The Psychology of Racism

Most social scientists treat racialist attitudes and behaviors as being the result of
social influences and conditioning only; that is, they believe it to be a learned condition.

The field of Indigenous American medical psychology tends to agree with that in relation to collective racism on the part of nation states that have exercised it institutionally in the past and even to a certain extent still today, such as only allowing indigenous communities, reserves, and reservations a certain amount of autonomy from the government of the dominant immigrant settler nation as opposed to the option of full sovereignty.

Racism on the part of non-indigenous industrialized governments basically holds the attitude that the more traditionally indigenous a peoples are in their attitudes and lifestyles, the more inferior they are socially, culturally, and even in intelligence, which calls for a certain amount of institutional subjugation and oversight.

Like with many individuals who held or once held racialist beliefs, attitudes and behaviors, collective institutional racialist attitudes and policies can eventually be overcome in time with education apart from legislation, etc. However, like with many behavioral and mental disorders, racialist attitudes and behaviors in some individuals are the result of a pathological brain disorder.

Obsessive and chronic racialist ideations, attitudes, and behaviors on the part of many individuals are the result of a neuro-pathological disorder centered around that part of the brain that regulates fear and anger, and also the prefrontal cortex, which regulates one's sense of right and wrong, morality, and exercising self-control over not violating other persons or their property for the purpose of personal gain or benefit, or just emotional satisfaction. People who intentionally violate the life and property rights of others for such personal gain are called sociopaths. And again as just indicated, various sociopathic attitudes and acts are the result of an abnormal or dysfunctional prefrontal cortex, which I discuss in greater detail in my commentary entitled Sociopathy.

Exercised racism in particular is a form of irrational cowardice or phobia, and cowards and phobics generally retreat from or lash out with rage against what they fear and veil themselves with a superiority complex. As phobic cowards, they don't normally act alone in carrying out the latter, forming some sort of small or large, temporary or permanent mob rule to meet their ends. Institutionalized racism utilizes the creation of laws and government coercion to enforce itself.

As with people who suffer from various types of irrational psychological fetishes, psycho-pathological racialists form alliances with one another for camaraderie, sharing and support. One of the largest racialist-obsessive collectives in the world can be encountered online at Stormfront.org. Having monitored this site for a number of years, I have come to the conclusion that racialist ideations and sentiments expressed by the vast majority of Stormfront members are the result of psychopathology in the prefrontal cortex which causes neurotransmitters to signal those portions of the brain that regulate fear and anger. Whenever the basic senses are alerted by whatever means of a differing race, the reaction biologically in the brain is similar of that to a food or beverage item that is not agreeable with an individual's taste buds.

Like with bad-tasting food or drink, some pathological racialists are not as repulsed by certain races as others. For example, Adolf Hitler and those who subscribed to his Nazi ideology considered most "non-Aryan" gentile peoples of European origin to be somewhat inferior genetically and in intelligence to Germanic and Scandinavian peoples, especially Slavs, but not as inferior as Jews and people of most other races.

Exceptions to the rule were Hitler-designated "honorary Aryans" that consisted of the Romans (Italians), the Greeks, the Spaniards, and the Japanese due to their ancestors great classical civilizations and imperial conquests. Other exceptions to the rule were individuals of other nationalities who were Nazi ideology sympathizers and Axis Power collaborators. (Most Greeks were not Nazi sympathizers, which is why Greece was not part of the Axis Powers and Mussolini invaded that country).

Can psycho-pathological racism rooted in prefrontal cortex dysfunction be "cured"? Putting aside the fact that most pathological racialists don't believe there is anything wrong with their racialist views and attitudes and thus nothing in their brain that needs fixing, it all depends on each individuals unique extent of "damage" so-to-speak and biological response to various types of conventional and experimental treatment. And although not yet conclusive, some medical researchers suspect that many people have a genetic, hereditary disposition for sociopathy by way of the makeup of the prefrontal cortex.

The bottom line is that there is unfortunately no magical pill one could spike a racialist's drink with to cure his or her obsessive and compulsive psychological fear and anger-based dislike of other races excused by delusional ideations of superiority.

Tradition

There are some indigenous traditions and values that contemporary Indigenous Americans no longer exercise by choice, and for good reason. The Traditional Indigenous American Values that I present on this blog are generally ones that can be applied to contemporary life.

The following is from The Nizkor Project :

Fallacy: Appeal to Tradition

Also Known as: Appeal to the Old, Old Ways are Best, Fallacious Appeal to the Past, Appeal to Age
Description of Appeal to Tradition

Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done." This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

1. X is old or traditional
2. Therefore X is correct or better.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the age of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something newer. This is made quite obvious by the following example: The theory that witches and demons cause disease is far older than the theory that microrganisms cause diseases. Therefore, the theory about witches and demons must be true.

This sort of "reasoning" is appealing for a variety of reasons. First, people often prefer to stick with what is older or traditional. This is a fairly common psychological characteristic of people which may stem from the fact that people feel more comfortable about what has been around longer. Second, sticking with things that are older or traditional is often easier than testing new things. Hence, people often prefer older and traditional things out of laziness. Hence, Appeal to Tradition is a somewhat common fallacy.

It should not be assumed that new things must be better than old things (see the fallacy Appeal to Novelty) any more than it should be assumed that old things are better than new things. The age of something does not, in general, have any bearing on its quality or correctness (in this context). In the case of tradition, assuming that something is correct just because it is considered a tradition is poor reasoning. For example, if the belief that 1+1 = 56 were a tradition of a group of people it would hardly follow that it is true.

Obviously, age does have a bearing in some contexts. For example, if a person concluded that aged wine would be better than brand new wine, he would not be committing an Appeal to Tradition. This is because, in such cases the age of the thing is relevant to its quality. Thus, the fallacy is committed only when the age is not, in and of itself, relevant to the claim.

One final issue that must be considered is the "test of time." In some cases people might be assuming that because something has lasted as a tradition or has been around a long time that it is true because it has "passed the test of time." If a person assumes that something must be correct or true simply because it has persisted a long time, then he has committed an Appeal to Tradition. After all, as history has shown people can persist in accepting false claims for centuries.

However, if a person argues that the claim or thing in question has successfully stood up to challenges and tests for a long period of time then they would not be committing a fallacy. In such cases the claim would be backed by evidence. As an example, the theory that matter is made of subatomic particles has survived numerous tests and challenges over the years so there is a weight of evidence in its favor. The claim is reasonable to accept because of the weight of this evidence and not because the claim is old. Thus, a claim's surviving legitimate challenges and passing valid tests for a long period of time can justify the acceptance of a claim. But mere age or persistance does not warrant accepting a claim.

Examples of Appeal to Tradition

1. Sure I believe in God. People have believed in God for thousands of years so it seems clear that God must exist. After all, why else would the belief last so long?

2. Gunthar is the father of Connan. They live on a small island and in their culture women are treated as property to be exchanged at will by men.

Connan: "You know father, when I was going to school in the United States I saw that American women are not treated as property. In fact, I read a book by this person named Mill in which he argued for women's rights."
Gunthar: "So, what is your point son?"
Connan: "Well, I think that it might be wrong to trade my sisters for cattle. They are human beings and should have a right to be masters of their own fate."
Gunthar: "What a strange and new-fangled notion you picked up in America. That country must be even more barbaric then I imagined. Now think about this son. We have been trading women for cattle for as long as our people have lived on this island. It is a tradition that goes back into the mists of time. "
Connan: "But I still think there is something wrong with it."
Gunthar: "Nonsense my boy. A tradition this old must be endorsed by the gods and must be right."

3. Of course this mode of government is the best. We have had this government for over 200 years and no one has talked about changing it in all that time. So, it has got to be good.

4. A reporter is interviewing the head of a family that has been involved with a feud with another family.

Reporter: "Mr. Hatfield, why are you still fighting it out with the Mcoys?"
Hatfield: "Well you see young man, my father feuded with the Mcoys and his father feuded with them and so did my great grandfather."
Reporter: "But why? What started all this?"
Hatfield: "I don't rightly know. I'm sure it was the Mcoys who started it all, though."
Reporter: "If you don't know why you're fighting, why don't you just stop?"
Hatfield: "Stop? What are you crazy? This feud has been going on for generations so I'm sure there is a darn good reason why it started. So I aim to keep it going. It has got to be the right thing to do. Hand me my shooting iron boy, I see one of those Mcoy skunks sneaking in the cornfield."