Hypothesizing a world in which Race is the dominant source of conflict – on par with religion, politics, and ethnicity, reveals a slew of expectations about the future of Race relations at the Global scale.
It is tempting to conceptualize this future by first reviewing the state of “Race Relations” across the world – to pick out trends, and extrapolate them into the next fifty years. This would yield a wealth of data, and offer a much needed panorama, but it is costly and requires a kind of research for which we lack sound theory. In order to forecast how conflict could be delineated along Racial lines – we are best served by trying two scenarios – the best, and worst case.
Virtually no-one in the world thinks about Race the same way one thinks about one’s ambitions, one’s educational programme, or one’s career. The President of France, Monsieur Sarkozy, came closest – when claiming that his country had always been the result of “metissage” (i.e. racial/ethnic “mixing”). Presented in a speech – this was a shot at a strategic vision of his country’s future racial identity, “it is not a choice, but an obligation..we can’t do it otherwise…we have to change…we will change.” While exceptional in its programmatic manner – some prefer seeing hypocrisy when comparing Mr. Sarkozy’s words with those he delivered in Saudi Arabia and claimed that “nothing is more dangerous in the world, than a broken identity” – implying that no one would venture to pressure the Saudis towards cultural – i.e. “identity’ reforms of their own.
Race is generally conceived as a biological given – especially by those claiming no racial affiliation or blithely maintain that “race does not exist”. In their discussions of non-Whites, White narcissists are notorious for explicitly acknowledging “minorities” the rights to ethnocentrism and race-based-political identities. Seen from this race-based- political angle, race is something a White Narcissist can forgo while conceding it central to the voting pattern of non-whites (“minorities”).
Race is a biological reality – but biology can be slightly more flexible than culture, when it comes to malleability. It takes only one mating couple to produce an individual of mixed Race ancestry – hence biology can be seen as far more malleable, than say economic, or cultural circumstances – who by their nebulous natures often enjoy surreptitious inter-generational transmission. In some cases, it appears that even if we wanted to obstruct the transmission of some insidious cultural practice, we can not – for lack of legitimacy.
Race-as-politics misconstrues biology through its obsession with the now-and-present, with which it colonises the recent past, and projects into the coming decades as an immutable constant. Not one active participant in discussions about Race – is distinguished by looking at the state of “Race” into the future. Only marginals have shown some interest in exploring the question of our racial identities in the year 2050. The vast majority remains limited to the “racism” frame, which implies either participation in Racialist Historical Revisionism, or the politics of pandering social differences by picking over poverty,incarceration, and income disparity. Race becomes the debate over deficits and credits – who owes what to whom, and how do we go about distributing it. This imparts to Race, a dangerous source of conflict between majorities and minorities, as the former decline in numbers, and the latter increase their political power.
Concomitantly with this “boxing-in” of discussions of Race, is the ignorance of on the ground processes of racial mixture, ongoing at spectacular speeds. One third of all American non-whites and non-blacks are interbreeding with whites. In cities across Western Europe, black-white couples are notable among black women with professional credentials, who seeks white male partners in perhaps more than fifty-five percent of cases. Sarkozy has been reminding audiences that a solid one fourth of French ancestry is non-French, and as Muslim women experience a liberation from patriarchal society which seeks to limit their mating options strictly to male-Muslims, the number of Arab-French couples is rising.
In Moscow, fully one fourth of Slavic women marry non-Russian males of non-Slav ancestry. While all interracial and inter-ethnic marriages suffer from higher divorce rates than the already high fifty percent rate found in non-interacial marriage – any and all offspring of non-white/white relationships pose a direct challenge to the present discussion of “Race.”
As much as society remains limited to dealing with “Race” as a here-and-now concept, individuals such as Barack Hussein Obama and Dieudonne – will remain more prominent for their Negro features, than their “metissage.” But as the numbers grow, so will the prospects for an a new group identity similar to the Spanish American notion of Mullato or Mestizo.
The best case scenario for Race in 2050, is that “Mixed” is replaced by a new identity term, and that the numbers of “Mixed” individuals reach 20 percent of a given population of a “White” country, so that the overall white component of such countries, is no more than 40 percent. This will effectively reduce “whites” to an absolute minority by 2100 in all formerly “white” countries. A possible effect of such change will neutralise the salience of Race conflict along the “white/non-white” axis, and will be accompanied by a revision of history, which will come to view “whiteness” as a transient identity relevant from 1850 to 2000.
By 2100 “mixed” individuals will go on to create a new “Racial” schema, in which not all “mixtures” will be equal. Because Asian-White, Arab-White, and Black-White, are presently much more common than any other racial mixture, another possibility for racial identities by 2100 is that “Whiteness” continues to exist, in an expanded form.
Depending on the fate of “pure” Races (i..e non-mixed), this Whiteness will represent both a social level, and one of select, rather than broad “mixing” – which may very well remain in conflict with non-mixed non-white groups, due to the continued exploitation of identity fault-lines for political gain.
Interracial mixing appears to be a social phenomenon, in that it is either hypergenic, or carried-out between social equals. This promises an underclass of blacks, darker Latinos and Indians, Aborigines, and Polynesians, distinct from whatever Global middle-class mixing takes place along the “White” axis.
The worst case scenario for Race relations in 2050, is one in which “whites” manage to effectively counter political pluralism, and begin an assertive politics of nativism and/or white pride. “Minorities” would be put on the defensive, and the economic development of the rich world, jeopardised by severe restrictions on immigration. An assertive “white” identity would be a spanner in the wheels of modern society, and would increase inter-communal strife. A sacrificed white identity it is condition for making racial pluralism work. Sarkozy’s observation, that mixing is a must, was accompanied by the caveat of “immense danger” if not followed through.
A worst case scenario for Race relations, would follow two stages. The first a Crash between whites and non-whites. Second, a Crash between blacks and non-blacks. When whites and non-whites clash, this will severely handicap those economies where whites and non-whites are demographically interspersed, and interdependent – the UK, France, and Netherlands – less so America due to market driven segregation.
Race tensions will have a negative effect on international trade, and will lead to international conflict, whereby the perceived “mistreatment” of non-whites in white countries, will draw countries of non-white’s origin (where an irrefusable appeal will be made on the basis of victim-hood) into the melee. Algeria, and Nigeria will not only issue threats, they may retaliate against white expats within their borders (there is a history of massacring whites). The slowing of global trade, will lead to a reduced “white” role in the global economy – where Oriental Asia picks up the slack to its advantage.
The resulting defeat of whites, in a white/non-white crash, will open the doors to the exploitation of blacks and Africa. The worst case scenario assumes that “mixed” individuals will not be granted the option of identifying “mixed” and that black-white individuals play no statistically significant role in a census. As “non-white & non-black” peoples gain in political ascendancy, they will not harbor the same guilt and self-restraint towards blacks, as whites had harbored for a set of unique cultural reasons. A more practical mindset will virtually assure that Blacks will be brutally displaced in Africa, and corralled and/or deported from cities with significant economic production.Violence of the sort witnessed in Southern California, where Latino gangs imitate skinheads in their racial symbolism, while aiming to racially cleanse their neighbourhoods of blacks, will take on international dimensions.
The very act of thinking about Race within a future oriented framework, reveals how much is taken for granted about our present lack of thought about the issue. Neither the worst case, nor best case scenario assumes the possibility of a continued “white” identity in either Europe, and America. While minority and White Narcissist Race demagogues thrive pandering to the Cult of Victim-hood, they omit the central role of “whites” in facilitating a racially pluralist society. By negating “white” identity, “white” countries make it possible for non-whites to organically integrate within their developed economies, while maintaining the society’s high-standards of living.
The worst case scenario shows that this “imported maintenance” will come with a hefty price – the eventual destruction of the societies which did the importing. The best case scenario shows the transmission of an economic and social culture of high-living standards, but without the peoples originally involved in its creation ever recovering their confidence.
In either case, the world as we know it today, with its present racial division, cannot continue either conceptually, or biologically. A little bit of forward thinking points to the inevitability of a Crash of Races in the 21st century.