Because normal human identity is stratified, of which 'tribe' has been one of those strata for millions of years now; chimps are well-known to separate into recognizable tribes, and will wage war with one another over territory, etc.Originally Posted by Singu
You will not change millions of years of evolutionary history by decree.
The homogeneity you speak of would be inorganically contrived, rather than emerging via natural selection of free association & competition. That's the real difference.If people hate each other and fractionalize anyway, then what's the difference between homogeneity and diversity?
Nature doesn't really tend towards monotypic equilibrium. We're always undergoing divergent speciation… accelerated in humans despite our lengthy lifespans because we have reproductive independence. Yet, you seem to want to arrest this process.
When even man's most basic psychological underpinnings show a high degree of heritability, race/ethnicity clearly becomes a vital consideration when living in social proximity. For instance, I just ran across this:
Doesn't require much extrapolative imagination to infer the consequences of what might happen if, say, two populations with contrasting biopsychological orientations in their reward processing were forced to live together. It would influence innumerable aspects of consumer behavior, contract law, normative expectations, and so on.
Incorrigible complexities adding incalculably costly social overhead to every interaction.
Typical Western conceit. Nobody actually cares about 'dialogue'.Only through dialogue and mingling that you can eliminate discrimination, because discrimination is based on ignorance. People discriminate against another when they think "those people are so different from me", when they aren't actually that much different.
Reply With Quote