In this writing I concentrate on British historical reasoning mostly, but other countries and language groups have been involved in ‘racist’ perception and activities. Europe was very interconnected at this time by a want for new lands and almost all are ‘cold country creativity’ creative-solutions, or done to out-do the British, so British historical focus is applicable.
There was never any such thing as ‘Race’ or ‘Human Race’, this was just a new overused word that year in Victorian vocabulary deficient English. Seriously.
The only race that was really on was the race for ‘new’ lands, albeit someone else’s;) between Britain and France mostly, as the solution-seeking creativity to assist poverty, misery, and ill-health problems. And it was on this desperate race, the word ‘race’ was then always referred to. : )
‘Race’ was a simplistic way of classifying human beings into four groups: ‘Caucasian’, ‘Negroid’, ‘Mongoloid’ and ‘Asian’, according to physical appearance.
There are many variations within a ‘Race’, and I find that we are ‘Breeds’ rather than a race of four. Breeds that are determined largely by language groups.
Certainly there are greater physical similarities between humans breeds found within those classification categories called ‘Race’, but on its own ‘Race’ is not adequate or sufficient.
To expand upon and improve the current classification order with Human Beings /Home Sapiens, I suggest in addition to the standard:
Kingdom; Phylum; Class; Order; Family; Genus; Species we add: Breed; Language. ( I don’t feel it even necessary to include ‘race’ though it could fit between ‘species’ and ‘breed’.)
When I meet someone I like to know their blood lines (heritage) on both side and their ‘home’ language. I find this the most helpful information to know more of someone, and it has proven reliable and consistent.
I have known, dated or befriended, all races and many breeds of humans. We Humans bond because of our vocabulary, not our language. We are bonded by our energetic resonance, that governs our word choice – or vocabulary – within a language. Just because two people speak the same language, this does not, at all, mean they use the same vocabulary.
I do not think a greater effort of classifying Human Beings was seriously entered into, as the motivation for it, came from fear and insecurity, rather than a position of ‘loving curiosity’.;)
Classification was carried out with the intent to make possible, the justification for theft, of land, inhabited by people already.
An outcome was desired, and then a reality contrived to make it possible. People were found to be not worthy of consideration, because of their appearance.
Historically and traditionally, the British used ridicule or derogatory language words to ‘bring down’ those they feared, or felt threatened by.
It is a known strategy also within the military. It has been demonstrated that a ridiculing, rather than a respectful or honourable way of treating people, leads to a more successful occupation or victory.
We know now in science, how it is important to be impartial when conducting studies. My own scientific background taught me that studies undertaken objectively and with no attachment to the result, makes for the better , more reliable, and trustworthy result.
The concept of ‘Race’ to describe other breeds of humans came about from a need, not an objective observation.
The use of judgement words, such as “superior” and “inferior”, that are ‘solution- seeking creations’, demonstrate a very strong attachment to the result.
Definitely the ‘Race’ concept was brought into popularity at a time when another ‘race’ was on, the race to take over the rest of the lands on earth.
To get the land that became ‘Australia’, Britain was in a competitive race by sea with France in the 18th century, which Britain ‘won’.
Was it with such a fixed determination, that the word ‘race’ was so impressed into the minds of these folk, that they used the word ‘race’ here also?;) Quite possibly.
Maybe it was even a ‘slip of the tongue’ and they were referring to the ‘race’ to obtain lands in competition with another language group/breed. Maybe it was from the British like, to ‘make life easier for yourself’, to use this new, common and frequently used word, ‘race’, to help name the other Peoples that had been discovered.
Historically, the English have always been, very fixated on physical appearance, how things look, and how things ‘appear to be’.
We must remember the “Might Is Right” British jargon of the time, to validate a situation taken by force. We know now, that it isn’t necessarily right at all, or clever to think so.
Using the invader’s common strategy of ridicule, it would be far easier, and upon seeing the advantage – coming quite naturally to them also, given their propensity for this, and also of ‘complaining’ – to discredit an entire populus, than to do it one at a time.
Much easier to dis-empower a race of people, than to deal with these strapping, stronger, physically in better shape, ‘Equal Men’ one at a time!;)
How clever to then be able to make use of these people as a free workforce, at a time when Britain was in such economic uncertainty. They justified slavery, removing people to free up their land, then forced them to work , all the while justifying how it was for “their own good to be fed and given a place to live out their days.”
With their academic ‘superiority’, British upper classes stated that these native people were dying out anyway (argument used in Australia) so it was only a matter of time before the land was available.
The English language is much more ‘word thick’ today than in the 18th century, and quite likely this is as complex a thinking process that occurred:
“Oooh golly…LOOK!!!. Look at his spear… and he’s not wearing any clothes…”
Then: “Spear? No gun? Not very smart. He’s not wearing any clothes….must be a lesser man than we.”
This sight would have been an enormous shock, and enormously threatening. Familiarity at this time was to react from a place of fear, as the Britain they had left behind was a cold, poverty-stricken, gruelling place of ill-health and misery.
It would have been overwhelming for them to see such a healthy, naked man so comfortable in his own skin, with such blatant sexual acceptance, when they were not allowed to mention their own body parts in polite company.;)
A more ‘conscious’ (and intelligent?;)) group, given the same sight may have gone “Wow, how beautiful..look at their comfort with themselves and natural living skills. What fine specimens and how fortunate to be able to live so freely in such a climate…”
Many of the English words to describe other people of differing breeds and origins have been banned popularly as they were found Internationally, to be derogatory, insulting and nonsensical to use. (The energetic injury we get from words I go into in another writing.)
My mother was Caucasian, the Race that classified the others, putting itself at the top.
At five years old I knew from my mother, that I was only half English, and that I was half Caucasian, and half Mongoloid race.” The tone of voice she used was derogatory, and in judgement.
She would look me over with narrowed eyes telling me my eyes were “too Chinesey”, my backside and face shape “too negro”, my head shape “too asian”. She insinuated I was of lesser worth, because I had these ‘throwback’ characteristics.
Consequently I bonded with the world;) and I drew strength from all Peoples experiencing oppression, to add to my fairy tale and Dicken’s characters. I considered myself an Albino Negro and Nelson Mandela became my hero.;)
My mother said “the only thing you have going for you is the hair on your head” referring to my blonde hair, while the rest of me she considered to be an evolutionary slip-up as I did not meet her specifics.
As we know more, other words have been introduced in our categorising, such as ‘hispanic’, and we are such a mixture now, we naturally use other words as descriptions such as African-American.
But still this is a physical description, without reference to language spoken. I describe myself as Anglo-Hungarian-Australian, which is far more useful than just ‘Australian’, in determining who I might be.;)
As breeds of humans – as with breeds of dogs – we may have a propensity /natural aptitude/tendency, not occurring in other breeds of us,
I find that starsigns/ natal data, and language group/home language spoken, far more helpful in determining someone than their ‘race’.
“Love the skin you ‘re in!” Absolutely, and also love your home language! : )