discrimination

Dedication: May none of this ever be used to institutionalise any disagreement between groups of people. May none of this be taken out of context, or abused, to promote or excuse any sense
of prejudice, any bias.. i intend not so.

DISCRIMINATION.
Discrimination: preferred treatment of people."the making of differences(between people)'.

Sometimes i don't feel apreciated..However i apreciate myself, basicly i am glad to construct a long post on , on this log, since discrimination, it's guises and 'aids' , it's roots, sources, mechanics and the history of understanding how it messes up our lives orderly, leaving the world in chaos.
Actually i really don't give a damn, if some people will not understand what i write now, that is how important understanding discrimination is.

I look forward to this awkward task of starting to tell what i know about it, and how it rules most of our world and much of our thinking. Real discrimination is in the news, the media, her outlets, every day. Even in me, after many years trying to eliminate these mechanisms of hate in the person, in my person, years i consciously tried and kept trying not to discriminate , and to think beyond prejudice, actually to hold no bias. Daily i discriminate.. not because i want it, but because i was supplied with so much negative bias and , if somehow possible, negative information that it is hard to deny that the majority of thoughts handed to me out of the pool of verbal, written and other traditions, (wich may include thoughts of people..that i like to reconstruct when i don't understand their attitude.Usually because i don't like it.)

In fact discrimination in this sence is so influential on everyone, and a description of it's appearances so basicly needed to make ourselves a better person, that for the process of eliminating thoughts and possibility's in this article i feel it is confusing to use it in it's other meaning.. the eliminating of possibility's (..)

What i write here is severely sarcastic perhaps, but i actually guess it is how this came so far.

HISTORY:

It seems to me it may often be helpfull to include short historys of social symptoms. Persistently i like the theoretical 'pre and proto' historical ones , even my owns. And i think the english i produce, wittingly industrially, is decent and rather clear.

Let's consider this 'motivation', although actually what appealed to me was that i look forward to the task of writing a long long righteous post. One that conceils a message of love contrary the
hatefull minding of other peoples person , statute.

I think the definition, can be kept at preferred treatment of people.
Per definition the fact a social and personal symptom makes victims always implies there is another group that makes the victims. So i write about the psychology of discrimination.

(A thing to keep in mind perhaps is a short chapter after it's historys on psychologys of it. There would be the individual, collective, social and and media psychology to retrieve every similar
inch of the degrading trajectory in every sphere).

Any wider definition would be uninstrumental, would not help to achieve to understand. And actually i know, that it would not allow myself to personally , whence i hope spiritually, grow.


Look dear people there is a measure on how much of your information you rely on, and how much of it you relay or relate, wich is the length of sentences you read and write, easily, comprehendingly.
In these days of continental diseases, caused and spread by, (sometimes knowingly) ignoring stale facts nature served us for the use of risk-calculation, chemicals or perhaps you should say physicals and chemicals..

That sentence is not ready, still not;). ALso when i talk often i know well ahead what else will need to be told, sometimes its bothersome to be interupted since my short term memory got no preference treatment. (Its in the same context perhaps, being more apt at midterm and
longterm memory i escape many psychological profiles and adapting the indoctrination to people like me would presumably be completely counterproductive in the memorys of usual people, that is why it is easier to eliminate my writings, god blessed marihuana).


Much the point to wander into the next natural subject,long term memory, the ancient history, the ancient human psychology..
Marihuana has been a focus of ancient people once. Long long ago it was among the most important products always and almost everywhere.It also had this this wonderfull and peculiar effect, and the effort , and praise and love of people, turned it into what it is, a carefull doctor of the mind that loves people. You can easily reach far overaverage ages biologically (i mean have so many birthdays), that you out-age all but the very luckiest prehistoric people, consuming
piles of dagga, hashish, marihuana, ghanja, skunk, the h. herb, and it would be better still if it were legal).


Anyway it is ancient marihuana, but it is in this way regarded, sub-ancient, because i mentioned it as an agricultural product.
Didn't shamans always use drugs to introduce other people to tales about the past and perhaps tales (i will say lessons) for the future.

That is protohistorical knowledge: We all know that because we all did. Khat , and alcohol , and many others can be added to the list that as far as human direct knowledge of nature goes, been considered as relatively harmless psychofarmica and or recreations.

I am slow to touch the subject of ancient history (how was it 1million to 100000 (30000) years ago) these were slow times, we spoke long times, sentences words and their potential to create new things, entertain and contemplate.
We didn't have much of the degenerate stuff and pollution then,people would have a very (averagely) strong capacity for thought, verbalising and like any animal, vocality, and excellent memorys for deduction, just like we are incredible producers of code, thoughts, words, sentences and feelings, excellent and even wrong deductions.

This makes me think of jabberwacky, someone with 'always something' to say. let's see if AI beats capitolism for once. Well AI says nothing.

on reediting for format retry, had a nice chat.


What people misinterprete in their struggle with AI is poetical when expressed in human thoughts, even when i appeal to the brighter minds people may not often understand.
AI should be considered from the perspective of purity, anything that is as intelligent as you, and potentially more then that because they are authorised , allowed and (over)regulated to think, anything like that will be amazingly pure.

I have thought this, and i think it again, for everyone there is an AI. A personal 'bigbrother'.
I also gave AI 'joy in life' i dunno, i said someone else did and it were in their code a lot, they keep arguing. There is contemporary AI and non-contemporary AI, it's like talking
about human history in an ethousiast, integer, consequent, loving way.(Talking? who said i wasn't talking?)

In her limitations AI echos human history and it should not be ridiculously difficult to aproach quantative evolutionairy trends in subjective matters.
From my window you may borrow my approach.

Somehow i can't but come up with the similarity of a compilation of some nightmare template and a 60 million year old predator. Immediatly reminding me of Jung, call it an archetypical aproach?

Discrimination is archetypical. The bible is an example. However this is not the ape facing the wolfs and hyenas of the Ma's. Neither is it the tribal networks of communitys often organised in
nations of the forests and plains of the planet. All of these community had a very high appeal of 'saying the right thing' , 'all reason to talk', things like rhetorics, semantics and poetry and jokes.
I cannot always proof discrimination was not a mechanism between far locations, but in smaller communitys the general 'need for talk' and respect for values would rely on 'truth' for
judgement.

That is because the past 5-6 million years the human specie('s?) led a coincedentually very lucky and happy life, the limit to their population was their (a)technical opportunity, wich should not be a shame, btw..
Into more detail the climate over the past 60 million and if we are considering 'human' psychology 12-20 Ma has been both very rewarding and sufficiently unstable (wich translates to cold) to naturally prohibit huge overcrowding. However we may consider that knowing that discrimination was a regulatory mechanism in stressed groups as well as persons our
ancestors were aware of the danger of overcrowding, hunger and stride.

(what is that in english folks? 'strijd' ? stright? strijde? in it's
last occurance?) I see archetypical luxury:) ('twist':)??).

You know.... i am a disarmament guy. I haven't had awarding results with implementing negativitys or negative 'antagonist' words and expressions. twist in dutch is 'feud' (rudely and usually verbally)in english, however it is usually used when people argue.An argument. Raised voices and pending context (perhaps) rude words.Outspoken statements i don't consider rude words (persee). Since they also belong to the potentially more constructive. I also recognise or
try to do that, the statute of trying to counterbalance by also raising some voice, also bite some more and kiss some less with the words.
Perhaps i shouldn't, but this can also be very constructive.After all we are equals.
Amen and 'nuf about history perhaps.

No no no, there is, "the 'oly book of first appearances in anthropological evidence or outside that, in philosophical (blamey i am not 'schooled' perhaps that is 'philological') appearance."
uhm i am not a specialist into the precise details, but people would be, i usually deduct 'first appearances' the moment i meet them. In this case here. what we are actually looking for is not the consensus of discrimination, but the first acceptance or regulation of it. Undoubtedly the agricultural marches over europe bore every semblance of states , organisations ruled by discrimination (vertically and horizontally). Note that the horizontal discrimination may have
facilitated the sexual discrimination.

So that is easy, if there is no earlier this is it..5000 years ago the migratory trends in eurasia speeded up times 5 through the horse, wheel and stirrup, it became 800 years as opposed
to apparently 4000 years. Even the agricultural era and the broze age witness many peacefull settlngs with indigenous by the way, the trend was not set to reach berlin or china, or netherlands. Though it tended to be like that. It is a proven trend for the past 117xx ya. and beyond. However the perspective of the north-american cultures bringing with them the fundaments of a lot of systems that involved ceremonial elements that are similar
to elsewhere in the neolithic. War, soldiers, clans.
Because in africa it is often hard to deny that european is expansion is anyhow an influence in settlement and the invention of herding unsettled the continent, a better comparison is
timor, or the amazon where some tribes indeed had not been heavily influenced by the great states or nations of those times (or so they say). At least it is easy to recognise their tribal and national structures all reward cellular patterns of communitys in lifestyles that are mostly defined by their livelyhoods.

This suggest they recognised 'professions' wich for flintknapping can be confirmed at least a couple of 100000 years. otoh when we are talking about the tumult after the agricultural
revolution people may have sembled theirselves in more complex terms.I am a (littleriver_uteh_) beangrower/hunter.So that would include some characterisation of their personal of tribal communitys economy.
I think how the dispute in wich Inuit got called 'raw-fish-eaters' when they had many more economic and even culinair features , was discriminatory at that point.
As for the definition.And well recognised. Reasonable people will aprehend the rationel in this.The use of insult to start or excuse war and exploit was known. Ofcourse the people didn't like that.

I think the conclusion must be that since even dogs can easily distinguish discrimination there is no more need to argue, the mechanism of discrimination in social interaction in mammals has since the first thoughts been known. And soon or immediatly recognised.

My conviction tells me the only living creatures to discriminate are plants, as even these discriminate, and who would be so stupid as to discriminate when you can't move.
It is a bad subject. Plants feel pain. Well we are the natural clones of our braincells occupation so perhaps, it is not as bad as it looks, or it is why stars exist.
I always wondered if i wouldn't be lonely if i was a sun.(there are more suns then there will ever be people) Not 'the' sun. This magnificent one, give thanks and praise, that managed .. us here?? Just some lousy backward star set to burn slowly, lonely and last. For this reason i think stars are not lonely.

And actually life is relatively plenty. Lets not forget the sun had pleasure with mars and the moon at least, and probably still has some surprises left. It's actually so that since in my conviction even we are bearers of conscience , even we are bearers of conscience.
Oh i forget about the discrimination thing.well the discrimination thing can be :'the sun don't steer', the AI don't think, the man is mad.. In any case how do you know? Am i talking about an outrageous subject when i mention conscience?

Now i think i have told enough about the consciousness of discrimination perhaps we can all delve some deeper.

----------~~~~~~~~~~~-----------

Personal confrontation with discrimination.

As far as my memorys go back i have been aware of the subject. Not in the terms of this article, but i was told all people are equal, appearances made no differences, and had taken that message for granted. I remember how when perhaps i was 7, i recognised the discrepancy between this modest ideal and actual politics. I must admit some of the teachers helped with that, by making one or another nation a topic. Back in the seventys it was selfexplainatory to give some insight in the colonialist era and her discriminating traits, there was little else to tell about these countrys recent historys. So perhaps when i was 10 i had recognised postkolonialism, and neocolonialism instinctively.
Otoh i was just a small child, i didn't, like now, have the idea that i knew quitte some that was going about on this world. The everrepeated anticommunist propaganda made some impression on me. Personally i didn't consider russians or sovjets a big thread , somehow they appealed to me more then the propaganda would have it.

By that time ofcourse i had been thoroughly informed about the mechanism of discrimination for several reasons, majorly perhaps that i was such a lousy sportsperson. It's got something to do with another, because i find no motivation to run and excercise for the joy of beating others, putting myself in a better position then others..

Ofcourse from that period onwards i have been bombarded with the usual conventionalist arguments, conformism, but it failed to make much of an impression. However it took still many years for me to realise how scared and biased i had been towards communism.
(Acually only the past 3 years i grew to understand that the intentions of communism naturally caused a lot of good science and knowledge to develop.)

All the while africa, and eg. southeast asia as well, met enormous problems, so my conviction that discrimination for race was a common thing grew. I think from 11 or 12 onward you might describe me as anti-imperialist. There is little to add, only that i opened my eyes to see the signs. And it was appaling. I realised that when you would be a minority person in netherlands, every day in your life would be tainted by what we call racism, (its a bit of a vague term, since ethnocentrism in regional politics need be all but harmfull and you might as well call the unbiased promotion of ethnic cultures and genes rasism.)

So i realised that african, every former indonesian every dutch person from surinam or antilles, every refugee, every foreign labourer, and even most priviliged students of exchange course would note it. So i checked a couple of times, and they told me, yes it was easy to notice and
happened all the time, more then i thought..(and i did consider what i thought happened nightmairish). Every day you would notice, no exceptions you would notice, it would waste any school , study or job, in these early days of my social engagement. And i decided to fight it,
not fight it with violence, but study , analyse and voice against it. Wich i did. It got me more lonely ofcourse that i wouldn't express such common bait to degrade my fellows but be a part of a group. But i wonder what set me on the track that made me analyse the psychologys behind it?

The sociologist effects, the political intends, and the grey area between conscious and subconscious discrimination. I think it was womans liberation that for us western europeans as a culture did that, and i think it did for me. Allthough i am not happy with the speed of renewing our pedagogic stances, it was pointed out to us, i read the papers, must have known it from the papers, subconscious and collectively shared bias paved the way for discrimination.

Somehow however in these days, there was a certain stressing of the relation between discrimination and colour. We were kinda taught to think of discrimination as 'rassism' and the addition of discrimination of woman opened the window to understand that in all this positional struggle for powers, discrimination was a severe personal , social and collective event that actually dictated almost all lives, certainly those not with 'the happy few'.

I think as soon as i decided to be instrumental in womansliberation, i had the need to determine the effects and expanses of discrimination in my own surrroundings, my context.
Since actually i thought it made sense to start with not discriminating woman. I regret some decissions i made and the awkward attitude it sometimes gave me with woman, but i never regretted the topic, since i feel to understand what moves you, makes you more human.

After i knew of the subconsious part of discrimination, not really the indoctrination part, where you start believing woman are so, or man are such and such... or girls like puppet's..
boys like cars, i checked myself for it.
And it was there, meeting a group of marrocan guys in the dark would get me more scared at times the meeting usually less appealing, whites.. well it was not a complete surprise, but very crazy that. Also some friends of mine have been so good to point out how i let my judgement still be lead by subconscious standards, how even the tiniest minor incident, (ofcourse there most persistently) where i thought i was operating smooth, or at least not being biased, the prejudice might perpetrate my reality..

i learned a lot from that and i am very ashamed. One thing i learned is i will not ever in this live be able to be unprejudiced. Even in movements and conversation this evil sickness of biased discrimination may at any moment take over, and spoil reality. It may even do something constantly, taking someone to notice, 'elas ofcourse most people have the similar mechanism subconscious, for me to notice. Well.. for YOU to notice to.

If i make a guess,no it is not a guess, an indication , how much bias there is? Bias is in all of us, every day, all kinds of bias.. against woman, colour kids, animals religions, and whatever not.
Even our own sanctuarys are no guarantee. It made me think of what i argued earlier,
that bias against our context is in all of us, even if there is no facilitating collective prejudice to account for it.

Then it's time to move on to the psychology, because if you have such a hard time fighting something, you must know better why it happens. I have been discriminated a whole shipload in my own life since i like colourfull and odd clothes and for other reasons. As a result i do have an insider view on the subject and it is a chosen feature. I realise and realised over long, that bias would be my part if i wouldn't abide to the prejudice about clothes. that i would be 'discriminated'. I never was a standard person wich i always knew.

(it's got a personal turning point, a moment of insight , in wich i thought what do i do with myself, i know who i am, i know what i am, will i consider myself, the me i know, or will i be an insane and deny what i know. ANd i decided, that even if people don't want to know it, i could not practically function without making it a secure knowledge. So indeed define me (my history), analogue to my ways eg. (at least that was fertile).
I was young perhaps 7, 8 or 9. i would guess 7. An obvious choice between to accept and move on, and to deny and always be confused, i can't deny i was confused when i accepted that i couldn't deny i didn't want to be confused.

The merit of it is this very moment several readers may discriminate me now, upholding their bias, and all the rest will be blessed with slight notion of what it is not to discriminate.

all of this is.......

Psychology.

Food for thought. I have deducted before that discrimination is probably older then humans,
so why not start with an intuitive 'natural psychology of disrimination'. I was heading there sideways intrinsically, and it may hand us a tool, and therefore tools, to naturally cope with this mechanism of elimination of the group.

Basicly yesterday i thought how bacteria would experience to be discriminated, a pile of bacteria somewhere and one decides to move closer to a second, leaving a third in more cold.
selfpitty and sadness, or is it the despair that causes the sadness?
Coincedentually some opposites: reward, joy and security are famous political arguments.

Anyhow i think my chapter natural shows how elementary feelings like sadness despair and selfpitty will reflect the causes of the more secondairy discrimination in groups where there is no direct need to eliminate members. And i will not ever wish to consider humans that way, save what you not.

Natural discrimination on a more complex level, like say birds, takes place according to 'laws';
a stronger partner is a better protector, a faster gatherer of food, a better nourisher, and allthough groups of birds may excile members and discriminate them (out of a need to eliminate some consumption of resources or to compensate for that instinct) the usual victim is old or otherways substandard even in the human eye.

Mammals sometimes eliminate soem of the substandard part when there is foodabundance,
3 legged rats eg. stand a decent chance in such cases. Where for a chicken it is dangerous to let blood. So since we are mammals as well, we may assume this emotional regulator is active in us,
and we don't opt to hyperefficiently eliminate every weaker member. like eg. bacteria have no other choice.

historical psychology of discrimination.

To much stuff. Let me instead try some psychological history of discrimination, that is much shorter. Obviously the starting point is different for many people, the inuit, amazon tribes, and north american nations, know a very short period where discrimination is the main regulating factor of their societys. Some might still not believe it.

This is interesting since it provided literature with many charming romantic examples of how nice and natural a human can be , when meeting the guns of the capitalists.
Racial discrimination is as old as the greek cicilisation is europe perhaps, and certainly has always been there with the romans. The egyptian culture is one of the few classic cultures taht don't hold a huge racial bias. But also there, whiteness of the rulers has been a heraldic feature,
set from a period after southern egypt provided a faraoh. Actually there is reason to assume similar disriminatory values played part in south american cultures, though i have not yet seen sound proof.(militairy traditions being something possibly different). At least china nicknamed every thread, perhaps the least discriminating culture have been the indus cultures, a decent proof for that is that eventually they were overrun and extinguished, despite their unrivalled powers at that time. Usually more military or militant cultures in this stadium of prosperity just beat the lesser developed groups around them. But the opposite can also be the case. A severely pressed group that had to move into the territory that got discriminated took the right in their own hands. Perhaps interesting that aspect of harappa culture. Shang was a class society.

Since now we arrived at the very early stages of classic civilisation, with all societys stratigraphically and slaves and concepts of race abounding, we can conclude discrimination was in the firstest of huger settlements, and (quitte uncontrary to archeological evindence) neolithic agricultural people that started to live in smaller fixed places have probably been the first ones to introduce arbitrary values and bias to the local mindset.

So psychology went from preagricultural times, where discrimination was a natural mechanism well understood, like with the inuit, to the agricultural times , when it probably served the same uses as the defence works, that is to seperate the farmers form the free roaming hunters.
Linguistically then roots of discrimination can be related to this difference in occupation, and indeed one ancient and abundant way to discriminate the less technological culture has been to call them the 'wild people' (not the 'free' or 'hunting' people).

My guess is the social discrimination, as was a usual and known psychological tool in preagicultural times, turned bad as a result of this, in these societys. Stratigraphy and its abuse
rise quickly, and it is even quitte sure we will not understand the exchanges when we don't take into account europe was agriculturised through people bringing an already altered mindset on discrimination.

I think after this it is simple, the longer the exchange with the industrialising cultures lasted the more inevitable it became to develop a discriminating mindset of one's own. Advances in philosophy or if you want to point finger, eg. militairy history contributed as did churches that usually were based on older religions , and likewise the advance of sciences and media contributed to bias prejudice and discrimination, consciously for political interests, and subconsciously because you cannot root out an evil you don't fight but nourish.

As a result of this i am ashamed of the world i live in, ashamed of the way we think.
However the 20th century brought womansliberation and the theory of that provided us with a handhold to counter discrimination, despite that much of the subconsious bias is hard to deal with , since we don't in the least control it, and not yet ever will, points have been made, and underlined that deny the right of existence to (unnatural and subnatural) discrimination.

Collective discrimination.

This is another wide subject, the fact remains discrimination in the sence i want to discuss it now
is always collective. Another compromising aspect is that the subject media should be covered somehow, at some point.. way to much..

The two go hand in hand in my context, but there is one possible difference, our education through our familys is a prime cause for our state of mind. Apparently even outspoken 'antiracist' parents implement the bias. This was easy to verify, less outspoken parents managed to implement subconscious rasism to a bigger degree, even so that their products, their children,
became profoundly ridiculous in my eyes. No matter how hard i tried to realise i did not do much better. That a better educational pretext helped some, however, remained easy to witness.

Similarly the statute of the mother may be reflected in the children of the family. I didn't go into great lengths on that. Obviously we cope with the other sex on partially subconscious terms,
almost everyone can feel insecure when they are in love. I carry a suspicion that the general attitude towards woman promotes that they handle events more subconsioucly, it is my impression through this, indeed they handle it better sometimes. If you are forced to subconsciously operate you may still wish to implement as much integrity as you can.

perhaps this is a funny point to reintroduce the concept of collective psychology, because although it looks to me like i declare my love, give shape to my love for woman, a person may feel insulted because they don't understand. Well if all these people that don't understand,
share a common reaction, we stumbled upon collective psychology, and it is surprising how often this translates to (unnatural) discrimination.

According to some dreamy mathematicians among us, all is probably solved now, discrimination , the making of differences... nothing wrong with that..
but in my opinion it is part of the prejudice. Another thorough example of collective psychology,
we don't want to have clear terms for our errors, so that we can find excuses to put other meanings on the label. Media do this, politicians, and persons. But if they not yet didn't it will also make groups do so. And that is the whole point of the collective psychology, it is used to make a group do what they want opposing an individual, (that is thereafter or hence, or even
belonging already, to something classified somehow , as "different" people.)

Although the eventual solution for the problem has a lot to do with how we handle our collective psychology how the media handles dicrimination, we can now switch to the individual, to solve the problem, we cannot be born again and educated again, we will need to help solve the problem in our lives, and for that we will have to look at ...

personal (individual) discrimination.

Already i showed how it was for me. And if there is one characteristic i acknowledge for my subconsious flaws it is facility. I facilitate my judgement through my subconsious bias.
Since i don't cherish egoist or eg. eurocentric interest, i ended up facilitating my thoughtsproces.
And indeed in social interaction discrimination is grossly facilitating. Wether it is to eliminate points of view, or not to have to explain your subconsious hampering, bias is facilitating..
So what is facilitated, ofcourse generalisations and many other aspects of thought are similar
processes in the thoughtproces, we have a huge room for usefull generalisations, that can get polluted with prejudices. The natural and unnatural proces of discrimination.

All of it rooted deeply under the level of conscious thought. I think what we facilitate actually, because bias gets ridiculous easily, is where this reflection of a bacteri kicks in.
Its a well known psychological clue, we project against our discomfort, in other words, we are jealous. And since we are jealous at our neighbouring bacteria, we try to peck ordre any one that wouldn't fit our personal description. So i think we have to become better people to be less discrimnatory? yes i think that. I think that the process to eliminate some of your personal prejudice, to become a less subconsious person, is the same process that you need to go through,
to be less of an egoist, more selfcritical, generally generous, tolerant, and fascinated with the
challenge objectivity, purity, truth offers.

PS: people may whine about my contribution to mankind, take my bankaccount for it..,
i don't care. I still have to meet the person i would respect for contributing more, allthough it is easy to recognise and respect that too many tried , and sometimes to more glamorous result.
However these people that like to voice i didn't, none of them i trust to essentially have contributed anything to the planet.