the political power of organized religion.

We need to understand organized religion (as opposed to the individual's religious feelings, which many professed atheists also have) within the context of the Darwinian nature of human society itself.

The Darwinian nature of human society . . ??

Indeed! If man is a product of Darwinian evolution, as I assume most of us agree he is, it is reasonable to assume that the social, political and economic institutions he has created (including organized religion) are also deeply Darwinian in nature, albeit in a perverted way, because the human environment itself (i.e. the "society", or extension of our original tribe, we are (self)-deceived into seeing it as) has become the venue of man's misplace but continuing primordial struggle for survival, advantage and (reproductive) "success", where it is largely reduced to the pursuit and exercise of POWER, in its multifarious forms.

Who can doubt that in modern western society, "success" is no longer seen as the number of viable progeny an individual produces, but in the POWER they possess over others, especially in the form of money, but also in the form of social and professional status, the moral high ground, etc.

It is the moral high ground (based on the word of God), rather than the sword or property rights, which forms the power base of organized religion (notwithstanding the importance of property rights too for some religions), and is why the Church complemented the aristocracy (with its military power) so nicely when it came to initially creating and developing the institutions of the STATE.

When our own state became more secular and democratic, its institutions didn't suddenly become less Darwinian, i.e. no longer primarily adapted to facilitating society's self-exploitation to the advantage of its dominant elites. There were shifts in power, of course, and with so much material wealth being created by industrialization and technological progress, a huge expansion and diversification of society's privileged elites, all striving to maintain or change the socioeconomic environment to their own perceived advantage - or that of their clients - and always rationalized as the social or moral good.

These clients might now reside anywhere in the social spectrum, with moral brownie points (and often government grants, in exchange for votes) associated with any section of society seen as being disadvantage.

From this, Darwinian, perspective, one sees that it is now not just organized religion with seeks power and advantage by laying claim to the moral high ground for itself, but the liberal-left, so-called "progressives" and others besides, and very well it has served many of them, especially in politics and the media.

Some may see this perspective as cynical, but I assure you, it is not; it is utterly realistic, and the sooner others (those who mean well on the liberal left and elsewhere) recognise this, the sooner we can start to develop an understanding of it and make some real progress in resolving our pressing, and increasingly dire, problems. But not before, because all we have at the moment is self-deception and confusion.

The "original sin" of being a "white man"

LINK to Guardian article, "JFS puts faith schools in the dock", by Jonathan Romain

BeatonTheDonis wrote:

"I'd say the vast majority of atheists in Europe and North America identify with Christian values, and history, but do not believe in God."

There is some - but only some - truth in this, I'd say.

Most of the history of European, i.e. western, civilization is steeped in Christianity, its beliefs, values and attitudes, so that there is no getting away from it, if this is the civilization you belong to and identify with (and, if you live in a western society, even if you don't). However, there are many so-called Christian values and attitudes, as well as beliefs, which a majority of the population no longer accepts, certainly not without reservations.

It is interesting to note that western civilization, for the first two and a half thousand years of its existence, was dominated overwhelmingly (for better and for worse, not just militarily and politically, but also culturally, artistically, scientifically and technologically) by "white men", who are now demonized to the extent that it is considered evil, i.e. "racist", to identify with them at all.

Those of us who cannot help being white men are only forgiven our "original sin", and deemed socially acceptable, if we fervently loath ourselves for it and submit to the moral superiority and authority of those occupying the moral high ground (which now, in our much more secular society, the Catholic Church has to share with the liberal-left and others).

This is all very much in the Judeo-Christian tradition, of course, which cultivates a sense of guilt, inadequacy and self-hatred as a means of facilitating social control and domination to the advantage of those occupying the moral high ground.

The importance of the moral high ground (whether based on the word of God or some secular ideology) is most readily understood from a Darwinian perspective (see my BLOG), which those claiming to occupy it seek to suppress and deny (even to themselves), because it reveals their primordial (subconscious) motivation in doing so.

Next to money, the moral high ground it is the most important source of social status and POWER, which facilitates their exploitation of society itself (notwithstanding its perversion of evolutionary intentions), as an artificial environment, to their own (and immediate family's) personal advantage.