/lit/ - Literature

>>16100023
>>genetic competition
>What's this pseudo nonsense?
It’s the fundamental mechanism by which biological life acts and interacts with itself through evolution (in social animals, like humans). Care by an individual or group of a species for another member of a species (in socially organised animals like most primates and pack carnivores) is directly proportional to relatedness, this is kin altruism, this helps the survival of genes you share with these related individuals, thereby enhancing your evolutionary success. This extends the other way as well whereby less related (less genetically similar) individuals of a species compete more and cooperate less, evolution and particularly speciation tends to involve the success of a group at the expense of another group, this is particularly strong between ethnicities in humans because those genetic differences are readily apparent in tissue structures (eg facial features) and skin pigmentation. To deny this for the preservation of comforting but incorrect humanist ideas of unity that preceded the wide acceptance of evolution is very naive. Pure Marxism (I say pure because application of Marxist ideals to ethnically homogeneous societies is no bad thing because then within the society rich and poor becomes the strongest divide) ignores that a fundamental part of humanity’s drive is to succeed evolutionarily, ignoring biology in favour of sociology.
>>ethnic plural societies are unstable
>Good, from the instability we can organize and unite.
Except ethnically plural work forces struggle far more to unite. It was discovered that Amazon packing facilities were less likely to unionise if they are ethnically diverse. Additionally, once you have your ethnically diverse “United” society, it will be far more susceptible to division than a homogeneous one because genetically disparate groups will be affected by kin altruism, those groups will care for their own members by preference and the groups will compete with one another. Pluralistic societies are inherently unstable because of inherent aspects of our biological behaviour, not currently unstable because of social factors that humanist universalists (Incl. most Marxists and liberals) imagine to be “artificially constructed”. You can’t organise your way out of your own biology (much less the biology of large groups of people) unless you want to castrate yourself. Note that this doesn’t require ethnic supremacy (ie the assertion that your race should oppress the others because you’re just better) this is about recognising the presence of difference and therefore disunity. You could solve it by getting everyone to interbreed exactly until there aren’t distinct groups but then you’ve proven my point by creating an ethnically/genetically homogeneous state.