Frequently Asked Questions

The Issue of Race

1. Race exists merely as a social construct, not a biological reality. The biological evidence points in favor of clinal variation which cuts across the major racial �boundaries.� Thus, variation occurs within a continuum of change corresponding with geographic location (much as skin color exists in a range from very pale to very dark and everything in between), but shows no recognizable differences between discrete white and black �races.�

If race is understood to be the level of the population group, all such concepts are put into their proper context; one can observe the uniqueness of each of the human populations without reductionism on the basis of skin color. Read further to retrace the path of natural history.

2. Hybrid vigor theory states that the admixture of individuals from different populations will result in more vigorous offspring; thus, interbreeding between races only serves to improve human health.

Taken to its logical conclusion, the admixture of entire populations would reduce to nil any opportunity for vigorous offspring. Its inherent logical fallacy notwithstanding, such a statement shows a specious understanding of genetics. To analyze this problem in greater detail, read more about heterosis.

3. The commingling of population groups has occurred throughout the course of history, and has in fact resulted in what are held to be new races. With this presupposition understood, why should groups seek to inbreed when there have been historical precedents to the contra?

Miscegenation on a relatively large scale usually occurs in conjunction with a shift in geographic location. When this happens, acclimation to the new environment must start all over again. It takes myriad generations to adapt to a specific environment for even the simplest of organisms; for complex creatures with intricate genomes, the period leading up a genetic stabilization on the level of the population is even greater.

Since culture is concomitant with race, the amalgamation of cultures also presents a precarious situation which the new group will have to solve, as they must decide, what exactly, they are going to uphold. To delve deeply into the issue of hybridization, read on.

4. How can one argue from a racialist�s perspective without resorting to supremacy?

Some discriminate because they simply desire to perpetuate their own ethnic and cultural traditions; they don�t wish to denigrate other groups at all. From a biological perspective, such behavior is merely an example of group selection, found in all thriving species, not merely humans. Acknowledging racial differences need not necessary result in hostility. An intelligent racialist objects to racial and cultural homogenization, and in doing so perpetuates disparate heritages, in stark contrast to one who advocating imperialistic multiculturalism. Read more about love of one�s ethno-culture without the hate one is accustomed to from supremacist groups.

5. The evolutionary disadvantages of hybridization are no longer relevant to a world which has the medicinal technology to combat any potential ill effects of miscegenation.

This statement presupposes a valuation of human life at all costs, an appraisal which in and of itself is inextricably linked to a concrete ideology, namely, that of humanism. This document seeks to argue from a standpoint free of any specific ideological biases, but in the interest of humanity and the diverse human cultures at large. Worse yet, such a statement is steeped in religious overtones which place their trust not in the faiths of yesteryear, but in the notion of perpetual technological progress. It divorces mankind from the state of nature, which, while ostensibly so, it not the case. Even if natural selection has been circumvented, the never-ending process of evolution keeps occurring, whether for better or worse. Keep reading about the eternal process of change.

6. If one identifies with a culture other than their own, why can�t one abandon the culture in which they were raised and embrace a new one?

This is essentially an exercise in egoism, as one is valuing their own self interest over something greater than the individual: the community. While there are those who feel that one should be free to promiscuously forsake their own heritage in favor of something they deem more desirable, one who values culture as such will acknowledge that this is a form of escapism. If one finds fault with the culture in which they live, then it is their duty as a member of that society to work towards positive change. Additionally, one from a given culture cannot possibly share the nuances of worldview or the particularities of experience that a member of a foreign culture possesses. They will forever be an outsider; to deny this is to deny the unique qualities of each ethno-culture!

-from Race FAQ
(by hate edge)
http://infection.limagery.net/racialism/Race%20FAQ.html
http://infection.limagery.net/racialism/Race%20FAQ.pdf
http://infection.limagery.net/racialism/Race%20FAQ.doc
Race
by hate edge
http://infection.limagery.net/racialism/Race.html
http://infection.limagery.net/racialism/Race.pdf
http://infection.limagery.net/racialism/Race.doc


Race and Culture
by Fieldmouse and Christopher
http://infection.limagery.net/racialism/Ra...%20Culture.html
http://infection.limagery.net/racialism/Ra...d%20Culture.pdf
http://infection.limagery.net/racialism/Ra...d%20Culture.doc