PDA

View Full Version : What Causes Racism?



Northern Paladin
Saturday, June 19th, 2004, 08:26 PM
What causes Racism? Is it an innate Instinct or is it socially learned? Are people born Racist or made that way?

Tommy Vercetti
Saturday, June 19th, 2004, 08:40 PM
Evyryone who has gone through schoolsystem knows that invidual diverging someway is more likely discriminated and bullied.Child's eye is very sensitive for differencies.

kinvolk
Saturday, June 19th, 2004, 09:36 PM
Tell me what you think of this. Go to a thread called 'Romeo and Julie in klan hoods'. Did any things like this ever happen to you? What made you a racist/racialist. Tell me yours and I might tell you mine!

Northern Paladin
Saturday, June 19th, 2004, 10:25 PM
Interesting site about the KKK and hate. However I don't agree that racism is just the byproduct of pain though i think it's a component of it. As for how I became a Racialist. Coming from an Urban area I am well aware of the problems of Multiculturalism poses to White Culture. It has nothing to do wit pain for me. It is more a matter of "Identity" and preservering that "Identity".

Triglav
Saturday, June 19th, 2004, 11:42 PM
Interesting site about the KKK and hate. However I don't agree that racism is just the byproduct of pain though i think it's a component of it. As for how I became a Racialist. Coming from an Urban area I am well aware of the problems of Multiculturalism poses to White Culture. It has nothing to do wit pain for me. It is more a matter of "Identity" and preservering that "Identity".

I believe that race, evolution and progress (mainly the same thing) take precedence over any kind of culture. Cultures can be re-created and revitalised while races can't be.

Eric34
Sunday, June 20th, 2004, 03:16 AM
I had a gipsy pal, when I'm was little guy. (So, I didn't borned to racist, sure.) But after my eyes are opened.

pearl
Sunday, June 20th, 2004, 09:58 AM
I don't believe that one is born with a pre-set configuration for racist tendencies...you take two small children and put them in a room together with some toys, and regardless of their race they will start playing with each other. They will notice a physical difference, of course, but if they were never taught to hate then the difference will have no meaning or actual affect on either child's opinion. Children are very openminded, thus making perfect "receptacles" for the ideas, opinions and beliefs of their authoritive figures (parents, siblings, etc).

Most people become racist by either being raised by parents who were racist, or from personal experience...such as a bad incident with someone of another race or just because they don't like the way people from other races act (either collectively, or individualy).

It might be disconcerting for someone who is white, raised around other whites and lives a relatively "white life" to be exposed to the culture of blacks or mexicans or asians, etc...unfamiliarity breeds contempt. Humans are naturally put off by what they do not fully understand or immediately identify with. Especially today with all the Multi-culturalism, white people are losing their sense of self and are experiencing how it feels to be the minority...it's scary for a lot of people (and even enraging for some too), so naturally racism takes the place of fear and anger and provides a scape-goat for one's insecurities.

Oskorei
Sunday, June 20th, 2004, 10:35 AM
Racism is an evolutionary, psychological instinct. A genetic group that shares its resources with other genetic groups will not survive in the long run, it is all about the "selfish gene". Just like we have more feelings for our family (very close genetically), we have more feelings for those of our extended family/genotype (pretty close genetically), and feelings of aversion towards those who are very dissimilar comes naturally.

Another example would be our feelings towards animals. Cats and dogs are close to us genetically, while snakes and spiders are not. Therefore we perceive cats and dogs as cute, since we recognize much of ourselves in them.

Our main problem is that this racist instinct is weaker among us Northern-Europeans than among, for example, semites. The cause is that, historically, the main enemy in the cold North was a harsh climate, and because of this a stranger was more often seen as a potential ally against nature than as an enemy. Therefore we are more altruist. In the Middle-East, the main enemy was other tribes. Interestingly enough, there have been studies which show that white infants are less scared of strangers than jewish children are (I dont know about other semitic infants, but probably they are scared of strangers too). This also shows that racism is a natural instinct. Like all instincts it can of course be modified by environment.

RusViking
Sunday, June 20th, 2004, 12:16 PM
Racism:
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=racial) differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=racial) prejudice or discrimination.

I am not sure I believe the first definition is true, nor do I fall into the category of the second definition...although I have my strong preferences. Having participated for awhile here at Skadi I have learned the difference between the above and being a White Preservationist. I am certainly the latter.

As far as cause - I consider it personal preference that can be developed and influenced in a number of ways. No different than not wanting to breed with an excessively overweight or unattractive person.

Is it an innate Instinct or is it socially learned?

Yes.

Are people born Racist or made that way?

And yes.

Agrippa
Sunday, June 20th, 2004, 03:02 PM
If we define racism as something which is just about clearly defined races, it has something to do with a certain worldview.
Even than it can have many different reasons.

If we define Racism more losely, it is for sure in the human repertoire of behaviour patterns.

Because it is the in-group and out-group sentiment which is an innate instinct. In modern times these feelings have oftentimes less to do with race, but more with ethnocultural groups, but for the human behaviour pattern this makes no big difference, because on a primitive level of hunter-gatherers your in-group was usually more related to you than your out-group, though there were even in early times exceptions from this rule.

And if individuals are further away from your group, they might be more dangerous, might have a very different genetic make-up and different social rules which would cause problems.

So it was just logical to avoid such people or be at least cautious.

But its not like "a white born baby has natural instincts against blacks", but it is as follows: Parents are white, relatives are white, they speak the same language, they are friendly and all strangers-foreigners can be a threat.

And if this foreigners are even further away from you than usual strangers, that they might be a threat is even more likely.

So the child is learning what is in- and outside of the group, which people are reliable, and which might be not.
This is a totally cultural pattern, but the racist component is obvious if we speak about homogenous groups, which might be one reason why some universalist-egalitarian want the worldwide panmixing in their perverted phantasies.

Later on the child has to be de-sensitized to accept those foreigners without problem, though, the earlier the more successful this trials will be, because in the early years the child is still learning, and if it is learning a "black man can be as reliable as a white" it might change its mind and later only kognitive and more complex emotional factors might lead to a "secondary kind of racism".

Thats again one of the reasons why whites MUST SEE so much black in the media, to get de-sensitized.

If you think about it, you can make out of a white baby an anti-white racist if you say him all the time that coloured persons are more reliable, if it has the impression that this is the case.

Because genetically determined is just the "fear foreigners, be cautious, prefer your own" thing, BUT WHAT IS YOUR OWN AT ALL, is something which is mostly learned.

That is the reason why pure Nordids can accept Negroes as brothers and can hate their own, fight their own in fierce battles.
Because in- and outgroup in later times than early childhood is something more cultural than biological.

Humans are just not adapted for the modern mass society, their behaviour is basically still made for small groups of related persons.
Though there are differences from the Neolithicum on and between groups and indivdiuals, its a human constant in modernitiy that their repertoir of behaviour pattern is not optimal adapted to a modern-mass society.

Thats in turn the reason of his instinct-insecurity, why he is easy to manipulate and can degenerate culturally, getting decadent very fast. Culture should bridge this gap, but today its making the gap even bigger and worse, because the liberalcapitalistic culture has almost nothing to do with the real biological needs of our groups and species.

Triglav
Sunday, June 20th, 2004, 03:55 PM
One Way Women Choose a Husband

Most women really do want to marry a man just like dad--or at least one who looks like him. That's the word from an international team of researchers, who have shown that women use their fathers as a template for choosing a mate--even if those women were adopted.

The process is called "sexual imprinting," lead study author Tamas Bereczkei of the University of Pécs in Hungary told New Scientist. Many husbands and wives do seem to look like each other, especially after years of living together. This may not be our imagination. Bereczkei says that couples who look alike are more likely to share common genes. Having a small degree of similarity is actually beneficial.

"There seems to be an advantage for animals to select a mate somewhat similar to themselves genetically," [/b]research team member Glenn Weisfeld, a human ethologist at Wayne State University in Detroit, Mich., told New Scientist. "One good possibility is that there are some fortuitous genetic combinations which are retained in the offspring if both parents are similar. In humans there is evidence to show a lower rate of miscarriage." Of course, there is a careful balance that must be struck between the benefits of marrying someone who is genetically similar the obviously harmful effects of inbreeding.

The study: Imprinting is a fast and instinctive way of learning. Newborn ducklings, for example, bond to the first thing they see. Using photographs of 26 adoptive families (so inherited preferences could be ruled out), the researchers asked 250 student volunteers to rate similarities within three sets of images of the 26 adoptive families. New Scientist reports that the first showed photos of the wife and four possible husbands, one of whom was the real spouse. The second showed a photo of the adoptive father as he would have looked when his daughter was between two and eight years of age, and the possible husbands. The third set showed the adoptive mother and the four possible husbands.

The results: The students were able to match the real husbands and wives far more accurately than they would have done just by chance. But what was most striking was the facial resemblance between the husbands and adoptive fathers. (There was no significant resemblance between the husband and the adoptive mother.)

An unexpected finding: Dads who were judged by their adopted daughters to have showed the most emotional warmth were much more likely to have sons-in-law who looked like them. "Our results support the notion of a long-lasting effect of attachment during childhood on later mating preferences," the team concluded, suggesting that people form a "mental model" of their opposite-sex parent's appearance, which they then seek out in later life, notes New Scientist.

The study findings were published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London.

http://channels.netscape.com/ns/love/package.jsp?name=fte/chooseahusband/chooseahusband

Agrippa
Sunday, June 20th, 2004, 05:49 PM
Very good article!

When culture is not working, is not minimizing the gap between instincts and biological needs, the result will be in humans, f.e. in daughters without a male person in the family, a real biological father, and manipulated by media will chose the wrong features, are irritated and insecure.

Its almost like it is with ducks which try to follow a football if they see it first as their "parent".

Imprints are very sensitive and cannot be corrected that easily if something went wrong. In small groups, with biological parents it would work, but in big, manipulated societies with destructed social and family structures it cant work.

Gareth
Sunday, June 20th, 2004, 11:11 PM
Culture should bridge this gap, but today its making the gap even bigger and worse, because the liberalcapitalistic culture has almost nothing to do with the real biological needs of our groups and species.
Could you define these needs precise? Thanks.

It's something I wrote about more intensively already. But people tend to see things different than me - what weakens my criticism, as they are those who have the needs.

Northern Paladin
Monday, June 21st, 2004, 07:03 AM
I don't believe that one is born with a pre-set configuration for racist tendencies...you take two small children and put them in a room together with some toys, and regardless of their race they will start playing with each other. They will notice a physical difference, of course, but if they were never taught to hate then the difference will have no meaning or actual affect on either child's opinion. Children are very openminded, thus making perfect "receptacles" for the ideas, opinions and beliefs of their authoritive figures (parents, siblings, etc).

Small children haven't developed a good sense of who they are in relation to the world around them. I think a main component of Racism is learning to identify with your own Ethnic/Racial group and excluding and negatively Sterotyping others who are not in this "In Group". Before I turned 12 I didn't even know what Race meant. Only after that age did I learn gradually who I was and what "Race" I belonged to. I think it's fair to say Racism isn't all biological and it isn't all social programming it's a mix of both. Personally I believe some people are naturally due to genetics inclined to be Racist just like some are inclined to be "Tolerant". Even among Racists I can spot the "Extremists" and the ones who though not exactly "Tolerant" aren't supportive of Extreme measures like all out Genocide of non-whites.


Especially today with all the Multi-culturalism, white people are losing their sense of self and are experiencing how it feels to be the minority...it's scary for a lot of people (and even enraging for some too), so naturally racism takes the place of fear and anger and provides a scape-goat for one's insecurities.

It's more of a Defense mechanism against Multiculturalism if you ask me. Reminds me of Newton's premise "For every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction". :P


Another example would be our feelings towards animals. Cats and dogs are close to us genetically, while snakes and spiders are not. Therefore we perceive cats and dogs as cute, since we recognize much of ourselves in them.

Agree with other parts of your post. To me the reason would be obvious and this is something I have read about in Science journals and seen on the Discovery Channel. People are genetically programmed to avoid poisonious animals and both spiders and snakes are poisonous.


Humans are just not adapted for the modern mass society, their behaviour is basically still made for small groups of related persons.

Yep we are stream lined for the Stone Age but here we are in the 21st century. Guess evolution has yet to catch up.

A major cause of "Racism" is White guys getting pissed over the fact that Non-whites are Fucking their women. Especially when you consider this one fact:

White females(esp blonde nordic types) are considered "Hot Merchandise" by Virturally all men. And Females from other Races aren't as attractive. So obviously this inbalance is a cause of tension.

To me Racism is mainly, Identity(Who I am related to the rest of the World) and the Projection that goes along with it. I see more of myself in a fellow Germanic than a black negroe. Nature has programmed me to treat myself the best and I see more of myself in a Germanic than a negroe.

To me everyone is has some Natural Racist Inclination. Even those who claim to be the most Liberal or Egalitarian of people. They are just the ones who have learned to suppress their "Racist Instincts"becaues they have an Agenda that they promote to their own benefit. A good example would be Politicians who have learned to play the "Race card" effectively to gain votes.



Thats in turn the reason of his instinct-insecurity, why he is easy to manipulate and can degenerate culturally, getting decadent very fast. Culture should bridge this gap, but today its making the gap even bigger and worse, because the liberalcapitalistic culture has almost nothing to do with the real biological needs of our groups and species.

The "LiberalCapticalistic" Culture has a lot more concern for the Survival of the Individual and Cares not about the Race. Many people seem to agree with this view and hence the continued decline.

Part of it is the Modern Lifesytle. How many people in America keep in touch with their relatives? When we lose touch with those around us and become isolated we become indifferent.

In the past when America had strong family values and people lived in Real Communities people Racial Awareness was High. Now that people move around all the time and are so individualistic they have lost one of the Strongest incentives to be Racist, a Community Identity.

Community Identity or a Collective Identity and Racism go hand in hand.

Agrippa
Monday, June 21st, 2004, 08:11 PM
A major cause of "Racism" is White guys getting pissed over the fact that Non-whites are Fucking their women. Especially when you consider this one fact:

White females(esp blonde nordic types) are considered "Hot Merchandise" by Virturally all men. And Females from other Races aren't as attractive. So obviously this inbalance is a cause of tension.

Women are the base of a "pure" group, like I often said, men can make bastards, can go away, this change nothing if the bastards are not or stay not in the homeland.

Thats one of the reason why an rational-effective and strongly expansive culture is almost everytime patriarchal and oftentimes at least optional polygamous (polygynic) and looks quite strong after their women.

A good example would be the Indian caste system in which the men spread in the early times to an maximum "Aryan" genes under the subjected but protected their women.

Another example the NS law, the Spartan law, the Muslim law etc...

Women have to protected to protect the minimal preservation of the own people, males are responsible for further expansion.

Their are archaeological sites in which all males, even children were killed, but the women, no matter which age were kept.

It was in the early European Neolithikum sometimes the case BTW.

Men have to be more racist, women are more oriented to the smaller organization units, family, children, man, village.
The higher order, the basic rules for the whole were most of the time men made, and its not by chance that to modernity all really progressive and successful societies were patriarchal.


Community Identity or a Collective Identity and Racism go hand in hand.

Yes, one isnt possible on a high level without the other on a highly organized and not forced (by egalitarian ideologies) society.
Its just natural to work for the own people more than for others and to preserve the own heritage.
That is something even the Neoconservatives know and they use primitive, more individualistic racist-like-perspectives to get through with their further fractionating and social destruction policy...like that: "hey, do you want to pay for a lazy Nigger?"

Of course it makes all things worse and solve nothing, but they play with such sentiments, because the real and deep sense of an in-group and its rules is already destroyed.


Could you define these needs precise? Thanks.

It's something I wrote about more intensively already. But people tend to see things different than me - what weakens my criticism, as they are those who have the needs.

Hmm, maybe I already read it, but cant remember, can you give me the links?

Here is one to my view:

http://www.forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=76454#post76454

In general I would just say progressive means higher potential of the individual AND the group for more possiple development and an higher probability of survival in difficult situations.
A life on a higher level, maybe even with real satisfaction, but without losing potential and destroying alternatives.
So decadence and degeneration are two things which must be prevented as senseless destruction of natural ressources and the ecosystem as well.

It is clear to me that some key elements in the near future are the preservation of Europeans and progressive variants of man in general, to stop the biological degeneration and to improve man, stop destructive population growth, the protection of natural ressources and the ecosystem, the stop of cultural degeneracy, asocial-economically assymetric structures if they are not justified must be replaced etc...

Dr. Solar Wolff
Wednesday, September 8th, 2004, 05:52 AM
What causes Racism? Is it an innate Instinct or is it socially learned? Are people born Racist or made that way?

This knowledge can be gained in either of two ways, either by education or life experience (or both).