Fallacies of Race and Culture

An Essay by Mark Bateman

(September 15, 2000)

So-called "race" is the result of divergent evolution brought about by geographical separation. Peoples who evolve in genetic isolation from other peoples will eventually display different characteristics in regard to skin color, straightness or curliness of hair, folds of skin about the eye or the absence thereof, relative tallness or shortness, etc. In my mind, then, there is nothing in "race" that is of any essence. It is a mere accidental consequence of geographic separation. This of course means that, given today's ease of transportation and mixing in the same society of persons of varying geographical origins, the divergence brought about by geographic separation will be overcome, and the trend will be in the opposite direction, namely, in the direction of an homogenization of so-called "racial" characteristics. Eventually, "race" will be an obsolete and useless concept. In fact, I myself consider it to be right now, at this very moment, an obsolete and useless concept.

I do not consider to be of a different race any of my colleagues, regardless of the color of their skin or various other so-called "racial" characteristics.   The factor of primary importance is that we are neighbors.  Our destinies are thrown together because we are neighbors. We live in the same geographical area. That is the single most relevant and unifying factor that should govern our relations with each other. If neighbors do not find the common interests which exist among them as a result of sharing the same turf, then how can those same neighbors who are racialists imagine that there are interests that prevail among peoples of common ancestries, interest which supposedly transcend geographical boundaries? How can racialists find common bonds among supposed racial colleagues when they cannot even successfully find common bonds with the very people among whom they live and work every day?

Now "culture", on the other hand, is a very relevant factor in achieving peace and prosperity among people. I think most particularly of language as the single most important aspect of culture to consider when searching for ways to increase peace, harmony, and prosperity in our society. I think popular thinking muddies the water inexcusably when it discusses the phenomenon of "race", and then introduces the non-racial subject of language.

Language is not an aspect of "race". Language is, however, the single most important aspect of culture. The values people live by, the ease with which they communicate those values to each other with a common language, and ultimately, the social and governmental mechanisms which they arrive at through dialogue, these are the essentials of culture, much more so than things like music, cuisine, and clothing, which are, after all, manifestations of culture which do not really affect the way that society is run.

Two other cultural factors which carry near equal weight with language are art and religion. Both art and religion influence the values and guiding principles within which neighbors interact with each other. And religious or artistic factors which make it difficult for people to interact in an peaceful and harmonious way are factors which have a decisive influence on the success of a society in achieving peace and prosperity. Without venturing to explore, at this point, the relative merits of various artistic or religious schools, I do affirm most vigorously that art and religion mold people's values, and thus have a direct effect on the individual interactions within society, and on the social and governmental mechanisms which arise because of the blending of individual values which manifiest themselves in the public square and in the voting booth.

Some recent non-European immigrant is my my neighbor by virtue of his geographical proximity to me. Perhaps one day, if he chooses, he may be my fellow American citizen. Hopefully we share a common language in English. We may not share the same nominal religious identification. And our artistic values may vary. All of the above points of differentiation (geography, citizenship, language, religion, art) are essential aspects of culture, and in my mind they are thus worthy of thought, discussion, and continuing analysis.

On the other hand, I do not see any useful distinction to be drawn from the fact that the ancestors of this non-European immigrant evolved in Asia or Africa, while my ancestors evolved in the British isles. That information is useful only in so far as it allows him and me to understand each other's culture, values, and underlying (and often unconscious) assumptions about the nature of reality. All of these factors are the result not of our genes, but of our cultures. There we have grounds for fruitful discussion.