Singular-ethnicity, ethnopluralism, or ideological denial?

Why does “racism” always appear in human history? A singular or imperial ethnicity, or totalitarian racism is what usually appears, but also a more sneaky singular-ethnicity with the great chutzpah to disguise itself as anti-racism. And then of course there is the modern ideological denial of any kind of ethnicity or biological origin of cultural behavior, such as Marxism or modern liberalism. But even conservatives and traditionalists more or less deny ethnicity, even as their traditions tend to uphold the old ways of a singular-ethnicity.

What are we to make of this mélange of views and denials? As I say here often, over many decades of honest and courageous work, scientific sociobiological studies have found that real human nature remains kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. It has been the singular or imperial forms of racism that have caused most of the devastating wars throughout human history.

How do we deal with this ethnocentrism? The ethnopluralism hypothesis presented here affirms ethnic regions and ethnostates for distinct ethnic cultures, protected internally and externally by some version of federalism. The United States Constitution with its separation of powers and states could even accommodate ethnopluralism.  Ethnopluralism allows evolution to continue with the variety and the time that evolution prefers.

This seems to be the way for us to civilize the beast without perverting or destroying human nature and human history. Human beings are capable of this life-saving behavior---we better be.